ML20053E507

Forwards Public Version of Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures EPIP 500-8, Quarterly Emergency Operations Facility Inventory (Primary Responsibility - Generating Station Emergency Plan Coordinator)

ML20053E507
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	05/21/1982
From:	Scott D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20053E500	List: ML20053E499 ML20053E507 ML20053E512
References
81-264, NUDOCS 8206080459
Download: ML20053E507 (4)

Text

-

C:mmonw;;alth Edison-Drtsden Nucitar Powsr Station R.R. 31 Morris. lilinois 60450 Telephone 815/942-2920 Date 01_I,& l. ! 0 $,S _

i q

DJS LTR:

81-264 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 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, f

D.

Scott Station Superintendent Dresden Nuclear Power Station "DJS:TGB:mt Enclosures cc:

T. Black =on File /NRC File / Numerical 00$

\\

l 8206080459 820528 PDR ADOCK 05000010 F

PDR

j DAP 9 2 ORESDEN STATICtl PROCEDURE ROUTItlG Revision 11 PROCEDURESCOORDINATORNOTfFIED /s/u/r /

DATE incex Number l

Unit

//

Procedure E ///>.fod-f Revision No.

o Ti tl e l').o a n a vs E.., co e. :. ~ ~s 8i m r ia

- % i- / % n r-a >/

s

/

/

/

Req'd. Compl. Date AI 7 d P Record Retention Requirements:

Action Item tio.

A/4 1.

Is a Surveillance affected?

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

Modification ?!o.

h /t 2.

Is a Statica Record Type being established?

m Draft Review:

a.

If "yes", specify record Deletion?

d.+

retention requirements.

Posted Procecure? u (as per Tech. Spec. Sec.

Posted Location?

9A 6.5, ANSI N45.2.9 App. A Typing Required?

vrs or DAP 2-3)

'e b.

If "yes", cbtain record type Index Change Requirec?

/-

/

number (see'R3 Coordinator)

,[

1.

9.s ['e: rcd =-

'y3'd

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _9 E19 2!) a _tgr,, _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _,, _ _ _ _,, _ _ _

e[!) b/ k l l'u 3

%X Th w

,A Routinc

~

v 8.

/ " Department SGper fscf

\\JT3cn. Staff Superviser gg 3.

N R-AtlR

9. 0~

/f.$U

&^l $

Sure I

cor tor

/

/

Verifier I.

' j

4. h$thib

( k m /1 $ 6.

13.

10.

fk

,1

&M Procecures/ Coorsnator laint. A W i 5

,Mac./ Cnem. Sup.

j T0

?*

TW 11.

~

S.

Procicures Manager Ope. rating Engi eexVor 5R0

7. N u-eA Dk 12.

94 hCPT

,O$

__9 191n a ;gc_t etagt e 3g1__ ___ ________________________S;a31gg,hy_______________ __ ___

l t

Re ister No.

b TRANSMITTAL RECEIPTS /P SoH 6 D,e5. 3)'c20,lfA g

[W d.wuLJ APPROVED REMWE:

_p

,y MAY 20'82 INSERT:

O.O.S.R.

I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above.

l Signed Date 9

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

FORM 9-2A 18 of 24

\\

I

--- - 4

d CAP 9-2 Revision 11 PROCEDURE HISTORY Procedure f Fl P soo-T Rev. tb.

O Cescription of Procedure Revision or of New Procedure de J Pas e eduec-Justification for New or Revised Procedure E % sur-T~.~ n./

fa s~o f f ~. ~ ~ :--

AuA Wi47~c Mint.

Supportive References J

Fonn 9-23 APPROVED gy 20'82 9 f 24 D.O.S.R.

j.

I

-.w-7,,

y

,,,<m w..

9

,va

%g w

,--u,

-,.r.,.-

4mw-y,-o-yw y

pgm 3y_

.c---

gy-.7--7 w

w

A 9"

CAP C-2 Revisic.i 11 SAF TY O/ALL%T!0N (10 CFR 50.33)

Mi s pecc.scureirevision :cnsci:u:e a enangs :c :!

Oces :

crecedcres as described in Safst'/ Analvsis Racerc?

l Mc fp)

Yes ( )

e r

9

[is a enange in :ne Tecnnical l Scecifica:Icn involved?

No ( )

y SAF:T( DALUA710ti: Answer :ne folicwing cuestions wi:n a yes" ce "nc", and previde speci fic reascns jus:s fying the decisicn:

the ccesequence cf an ac Is :he probability of an occurrence, 1.

ce calfunceica cf safety rela:ed equipmen:, as pesvicusly den t, increased?

evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Repce:,

Yes y No, because: p(o r il.) 24 ess CE 2~v 6 Id #

Is the pcssibility for an-gcciden ce mal function of a di fferen::

1.

^

ype : San any previcusly evaluated in the Fina! Safe:y Analysis O

Repore created?

Yes K No, because:

g en,E' Is :he margin of safe:y, as defined in :he basis for any Tech-3 nical Speci fica:icn, reduced?

Yes

/

No, becaus e:

fr-71);/sg.cred & TS.

I All Answers !!c

()<)

Any Answer

• Yes ( )

r i

Aequest anc receive Weies.r Regulaccry Cce::i ssion APPROVED authori:aelen f=r chance.

g 20'82 Auchcrizacicn acceind ( )

0.0.S.R.

+

• NOTE:

{ ini tiate ?rt.ccours i I

tectements:ica l

Any answer checked "yes" shcutd be reccr:cd in :he Performed 3y D e-annual recer: : :he Ml:0.

10hoffl Cate FC.'L't ?-2C.

'1 20 of 24 I

e=mam=..

se l