ML20040F920

Forwards Public Version of Revision 4 to Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure 500-7, Operational Checks of Communication Sys (Primary Responsibility-Generating Station Emergency Plan Coordinator). Receipt Form Encl

ML20040F920
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	01/25/1982
From:	Scott D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20040F917	List: ML20040F916 ML20040F920 ML20040F924
References
81-264, NUDOCS 8202100468
Download: ML20040F920 (4)

Text

"

Commonwealth Edison Dresden Nuclear Power Station R.R. #1 Morris. Illinois 60450

~

?

Telephone 815/942-2920

?,

Date O N)11n n D bb. ) hk g-DJS LTR:

81-264 V

.s Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Washington, D.C.

20555

Subject:

Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures for Dresden Station Units 1, 2, and 3; NRC Docket Nos. 50-10, 50-237, and 50-249

References:

(a) D. J. Scott letter to H. R. Denton, dated March 12, 1981 (b) Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix E, Part V

Dear Mr. Denton:

Enclosed are ten (10) copies of revisions to Dresden Station Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.

No return of transmittals is necessary.

Sincerely, (h

D.

. Scott Station Superintendent Dresden Nuclear Power Station

'DJS:TGB:mt Enclosures d

D cc:

T. Blackmon E

1 RECES'S File /NRC File / Numerical 2}

JM 2 9 iggy [8 as ricar amayr :,,g,,

DCG muaal sa N.c 0

D,I-:\\

6 yo0 Sii 8202100468 820204 PDR ADOCh 05000010 F

PDR b

0 0

w y

s

[

_____...-.3 f

x.

?_

DAP 9-2 ORESDEN STATION PROCEDURE ROUTINGr Revision 11 4

PROCEDURES COORDINATOR NOTIFIED 5

i

~~

OATE Q

Index Numoer Unit 8/[

Procedure

[#'C # G

~7 Revision No.

O T1t1e00p$ Y W L _.O W U : IN_ =lm : N8--

~

(/ G.fff M F 4),,

l Req % Compl. Date Record Retention Requirements:

~

-)

1.

Is a Surveillance affected? ( FO

~

Action Item No.

l (Submit DAP 11-2 pgs. 5 or 6)

~~

Modification No.

2.

Is a Station Record Type being established?

A/o Draft Review; a.

If "yes", specify record Deletion?

/1/0 retention requirements.

Posted Procecure?

wo (as per Tech. Spec. Sec.

Posted Location?

1. v 6.5, ANSI N45.2.9 App. A 1

Typing Required?

vp 6 or DAP 2-3)

\\

Index Change Requireal vg5 b.

If "yes", obtain record type I

(

number - (see R3 Coordinator) l.

d]

Originator Routine' 2.

[2- [b$ d 779 C 8.

..-J 7'8 Department Supervisoc f

gecn. Staff Supervisor 4

u/a e/A $I Nlrt anni 2.

i s.

Ver1fier

/

surveillance Coorcinator

4. (Y$bh}-

LhSY Nk 5.

13.

10.

hl NfR Pro ecurssl Coorcinator nt. Asst. Sup, Rac./Cnenr. Sup.

/

}

5. t N

11.

[M c

i Procecures Manager DO Op ling Eng1ree 4r SRO

7.,

78 12.

/

M Os 4

l

_ Gr1ginator (proofreaa)_

Station /Sugt.)

TRANSMITTAL RECEIFT /~[ff Ra er No.

b-EPip Sgg_7 psy,3

• M @ b PPROVED REMOVE:

INSERT:[/ /[ JJO -7 6/

M 20M 3

a D*0.S.R.

j I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above.

j Signed Date j'

(Sign and return this fom to the Procedures Manager.)

[

FM M 18 of 24 k

t t

l

_. _ _ _. _ _ _ _.____q

)

. ~. -

-'1 t

k

. 7 MP92-1

._ O Revision 11 PROCEDURE HISTORY

2 Procedure EprP Iso -7 Rev. No.

Y

<l

^

Description of Procedure Revision or of New Procedure g

~~'

6) 84

1. fi 2.sJ lS $ bsp A

?Yk

_ (A w'-U~./: _ ' L, dig 427

~~

02

>L n1, n_

M L ~ tJ e L f k ~ m?ssed) J

?a) t>W c4s Lu'l eA..//L7'A A L v 2 a 1. 3 JA J.4 2.!f A _

n r) L & d / a <-L h / A rac ' era

&J 3

Justification for New or Revised Procedure

6) 7)

AA'1/

H bA Cm=v a:' c.An cd 'da

(.2) 2m 5 A/#r Lo

?Zn dLJA 2'r' (3]Y Vd m m as h eL2 (5) d

& 4 Msc L~n

&'a,L //s w M / "

/

//

Supportive References

- s' locrp

& fen

/w AL 2 AL 2A'

//

/ /

TC E. 9. d.

APPROVED 3 20'82 i

is of 24 0.0.S.R.

.J u\\/

i.

a

~.-

= ::.

..g

^-

j f

t.

. =,

OAP 9-2

{'

P.evisica 11 c

SAF~7Y O.'At.!!AY!ON

}

(10 CFR 50.53)

Does this peccadure/revi sion. =nsci tute a enangs to

~

orocedures as described in Safety Anaivsis ?.accre?

Yes ( )

no 65 ij le L.. _.

~~

- - - - _j is a. change in the Tecnnical jSoectficaeion involved?

No ( )

s Answer tne following questicns wi tn a 'yes" or~

~

^

iAFETI EVA1.UAT10ti:

~

"no", and provide specific reasons justifying the decisien:

Is the probability of arr occurrence, the consequence of an acci-1.

dent, or malfunction of safety related equiptr.ent, as previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis P.e;cer, ince.easpe 7 Yes

1. No, because: M A,,

I

.4$.NRC d-~'y'~y

• is the possibility for an4ccident or malfunction of a different.

~

L.

type than any previcusly eva u ced in the Fina! Safety Analysis

^

(O.y Report. created?

Yes No, because:

~

C 0

r

/

tr the margitt of safety, as defined irr the basis for any Tech-3 nical Specification, reducedt Yes No, because-j-

a ~

,/

[

All Answert No-Q$

j Any Answer

• Yes ( )

p

- aenu m anc rec =

.,e auc'**"

APPROVED a

Regutatory Cor.:::::ssion g 2Q'82 I

authorT:stien for chanes.

D.O.S.R.

e Authorf:acien Received ( }

J i

e 1

initiate ?rw ccure

• MCTE:

Imcl m ca:icn Any answer checked "yes" should be repo.- cd in the Pedermed 5y j

annu.tl recort :o :he r.0.

i d

oate // W 3

3 e

FO. t _ ~c T

• I a

T

[

20 of 2f+

}

..L -

e..

.