ML20012B114
| ML20012B114 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/26/1990 |
| From: | Tim Reed Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9003130585 | |
| Download: ML20012B114 (3) | |
Text
,--
. R.
> p-3g-
.s February 26, 1990 1
MEMORANDUM FOR: ALL NRR PROJECT MANAGERS FROM:
Timot h A. Reed Lead Project Manager - PGP 3
i
SUBJECT:
REVISION TO PREVIOUS GUIDANCE REGARDING l
1 PROCEDURES GENERATION PACKAGE SERs The following revises previous guidance provided to PMs on January 26, 1990, regarding Procedures Generation Package SERs. The change to the previous guidance is the addition of the word "unneriessary" into both enclosures.
Both enclosures are attached with marginal lines identifying the changes.
This revision has been coordinated with HFAB. Any other changes to the PGP SERs should not be made without consulting with the Human Factors Assessment Branch (S. Shankaan).
/s/
Timothy A. Reed Lead Project Manager PGP
Enclosures:
As stated cc.w/ enc 1s:
PDs DISTRIBUTION QUecnetJ11e:M,\\
NRC PDR Local - PDR PDII-3 Reading -
S. Varga 14-E-4 G. Lainas 14-H-3 D. Matthews 14-H-25 R. Ingram 14-H-25
.T.
Reed 14-H-25 OGC (For inform. Only) 15-B-18
- E. Jordan NNBB-3302
- ACRS ~ (10)
P-315 f
.SSksntmsn s.S
[\\
f1b MO D:FkIVsJk
-LA:PDII-3 PM:PDII-3 A
Ring,ramA Treed:cb DMa m ews A/D/90 2/p/90
%/p90 1
L
] F" k
l 4
1 9003130585 900226 l
PDR ORG NRRB
(.
r 3
4 Cover letter to the Licensees
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION FOR THE ----------- PROCEDURES GDIERATION PACKAGE (TACNO.
)
The staff has completed its review of your Procedures Generation Package
{
(PGP) for the plant submitted in a letter dated
, supplemented by a letter dated The enclosed
__ safety evaTsation dismsses programmatic inprovenents which will enhance _-
your ability to develop and neintain consistently high quality Emergency Operating Proce&res (EOPs).
The majority of the findings are related to-the writer's guide.
The staff concludes that your PGP needs to bo l
reviewed-to address these programn.atic inprovements.
For items you-deen inappropriate, no longer applicable, or unnecessary for inclusion in your l-PGP, you should develop and maintain dommented justification in an auditable form.
a.
[During the period of Septenber 17-28, 1989, a team of EC inspectors audited your Integrated Plant Emergency Operating Procedures (IPEOPs).]
b.
[The staff reconnends you consider both the enclosed discussion and-the results of the E0P inspection as stated in Inspection Report Nunt>er 50-305/89012(DRS) and utilize them as appropriate in the next major revision to your PGP and E0Ps.]
The staff recognizes that your PGP may have been revised since the -
4 submittals, and requests that you maintain mcords of all revisions
.to your PGP and E0Ps in an auditable form.
No further submittals are required.
Both a. and b. represent inclusions based on the E0P NOTE: _
inspection performed at the partimlar plant of intemst.
Inspection dates and report nunt>ers should be changed to reflect.the site specific inspection information.
.g t
The following:is the conclusion section for the Safety Evaluations
- CONCLUSION
- The staff concludes that, the PGP submitted by for in letters from to the NRC, dated should be reviewed to address the programatic improvements outlined in Section 2 of this report. A PGP revision should not be submitted to the NRC.
For itenis the licensee deems inappropriate, no longer applicable, or unnecessary
'l~
- for inclusion in its PGP, it should develop and maintain documented justification in an auditable form. All revisions to the PGP should be reflected in plant--
E0Ps within a reasonable period of time, e.g. the next planned revision of the
-E0Ps.
t
?
(
1 1
l
.