ML20151F948

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 2 to Emergency Operating Procedure 1.3.4-13, Emergency Operating Procedures Verification Program
ML20151F948
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 04/06/1988
From:
BOSTON EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20151C809 List:
References
1.3.4-13, NUDOCS 8804190085
Download: ML20151F948 (49)
v • d • e


Text

___ __ _ __

BOSTON EDICON PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Procedure 1.3.4.-13 E0P VERIFICATION PROGRAM Approved d'f[nwd v #/#/69 QA Man ger /Date -

Approved d '. [ 4 1 .!@

Station Diredtfr /Da'te 70R lNFORMA;;o.N h! [hohkh0 93 PDR t

J,,

y, {\/

F

' Proc.I 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 1 of 49

Table of Contents Section Pace I. PURPOSE .................................................. 3 II. APPLICABILITY ............................................ 3 III. OEFINITIONS .............................................. 3 IV. REOUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS A . Veri fi ca ti on Proc edu re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Personnel Quali fi cations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Evaluating, Resolving, and Correcting Identified Discrepancies ............................. 7 D. Documentation ........................................ 8 ATTACHMENT A: E0P VERIFICATION PROGRAM CHECKLISTS Fopi //yg' k .4 ,-

( ' M T/g,,qj Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 2 of 49

I. PURPOSE This document provides appropriate requirements and instructions for verifying the PNPS Emergency Operating Procedures (E0Ps).

II. APPLICABILITY The requirements and instructions specified herein apply to the overall process of developing new E0Ps and revising existing E0Ps.

This document supplements existing PNPS procedures governing procedure preparation, revision, and control but does not supplant them.

III. DEFINITIONS E0P Source Documents - Guidelines, procedures, data and other records which comprise the technical basis of the E0Ps and requirements for their development.

E0P Technical Accuracy - An E0P characteristic that refers to the compatibility of the procedures with plant systems, hardware, and instrumentation; additionally, the conformity of the E0Ps with other plant procedures that are referenced therein, and with the content of the technical guidelines from which the E0Ps were developed.

E0P Verification - The process of confirming and documenting the technical accuracy and written correctness of the E0Ps.

E0P Hritten Correctness - An E0P characteristic that refers to the conformity of the procedures to the standards of E0P format and editorial content presented in the E0P Hriters' Guide.

IV. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS A. Verification Procedure E0P technical accuracy and written correctness shall be verified using the checklists provided in Attachment A. New E0Ps shall be evaluated in terms of all checklist criteria; one set of checklists ,

shall be completed for each new E0P. Modifications of existing E0Ps l need be evaluated only in terms of those criteria directly applicable to new and modified steps; if the number of such steps is relatively l small, only one set of checklists need be completed for all revised E0Ps.

The instructions listed below shall be followed during performance of verification checklist evaluations:

1. Fill in the following information on the E0P Verification Record (illustrated on page 6 of Attachment A):
a. The number, revision, and title of the E0P being verified. '
b. The PSTG revision which was used as the source document for the E0P being verified.

m en gp A- n n!

. Vin ,

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 J1 "U ,

Uh Page 3 of 49

@ LY

l l

l IV. A. Verification Procedure (continued)

c. The Hriters' Guide revision which was used as the source document for the E0P being verified,
d. The name, organization (or department) and job title (including such information as R0, SRO, Shift Supervisor, etc., as applicable) of the person performing the verification.
2. Write the number of the E0P being verified on the top of each checklist page.
3. Apply each checklist evaluation criterion, one at a time, to each flowchart element of the E0P being verified. If necessary, refer to the E0P Hriters' Guide for guidance on proper interpretation of the criteria presented in checklist Sections A, B, and C. (The relevant paragraph of the E0P Hriters' Guide is identified in parentheses after each Section A, B, and C checklist item.)
4. If all E0P flowchart elements to which a checklist item is applicable are fully compliant with the evaluation criterion, circle "Yes" on the checklist form. If a checklist item does not apply to the E0P being verified, circle "NA". If one or more E0P flowchart elements are not fully compliant with the evaluation criterion, circle "No" and assign a unique discrepancy identification number of the format:

Checklist section - Criterion number - Sequence number Example: 82-14-2 (Checklist section 82, criterion 14, second discrepancy)

Multiple occurrences of the same discrepancy may be assigned the same identification number provided that each location of the discrepancy is documented.

5. Complete Part I of an E0P Verification Discrepancy Report (illustrated on page 7 of Attachment A) for each identified discrepancy.
a. Uniquely identify the flowchart element (s) to which the identified discrepancy applies; if the discrepancy is one of omission identify the applicable part of the PSTGs.
b. Provide a comprehensive narrative description of the nature of the discrepancy. If additional space is needed, use a Continuation Sheet (illustrated on page 9 of Attachment A) I and check the associated box on the Report indicating that a !

continuation sheet is attached. The sequential and total '

number of continuation sheets used for an individual discrepancy shall be identified in the appropriate blanks on j each continuation sheet.

FOR LNTORMATON Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 0,0i - > ee9e 4 of 49  ;

IV. A. Verification Procedure (continuation)

6. When all checklist items have been completed, the person who performed the verification shall:
a. List the checklist section(s) completed.
b. Sign and date the E0P Verification Record.
c. Attach all completed checklists and Part I Discrepancy Reports including associated continuation sheets to the E0P Verification Record.
d. Return the completed package to the Nuclear Operations Manager.

B. Personnel Oualifications Personnel performing the EGP verification must be knowledgeable in certain specific subject areas related to the activities to be performed. Minimum personnel qualifications for each task are listed in Table 1. Plant operators, subject matter experts, procedure writers, (other than the E0P author (s)), and human factors experts should all be involved in verification of a new E0P. The technical L accuracy should be the major task of the operators and the subject matter experts. The written correctness should be the major task of the procedure writers and human factors experts.

The E0P author (s) should not participate in the evaluation of the E0Ps relative to the checklist criteria.

I 3^

g gg0k,87'}kh .k

(

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 i Page 5 of 49 l l

e Table 1: Personnel Qualifications for E0P Verification Activities Activitv 00alifications Application of Checklist Familiarity with the PNPS PSTGs and Sections A and B the E0P Hriters' Guide Application of Checklist Familiarity with the PNPS PSTGs, Sections C and D the E0P Writers' Guide, and plant operations (licensed operator preferred)

Application of Checklist Familiarity with the E0P format, Section E plant systems and control room instrumentation (licensed operator preferred) p c'

  • A b6

\

\ i '- 5 6 -

\b

  • Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 6 of 49

l IV. C. Evaluatingo Resolvina. and Correctina Identified Discrepancies Each E0P discrepancy identified through the verification process shall be analyzed to determine if any corrective action is required.

Resolution of all identified discrepancies and, if required, completion of associated corrective action (s) shall be documented on Part II of an E0P Verification Discrepancy Report (illustrated on page 8 of Attachment A). If no corrective action is required, appropriate justification shall be provided.

1 The analysis and resolution of E0P disciepancies and the l identification of appropriate corrective actions should be performed as a cooperative effort among several individuals having expertise in the E0Ps, the E0P source documents, plant operation, and control room operator training. The procedure author (s) and the individual (s) who completed the verification checklists should participate in the evaluation and resolution of discrepancies. The following process shall be followed in completing this task:

1. Review the description of the discrepancy. (If those who performed the verification are participating in the discrepancy review and resolution process they can supply additional information as necessary.)
2. Determine whether any corrective action is necessary. This decision should be made by :

(a) confirming that the identified discrepancy is actually a deviation from the evaluation criterion and (b) assessing the degree of deviation from the evaluation i criterion, and (c) investigating whether extenuating or mutually conflicting requirements necessitate a deviation from the evaluation ,

l criterion. l l

3. If corrective action is appropriate, develop a recommended solution which corrects the discrepancy. Solutions may include changes to the E0P, additions to the E0P training program, modifications to plant equipment, or revisions to E0P source documents.
4. Document the agreed-upon corrective action on Part II of the E0P Verification Discrepancy Report, using Continuation Sheets as necessary to completely record the action to be taken. If no corrective action is required, provide appropriate justification.

The individual who prepares the description of the required corrective action (or the justification for no corrective action) shall sign and date the Report in the space provided.

fon ?vv^G\o% QW

\

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 7 of 49

IV 0 C. Evaluating. Resolving 3 and Correcting Identified Discrepancies (continued)

5. When the corrective action has been implemented, the individual who completes the corrective action shall sign and date the associated E0P Verification Discrepancy Report Part II in the space provided.
6. Satisfactory completion of the required corrective action shall be independently verified. The person who performs this task shall sign and date the associated E0P Verification Discrepancy Report Part II in the space provided.

D. Documentation Documentation of each verified E0P shall consist of the following:

1. E0P Verification Record with all information and signatures.
2. One completed set of E0P Verification Checklists.
3. An E0P Verification Discrepancy Report Part I (including associated Continuation Sheets), appropriately completed for each discrepancy listed on the Verification Checklists.
4. An EOP Verification Discrepancy Report Part II (including associated Continuation Sheets), appropriately completed for each discrepancy listed on the Verification Checklists.

The completed documentation package shall be returned to the Nuclear Operations Manager. A review of all materials for compliance with the requirements and instructions of the E0P Verification Program shall be perfor.ned by the Nuclear Operations Manager and the QA Director.

These ind',viduals shall sign and date the E0P Verification Record when they have determined that all requirements have been satisfactorily completed.

All records of E0P Verification shall be retained as specified by N00 Procedure 1.3.7.

I

~i VO R @{fi'"$ \

k.!

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 8 of 49

Attachment A Page 1 of 41 l

ATTACHMENT A EOP VERIFICATION PROGRAM ,

CHECKLISTS i

I I

i

\U

( @'

i

\

d (J i'4 %s$, ,

i

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 .
Page 9 of 49  !

RTYPE H7.01 ,

1 i

w-+= . r---v,+--,-,-*wm---- ___ _ _ w w- a w- w w w -- w--rw-ww---ww v-- - wwwe-v---r---'ve----w w - -e -wW -r-r rv - w'se,tw,-=,- ------*--,,-+-e--~+

w -r--T- - w 1y*v- *'

Attachment A Page 2 of 41 Table of Contents Section Pace A-INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING E0P VERIFICATION CHECKLISTS ............................................... 4

A. PROCEDURE

IDENTIFICATION ................................. 10

B. PROCEDURE

FORMAT Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements ........................ 11 B2. Step Numbering ...................................... 17 B3. Listed It,ms ........................................ 18 B4. Use of Emphasis Techniques .......................... 19 B5. Procedure Layout and Associated Conventions ......................................... 20 B6. Instructions for Printing, Copying, I and Storage ......................................... 22 1

l

C. PROCEDURE

CONTENT i l

C1. Level of Detail ..................................... 23 C2. Writing Style ....................................... 25 l

C3. Cautions and Notes .................................. 26 C4. Branching Instructions and Cross-References .................................... 27 i

i C5. Component Identification ............................ 29 C6. Spelling, Grammar, and Punctuation .................. 30 C7. Nomenclature, Vocabulary, and Abbreviations ....................................... 31 l C8. Numerical Values .................................... 39 D. CONFORMITY HITH PLANT-SPECIFIC TECHNICAL GUIDELINES 40 4

E. COMPATIjlILITY HITHn CONTROL ROOH ........................

  • q

[\

1 l l 0fR>@M4 RYpEH7.01

()$.'l

Attachment A Page 3 of 41 Table of Contents (Continued)

Forms Paae A-E0P Ve ri fi ca t i on Reco rd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 E0P Veri fication Di screpancy Report, Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 E0P Veri fication Di screpancy Report, Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 E0P Verification Discrepancy Report, Continuation Sheet ....................................................... 9 Tables Page A-A1: Application of Logic Terms . ........................... 32 A2: Standard Terms and Definitions ......................... 33 A3: Standard Acronyms and Abbreviations .................... 36 i ,

VOR k

((k Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 11 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

, , , ,r- -- -. -,,---, -

= ~ - - - - - - , , - - - -- -

Attachment A Page 4 of 41 l

l INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING E0P VERIFICATION CHECXLISTS i

1. Use black ink on all checklists
2. Fill out an E0P Verification Record (page A6) as follows:

(a) Identify the number, revision, and title of the E0P being verified.

(b) Identify the PSTG revision which was used as the source document for the E0P being verified.

(c) Identify the Writers' Guide revision which was used as the '.ource document for the E0P being verified.

(d) List the section(s) of the E0P Verification Checklists being completed by you.

(e) Print your full name, organization for department) and job title (including such information as R0, SRO, Shift Supervisor, etc., as applicable) under "Verification Performance Completed By."

3. Write the E0P number on the top of each checklist page.
4. Apply each checklist evaluation criterion, one at a time, to each flowchart element of the E0P being verified. If necessary, refer to the E0P Hriters' Guide for guidance on proper interpretation of the criteria presented in checklist Sections A, B, and C. (The relevant paragraph of the Writers' Guide is identified in parentheses after each Section A, and B, and C checklist item.)
5. If all E0P flowchart elements to which a checklist item is applicable are fully compliant with the evaluation criterion, circle "Yes" on the checklist form. If a checklist item does not apply to the E0P being ,

evaluated, circle "NA". If one or more E0P flowchart elements are not '

fully compliant with the evaluation criterion, circle "tvo" and assign a l Unique discrepancy identification number of the following for9at:

Checklist section - Criterion number - Sequence number Examole: 82-14-2 (Checklist section B2, criterion 14, second discrepancy)

Multiple occurrences of the same discrepancy may be assigned the same identification number provided that each location of the discrepancy is documented.

6. Complete Part I of an E0P Verification Discrepancy Report (illustrated on page A7) for each identified discrepancy.

1 (a) Uniquely identify the flowchart element (s) to which the identified l discrepancy applies. If the disge gncy is one of omission, identify '

the appl able p

}

d l Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 i Page 12 of 49 Q. h RTYPE H7.01 i

l

_ . - . - - - -l

J Attachment A Page 5 of 41 (b) Provide a comprehensive narrative deccription of the nature of'the ,

discrepancy. If additional space is needed, use a Continuation Sheet (illustrated on page A9) and check the associated box on the' Report indicating that a continuation sheet is attached. The sequent.lal and total number of continuation sheets used for an individual discrepancy shall be identified in the appropriate blanks on each continuati'n sheet.

7. When all checklist items'have been completed:

(a) Sign and date the E0P Verification Record.

^

(b) Attach all completed checklists and Part I Discrepancy Reports-including associated continuation sheets to the E0P Verification Record.

(c) Return the completed package to the Nuclear Operations Manager.

l l

i \ ( ( ,' ,'s ., ; sf Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 i Page 13 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

/,, ,-

l Attachment A Page' 6,of 41 I BOSTON EDISON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR P0hER STATION ,

E0P VERIFICATION RECORD E0P # ,

Revision _ _

E0P Title DESIGN INPUT PSTG Revision , Dated E0P Hriters' Guide Revision , Dated _

VERIFICATION PERFORMANCE E0P Verification Checklist Section(s)

Completed by:

Name (Print)

Organization & Job Title Signature _

Date Reviewed by:

Nuclear Operations Manager Date '

I QA Director l 5 \T' ON

_)q 1,, I tii l I V ' 1 0'9i\ L Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 14 of 49 l

p/ %j\[

RTYPE H7.01 l

Attachment A Page 7 of 41 BOSTON EDIS0N COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR P0HER STATION E0P VLRIFICATION DISCREPANCY REPORT Part I DISCREPANCY ID # CHECKLIST # , . .

E0P # REVISION

L

, c PROCEDURE ELEMENT (s); quote, or describe uniquely:,

t, .L DESCRIPTION OF DISCREPANCY:

i 1

~

ContinuationSheet(s) attached l_l )

1 I

,en%M, T\@

, Proc. 1.3.4-13 Fev. 2 3v g

( \

(\g. , - {~

Page 15 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 s

1

Attachment A Page 8 of 41 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR P0HER STATION E0P VERIFICATION DISCREPANCY REPORT Part II OISCREPANCY ID # CHECKLIST #

., '/

E0P Number REVISION CORRECTIVE ACTION

Description:

ContinuationSheet(s) attached l[l Prepared by:

Name (Print)

Signature Date  ;

ImplemeNtedby: i l

Name (Print) . , _ .

Signature Date i

Completion Verified by:

Name (Print)

Signature ..__.. Date

'-~

g.i\ { Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 16 of 49 h .RTYPE H7.01

'I

Attachment A Page 9 of 41 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR P0HER STATION E0P VERIFICATION DISCREPANCY REPORT CONTINUATION SHEET DISCREPANCY ID # CHECKLIST #

E0P Number REVISION Continuation of: Parti l[l Sheet of PartIIl[j Sheet of l

T1 k=

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 17 of 49 1

h! I RTYPE H7.01 8

Attachment A Page 10 of 41 E0P SECTION A: PROCEDURE IDENTIFICATION

1. Is the procedure number and title presented in Yes No NA large, boldfaced, underlined print, and placed at the top of the E0P?

(II.A. III.D.l.a. III.D.2.a. III.D.3)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Is the E0P number unique? (II.A) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
3. Is the E0P title descriptive of the procedure Yes No NA content? (II.A)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Does the E0P have a title block located in the Yes No NA lower right corner of the bordered area surrounding the E0P? (II.B. III.E.5)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Does the E0P title block contain: Yes No NA (1) plant name, (2) approval signature, (3) effective date, (4) procedure title, (5) procedure number, and (6) revision number? (II.8) l Discrepancy ID #

1 l

l F0'x ',N'FORMEONerx. 1.3.4-i3 Rev. 2 1

() h, Page 18 of 49 U

  • RTYPE H7.01  ;

Attachment A Page 11 of 41 E0P SECTION B: PROCEDURE FORMAT Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements

1. As appropriate, is entry to the E0P indicated at the top (i.e., beginning) of the procedure by

, either of the following:

  • A tabular presentation of entry conditions Yes No NA enclosed in a heavy-bordered rectangle with rounded corners? (III.A.1)
  • The word "START" printed in boldfaced uppercase Yes No NA letters enclosed in a heavy-bordered rectangle with rounded corners? (III.A.1, III.D.2.c)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are concurrent execution statements enclosed Yes No NA within a shaded elongated rectangle with entry and exit arrows appropriately located? (III.A.2)

)

Discrepancy ID #

l

3. Are section designators printed in Yes No NA boldfaced uppercase letters centered within l shaded trapezoids? (III.A.3, III.D.I.d, III.D.2.d) l Discrepancy ID #
4. Are instructional steps presented as complete Yes No NA i sentences enclosed in rectangles? (III.A.4)

Discrepancy ID # {

l

5. Are individual decisions which constitute major Yes No NA l i branch points each phrased as "yes/no" questions and enclosed in diamonds?

(III.A.5)

Discrepancy ID #

6. Are "Yes" and "No" response path labels Yes No NA capitalized and placed adjacent to arrows extending from decision diamonds?

(III.A.5, III.A.6.a. III.A.6.b)

Discreptncy ID #

1( Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 19 of 49 0D l\

g3,,,3 y RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 12 of 41 E0P Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements (continued)

7. Do conditional statements that are formatted as a single instructional step:
a. Have the conditional part of the instruction Yes No NA stated first, followed by the contingent action? (This formatting requirement does not apply for conditional clauses that begin with "Until" or "Except"). (III.A.7)

Discrepancy ID #

b. Have the logic terms been printed in uppercase Yes No NA letters and separated from the remainder of their respective clauses. (This formatting requirement does not apply for conditional clauses that begin with "Until" or "Except".)

(III.A.7.b. III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

8. Where a prescribed action is to be performed until Ye: No NA certain specified conditions occur, are the conditions prefaced by the word "UNTIL" printed in uppercase letters? (III.A.7.c, III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

9. Where a prescribed action is to be performed with Yes No NA certain specified exceptions, are the exceptions prefaced by the word "EXCEPT" printed in uppercase letters? (III.A.7.d, III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

10. Where a prescr'. bed action may be performed any Yes No NA time before a specified condition occurs, is the condition prefaced by the word "BEFORE" (separated by a double horizontal line) printed in boldfaced uppercase letters and enclosed in a trapezoid?

(III.A.7.e. III.D.I.g. III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

, 11. Where an "and/or" decision structure is required, Yes No NA i

has one of the following formats (or an acceptable alternate format) been chosen to clearly depict the relationship between the conditional clauses?

(III.A 7 f)

  • A decision table
  • An appropriately structured series cision diamonds Discrepancy #.- t C O Q N, K(T'I li 31 v s '

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 p N i \' Page 20 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 13 of 41 E0P Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements (continued)

12. Where plant conditions are specified which cause Yes No NA procedure execution to immediately proceed from one instructional step to a subsequent flowchart element, are the continuation conditions prefaced by the word "HHEN" printed in uppercase letters and separated from the remainder of the respective clause by two periods?

(III.A.8, III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

13. Are hold points expressed as instructions Yes No NA beginning with "HAIT UNTIL ..." printed in uppercase letters and enclosed in an octagon?

(III.A 9, III.D.2.e)

Discrepancy ID #

14. Are override statements formatted as decision Yes No NA tables enclosed in shaded heavy-bordered rectangles with rounded corners?

(III.A.10)

Discrepancy ID #

15. Do override statements have heavy shaded lines extending Yes No NA downward from the left and right sides of the enclosing rounded-corner rectangle to indicate the flowchart element (s) which the override statement applies? (Extension lines need not be used where an override statement applies to an entire procedure.) (III.A.10)

Discrepancy ID #

16. Are procedure exit statements and end points enclosed Yes No NA in heavy-bordered rectangles with rounded corners?

(III.A.11) l Discrepancy ID #

17. Is supplemental information that applies to the Yes No NA l performance of a step located outside the direct '

path of the flowchart elements, and is the association to the appropriate flowchart element indicated by a dashed line? (III.A.12)

Discrepancy ID # .

F0pn 1Mc0RgE0M

,,oc. 1.3.4 13 eeee 2, of 49

,ev. 2 i RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 14 of 41 E0P Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements (continued)

18. Are notes printed in italics and located Yes No NA immediately adjacent to (either before or after) the text to which they apply? (III.A.13, III.D.4)

Discrepancy ID #

19. For notes, is the word "NOTE" printed in uppercase Yes No NA letters and punctuated with a colon prefacing the text of the note? (III.A.13, III.D.2.h)

Discrepancy ID #

20. Are references to cautions indicated within flowchart Yes No NA elements through the use of a circled number with black background? (III.A.14)

Discrepancy ID #

21. Is the full text of each referenced caution enr.losed Yes No NA in a rectangle and arranged in sequence around the periphery of the E0P, located to the left of or above any figures present? (III.A.14. III.E.6)

Discrepancy ID #

22. Is each figure labeled with a number and title printed Yes No NA in boldfaced uppercase letters centered above the figure numb 9r having a prefix corresponding to the number of Lae E0P followed by a unique sequential decimal number?

(III.A.15, III.A.15.b, III.D.1.e III.D.2.f)

Discrepancy ID # l

23. Are all figures that are referenced within the E0P Yes No NA correctly arranged around the periphery of the procedure in proper numerical sequence?

(III.A.15, III.E.6)

Discrepancy ID #

24. Are the text and graphics of each figure clear, Yes No NA simple, and easily read? (III.A.15.a) l Discrepancy ID #
25. Are axes of all graphs labeled with parameters, Yes No NA 1 units, and numerical values? (III.A.15.c) I Discrepancy ID # i 701 TOTMKEON Q' 2th'8 RTYPE H7.01 jg/

Attachment A Page 15 of 41 E0P Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements (continued)

26. Are both horizontal and vertical grid lines provided Yes No NA on all graphs? (III.A.15.d)

Discrepancy ID #

27. Are all graphical presentations of operating regions Yes No NA which are beyond the action level defined by the E0P delineated through the use of cross-hatching or background shading? (III.A.15.e)

Discrepancy ID #

28. Is each table labeled with a number and title printed Yes No NA in boldfaced uppercase letters centered above the table, with the table number having a prefix corres-ponding to the number of the E0P followed by a unique sequential decimal number?

(III.A.16, III.A.16b, III.D.l.e. III.D.2.g)

Discrepancy ID #

29. Are all tables that are referenced within the E0P Yes No NA correctly arranged around the periphery of the procedure in proper numerical sequence (small tables located adjacent to flowchart elements ,

excepted)? (III.A.16, III.E.6)

Discrepancy ID # -

30. Are small tables placed alongside the flowchart Yes No NA element in which they are referenced, with a dashed line used to indicate step association?

(III.A.12, III.A.16)

Discrepancy ID #

! 31. Are the text and graphics of each table clear, Yes No NA l

simple and easily read? (III.A.16.a)

Discrepancy ID #

32. Are tables placed within a border? (III.A.16.c) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
33. Is an appropriate heading provided for each table Yes No NA column, printed in uppercase letters and centered

, over the respective column? (III.A.16.d. III..D.2.g)  ;

I

, Discrepancy ID # _

,ni n

l b (N'iORMN eroc.Page i

i.3.4-n 23 of 49 Rev. 2

,\ RTYPE H7.01 i

Attachment A Page 16 of 41 E0P Bl. Format of Flowchart Elements (continued)

34. Is a double horizontal line placed below table column Yes No NA headings? (III.A.16.e)

Discrepancy ID #

35. Are table columns divided by vertical lines? Yes No NA (III.A.16.f)

Discrepancy ID #

36. Are dashed horizontal lines or blank spaces used within Yes No NA tables to group (or divide) entries as appropriate?

(III.A.16.g)

Discrepancy ID #

j t i\l ,' Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 ,

Page 24 of 49 i

! RTYPE H7.01 I

i

l Attachment A Page 17.of 41 E0P B2. Sten Numberina

1. Are sequential arabic numerals used to number steps for Yes No NA those operator actions that must be executed sequentially and that are presented within the confines of one flowchart element? 'III.8)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are step numbers absent from flowchart elements, except Yes No NA as identified in checklist item 82.1 above? (III.8)

Discrepancy ID #

't 4

l 1

]

i FOR ;NFORMATiON aev. 2

c1nd;;3 2

- ONLY RTYPE H7.01 l 1  !

f f

Attachment A Page 18 of 41 E0P B3. Listed Items

1. Are multiple items for which there is no Yes No NA unconditional pre-designated preference or priority arranged in a list format, with each entry in the list prefaced by a bullet (o)? (III.C)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are bullets which precede listed items indented two Yes No NA spaces to the right of the left margin of the immediately preceding text? (III.C.)

Discrepancy ID #

1 1

l npTAi v

Mb i l

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 i

gg, g,3 Page 26 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

___..__y --.__m __ _ . - . -- ,_..m e . -,,-

. _ - . .=. -

Attachment A Page 19 of 41 E0P B4. Use of Emohasis Techniaggi

1. For the entry conditions element, are the words Yes No NA "ENTRY CONDITIONS" and the column headings printed in boldfaced and uppercase print?

(III.A.1, III.D.1.b, III.D.2.b)

Discrepancy ID #

2. For the entry point element, is the word "START" Yes No NA printed in boldfaced and uppercase print?

(III.A.1, III.D.1.c, III.D.2)

Discrepancy ID #

3. Are figure axis labels (except for identified Yes No NA engineering units) printed in uppercase print?

(III.A.15.c, III.D.2.f)

. Discrepancy ID #

4. Are boldfaced letters used within flowchart elements Yes No NA of a slightly larger print size than that normally used for standard text? (III.D.1)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Are as-labeled component / instrument designators, Yes No NA control switch positions, and annunciator engravings printed with uppercase letters enclosed in quotation marks? (III.D.2.j, III.D.5)

Discrepancy ID #

a j

1

s. } Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 l

{ \ '

Qgg j .

Page 27 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 j

1

Attachment A Page 20 of 41 E0P B5. Procedure Layout and Associated Conventions

1. Is the E0P devoid of page breaks? (III.E.3) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
2. Does a border surround the page? (III.E.4) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID # --
3. Is the page border of medium line thickness and at Yes No NA least 1/2 inch from the page edges? (III.E.4)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Where multiple E0Ps exist on a single page is there Yes No NA a bordered area surrounding each E0P? (III.E.5)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Is a title block connected to the lower right hand Yes No NA corner of each bordered area surrounding each E0P?

(III.E.5)

Discrepancy ID #

6. Are lines ending in arrows used to connect all Yes No NA flowchart elements? (III.E.7)

Discrepancy ID #

7. Is the general progression through the E0P down and Yes No NA to the right? (III.E.7)

Discrepancy ID #

8. Is at least a 1/2 inch spacing maintained between the Yes No NA page border and:

(a) The E0P title and (b) flowchart elements (including connecting lines and extension lines emanatinE from override statements)? (III.E.8)

Discrepancy ID # ..x r,1 i Mk h I{\ k hc tYKm \ \' N "' ' Page

~ 281.3.4-13 lb Proc. Rev. 2

,T -

of 49 Li RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 21 of 41 E0P B5. Procedure layout and Associated Conventions (continued)

9. Is a spacing of at least 3/8 inch maintained between Yes No NA flowchart elements? (III.E.9)

Discrepancy ID #

10. Is a spacing of at least 3/8 inch maintained between Yes No NA parallel lines connecting flowchart elements, and between extension lines emanating from override statements (except for dotted intraprocedure branch lines and dashed lines connecting supplemental information)? (III.E.10)

Discrepancy ID #

11. Has the cross-over of lines connecting flowchart Yes No NA elements been minimized? (III.E.11)

Discrepancy ID #

l l

l l

1

\\k me Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 .

Page 29 of 49 l RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 22 of 41 E0P B6. Instructions for Printina. Cooyina. and Storage

1. Is text within flowchart elements single-spaced, with Yes No NA one-and-a-half line spacing maintained between listed items and between multiple instructions or statements enclosed within one flowchart element? (III.F.1)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Is text within instructional steps, exit statements, Yes No NA and endpoints left-aligned? (III.F.2)

Discrepancy ID #

3. Is text within the individual columns of entry Yes No NA conditions, override statements, and elements with decision table formats left-aligned? (III.F.3)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Is text within hold points and decision diamonds Yes No NA centered? (III.F.4)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Is type size no smaller than 9-point? (III.F.5) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
6. Has a type style been used that is simple, easy-to- Yes No NA read, and devoid of serifs and other character  !

embellishments? (III.F.6)

Discrepancy ID #

7. Are all portions of the copy of the E0P fully Yes No NA legible? (II.F.7)

Discrepancy ID # ,

i OWMN '

s Proc. 1.3.4'-13 Rev. 2 ,

- Page 30 of 49 l RTYPE H7.01 i I

Attachment A Page 23 of 41 E0P SECTION C: PROCEDURE CONTENT C1. Level of Detail

1. Is the level of detail presented in the E0P Yes No NA consistent with the knowledge and capabilities of a newly-licensed reactor operator (i.e.,

has the relative complexity of and an operator's familiarity with the evolutions to be performed been appropriately considered)? (IV.A.1)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Has excessive detail been avoided? (IV.A.2) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
3. Have expected results of routine actions att been Yes No NA stated? (IV.A.2)

Discrepancy ID # l l

4. Have system response times been specified where Yes No NA l appropriate? (IV.A.4)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Have equipment limitations been identified where Yes No NA appropriate? (IV.A 4)

Discrepancy ID #

l

6. Have instrument inaccuracies been identified where Yes No NA appropriate? (IV.A.4)

Discrepancy ID #

7. Has alternate or backup instrumentation been Yes No NA identified where appropriate? (IV.A.4)

Discrepancy ID #

{Qnn k f 0RMM l ' Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page531 of 49

L- RTYPE H7.01 2

Attachment A Page 24 of 41 E0P C1. Level of Detail (continued)

8. Have manual override instructions been incorporated Yes No NA where appropriate? (IV.A.4)

Discrepancy ID #

9. Have methods of verifying correct plant response been Yes No NA specified where appropriate? (IV.A.3)

Discrepancy ID #

10. Are instructions succinct and precise with only short, Yes No NA simple sentences used? (IV.A 5)

Discrepancy ID #

11. Where required, has verification of automatic plant Yes No NA response been included as an instruction? (IV.A.5)

Discrepancy ID #

3 ;MFOR4M Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 h5g\g\/

~

% t.! Page 32 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 1

Attachment A Page 25 of 41 E0P C2. Writino Style

1. Is the wording, grammar, and sentence structure Yes No NA within all flowchart elements easily readable and interpretable? (IV.B.1)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are instructions written in the second person Yes No NA imperative mood with an implicit subject?

(IV.B.2)

Discrepancy ID #

3. Does each instructional step only address one idea? Yes No NA (IV.B.3)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Are the objects of actions specifically stated Yes No NA

. (i.e., is it obvious exactly what is to be done to what?). (IV.B.4)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Have multiple objects (3 or more) been listed Yes No NA individually and separately from the preceding text? (IV.B.4)

Discrepancy ID #

1

6. Where actions must be performed concurrently, are Yes No NA they specifically identified as such? (IV.B.5)

Discrepancy ID #

l

7. Are limits expressed quantitatively? (IV.B.6) Yes No NA l Discrepancy ID #  ;

1

8. Has the need for arithmetical calculations been Yes No NA -

l avoided where possible? (IV.B.7) l l

screpancy ID #

i

} } Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 ease 33 of 49 "r0e\

l . t N, FOR +

l .

RTYPE H7.01 n W ~

Attachment A Page 26 of 41 E0P C3. Cautions and Notes

1. Have cautions only been used to identify potential Yes No NA hazards to personnel or equipment? (IV.C)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Have notes only been used to provide supplementary Yes No NA information related to performance of a particular action? (IV.C)

Discrepancy ID #

3. Has the use of cautions and notes been minimized? Yes No NA (IV.C) i Discrepancy ID #
4. Do notes and cautions Dat contain instructional Yes No NA steps? (IV.C)

Discrepancy ID #

1

)

i 4

l 1

,0n,6NrogMK30 r ,1 i Neroc. i.3.4-ia aev. 2

! rs All \/ Page 34 of 49 l 1

(l hl t . '. RTYPE H7.01 1 i

Attachment A Page 27 of 41 E0P C4. Branchina Instructions and Cross References

1. Are all branching instructions clear and specific Yes No NA (i.e., not ambiguous)? (IV 0)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are all branching instructions presented as complete Yes No NA sentences? (IV.D)

Discrepancy 10 #

3. Where branching is required, does each branching instruction correctly employ one of the following formats:

- Exit this procedure and enter (Procedure X), Yes No NA

"[ Procedure Title)".

- Exit the (Parameter) section of this procedure Yes No NA and enter (Procedure X), "(Procedure Title)".

- Exit this procedure and enter the [ Parameter] Yes No NA section of (EOP -[X) , "[EOP Title]".

- Exit this procedure and enter the (Parameter] Yes No NA section and the (Parameter) section of E0P-[X),

"[EOP Title)"; execute these sections of E0P-[X]

concurrently.

- Enter (Procedure X), "[ Procedure Title)", and Yes No NA execute (Procedure X) concurrently with this procedure.

Continue at (Y). Yes No NA Return to (Y). Yes No NA (IV.D)

Discrepancy 10 #

4. Where an entry to a particular E0P section from another Yes No NA E0P is indicated, has a rectangular arrow been used to enclose the correct number of the other E0P that specifies this entry? (IV.D)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Where entry to a particular E0P section is directed, has Yes No NA a rectangular arrow been used to indicate the appropriate entry point location in the identified E0P (including identification that entry is from this procedure)? (IV.0)

Discrepancy ID #

o tNTORMAEO N35 of 49 e,oc.i.3.4-33 Rev. 2 A '

Page qiM!\/ RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 28 of 41 l E0P C4. Branchina Instructions and Cross References (continued)

6. Does each intra-procedure branch correctly employ Yes No NA a unique letter designator format (i.e., capitalized, circled, and each pair connected by a dotted line)?

(IV.0)

Discrepancy ID #

7. Has forward and backward branching within the E0P Yes No NA been minimized? (IV.D.)

Discrepancy ID #

8. Have cross-references been minimized? (IV.0) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
9. For cross-references to supplemental procedures, has Yes No NA the referenced procedure been identified by both number and title, with the title enclosed in quotation marks? (IV.D)

Discrepancy ID #

10. Where figures and tables are referenced in the E0P, Yes No NA are they identified by correct number? (Identification of the title is not required.) (III.A.15. III.A.16. IV.D)

Discrepancy ID #

i l

l l

l i

k'I

~

if Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 36 of 49  ;

i RTYPE H7.01 i

i

Attachment A Page 29 of 41  !

E0P C5. Component Identification
1. Are components clearly and completely Yes No NA identified? (IV.E)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Where a specific control switch or instrument is Yes No NA referenced, are as-labeled designations printed in uppercase letters and enclosed in quotation marks?

(IV.E.1) 4 Discrepancy ID #

3. Have system titles been capitalized? (The word Yes No NA j "system" is not required.) (IV.E.2)

Discrepancy ID #

4. For infrequently used components, have locations Yes No NA been specified? (IV.E.3)

Discrepancy ID #

1 4

F 0 7( T O RMA d Proc. 1.3.4-13 aev. 2

(-)Nll' Page 37 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 1

. ,. --: __ , , , . - ,- ..__.-p- -. --r -,y- <--- - -- . -

Attachment A Page 30 of 41 EOP C6. Spelling. Gra mar. and Punctuation

1. Is spelling, grammar, and punctuation consistent with Yes No NA standard rules and modern usage? (IV.F)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Has excessive use of commas, definite articles, Yes No NA pronouns, and adverbs been minimized to the extent possible? (IV.F.1, IV.F.2)

Discrepancy ID #

! 3. Are elements with columnar formats (e.g., override Yes No NA statements) devoid of commas? (IV.F.1)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Have personal pronouns no.1 been used? (IV.F.2) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #

i i

(ej. Ng

'gkh k- Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 38 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 1

) l

Attachment A Page 31 of 41 E0P C7. Romenclature. Vocabulary. and Abbreviations

1. Have simple, common words with specific, precise Yes No NA meanings been used? Have ambiguous terms been avoided? (IV.G.1, IV.G.2)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are logic terms used consistent with the definitions Yes No NA provid.d in Table Al? (IV.G.3)

Discrepancy ID #

3. Has terminology been consistent with the definitions Yes No NA provided in Table A27 (IV.G.4)

Discrepancy ID #

. 4. Has the use of abbreviations and acroisyms been Yes No NA minimized? Have only those immediately recognizable from Table A3 been used? (IV.G.5)

Discrepancy ID #

I l

j' ij gs @

M n e.%'

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 gb'

\ [\h V4 Page 39 of 49 RTYPE H7.01 l

l I

Attachment A Page 32 of 41 E0P Table A1: Application of Logic Terms Loaic Term ' Definition AND Designates a combination of two or more conditions.

Identifies the second and subsequent elements of a set conditions.

BEFORE Indicates that the respective action is to be performed prior to the occurrence of a specified condition. Does >

not imply or require any specific margin be observed when a step states that action be taken "before" reach-ing a limit or value.

EXCEPT Specifies an exception to or exclusion from taking a prescribed sction.

IF Indicates that performance of the associated action is contingent upon the existence of the identified condition (s). If the identified conditions do not exist, the prescribed action is not to be taken and execution of operator actions proceeds to the following step.

OR Designates alternative combinations of conditions.

Indicates that the associated action is to be performed if any one of the specified conditions occur. (Always used in the inclusive sense.)

THEN Designates the action portion of an instruction.

HAIT UNTIL Indicates that execution of subsequent operator actions is not permitted until the identified condition exists.

WHEN Indicates that upon occurrence er ?xistence of the identified condition (s), execut a of the procedure should immediately proceed to ti,e next identified flow chart element.

UNTIL Indicates that the associated action is to be terminated when the specified condition occurs.

\f0 OND'

)

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 40 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 33 of 41 E0P _

Table A2: Standard Nomenclature and Definitions Available:

The state or condition of being ready and able to be used (placed into operation) to accomplish the stated (or implied) action or function.

Cannot be determined:

The value or status of the specified parameter relative to the procedure action level cannot be ascertained using available indications.

Cannot be maintained:

The value of the specified paramaeter cannot be kept above or below (as applicable) the identified limit. Implies ar, evaluation based on system performance and availability considered in relation to parameter values and trends. Neither implies that the parameter must actually exceed the limit before the action is taken nor that the action must be taken before the limit is reached.

Cannot be restored:

The value of the specified parameter cannot be returned to within the specified limit. Implies an evaluation based on system performance and availability considered in relation to parameter values and trends. Does not imply any specific time limit, but does not permit prolonged operation beyond the limit.

Close: I To position a valve or damper so as to prevent flow of the process fluid.

Confirm:

Use available indications and, as appropriate, physical observation to establish that the specified action has occurred, conditions tre as stated, etc. Includes an implied requirement to take corrective action if the identified conditions do not exist.

Control:

Take action, as necessary, to maintain the value of the specified I parameter within applicable limits.

Enter:

Commence performing, in sequence, the steps of the identified procedure.

Execute:

Perform the actions prescribed in the identified step.

M

.f t OtO Prec. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 41 of 49

. RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 34 of 41  :

E0P -

Table A2: Standard Nomenclature and Definitions (continued)

Exit:

Cease performing the steps of the identifie1 prc:edure.

, Initiate:  ;

Operate the necessary controls so as to establish the specified system ,

configuration or plant condition. Prolonged attempts to jumper interlochs, align alternate or backup power supplies, enter remote areas to manually operate valves, etc., are not intended by this term.

Line up:

Establish the prerequisites nece.sary for system operation. Does not encompass starting main system pumps.

Maintain:

Take action, as necessary, to keep the value of the specified parameter within the applicable limits.

Monitor:

Observe and evaluate at a frequency sufficient to remain apprised of the value, trend, and rate of change of the specified parameter.

Open:

To position a valve or damper so as to allow flow of the process fluid.

Place:

To align a switch to a specified position.

Prevent:

Take action to forestall or avert the state, condition, or action addressed by the step.

Purge:  !

Force flow through an enclosed volume. Includes establishing both an  !

influent and effluent flowpath, l Restore:

Take action, as necessary, to return the value of the specified parameter to within applicable limits.

Set:

To position a control to a specified scale value.

Shut:

To position a breaker w as to permit the flow of currert in the associated circuit.

Slowly:

Only as fast as can be accommodated and still maintain effective ccntrol of the associated parameter (s) Vithin.spegiftedjalues or limits.

(h Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 42 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

7r

6 Atto?h.nent A Page '35,of 41 E0P Table A2
Standard Nomenclature and Definitions (continued)

Start: /

To energize a pump or fan motor.

r Terminate

Stop the stated action, process or evolution. The most direct action to stop the stated action / process / evolution is preferred, but many actions may be required.

Throttle:

To position a valve or damper so as to partially restrict flow of the process fluid.

Trip:

To deenergize a pump or fan motor; to posiiion a breaker so as to interrupt or prevent the flow, of current in the associated circuit.

Vent:

Open an efficent (exhaust) flowpath from an enclosed volume.

/v l , f .-

'l , ,.

J mginf0%

d 00 Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 43 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

..l , f

<- / , .

Attachment A Page 36 of 41 E0P Table A3: Standard Acronyms and Abbreviations Abbreviation Meanina ADS Automatic Depressurization System APRM Average Power Range Monitor ARI Alternate Rod Insertion BIIT Boron Injection Initiation Temperature CAC Containment Atmospheric Control CAD Containment Atmospheric Dilution CPS Counts Per Second CRD Control Rod Drive ry/. '

CS Core Spray CST Condensate Storage Tank Demin Demineralizer DSIL Drywell Spray Initiation Limit DH Drywell ECCS Emergency Core Cooling Systems Elev Elevation

  • F Degrees Fahrenheit ft Feet FH Feedwater GPM Gallons Per Minute d

H&V Heating and Ventilation HCLL Heat Capaacity Level Limit HCTL Heat Capacity Temperature Limit HCU Hydraulic Control Unit

, A100

'i

\g GRM^""Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2

, QIhs,\! Page 44 of 49 j, RTYPE H7.01 i

e Attachment A Page 37 of 41 E0P Abbreviation Meanina HPCI High Pressure Coolant Injection hr Hour HX Heat Exchanger in. Inch lbs Pounds LCO Limiting Condition for Operation LI Level Indicator LOCA Loss of Coolant Accident i LPCI Low Pressure Coolant Injection LR Level Recorder HARFP Minimum Alternate RPV Flooding Pressure MCFI Minimum Core Flooding Interval MCUTL Haximum Core Uncovery Time Limit min Minimum i

HPCHLL Haximum Primary Containment Hater Level Limit mR Hilliroentgen/Milliren (as appropriate to the context and the units of associated instrumentation.

HSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve N/A Not Applicable i NPSH Net Positive Suction Head N.H. North West PCPL .PrimarysContainment Pressure Limit p3RINTORMAldWe,i4r sguere inch <geuge>

nN1Y s- -

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 45 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 38 of 41 E0P l

Abbreviation Heanina PSP Pressure Suppression Pressure RB Reactor Building RBCCH Reactor Building Closed Cooling Hater RCIC Reactor Core Isolation Cooling RHR Residual Heat Removal RPM Revolutions Per Minute RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RHCU Reactor Water Cleanup SBGT Standby Gas Treatment SBLC Standby Liquid Control S.E. South East SRV Safety Relief Valve SRVTPLL SRV Tail Pipe Level Limit SSH Salt Service Hater S.H. South West TAF Top of the active fuel TBCCH Turbine Building Closed Cooling Hater TIP Traversing In-Core Probe

& Arrpersand ("AND")

Feet (units of elevation)

Inches (units of elevation)

% Percent 4 i 9%\

g g K S M O

YO h ggl, Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 46 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 39 of 41 E0P C8. Numerical Values i

1. Have limits and values of operating parameters been Yes No NA expressed quantitatively? (IV.H)

Discrepancy ID #

2. Have only Arabic numerals been used? (IV.H.1) Yes No NA Discrepancy ID #
3. Do parameter values include the tnits of measurement? Yes No NA (IV.H.2)

Discrepancy ID #

4. Have parameter values been expressed to a precision Yes No NA consistent with the intent of the action (s) specified in the step? (IV.H.3)

Discrepancy ID #

5. Are acceptance values expressed in terms of a range Yes No NA rather than a tolerance band to obviate the need for mental arithmetic (e.g., 20 in. to 30 in.,

rather than 25 in. 15 in.)? (IV.H.4)

Discrepancy ID #

6. Has a slash mark (/) been used in place of the word Yes No NA "per" (e.g., mR/hr)? (IV.H.5)

Discrepancy ID #

7. Are numbers between zero and one expressed in decimal Yes No NA form with a zero preceding the decimal point (e.g., 0.12)? (IV.H.6)

Discrepancy ID #

3

,_ g QW; <.

I

{s\

Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 47 of 49

. RTYPE H7.01

P 1 Attachment A Page 40 of 41 E0P SECTION D: CONFORMITY HITH PLANT-SPECIFIC TECHNICAL GUIDELINES

1. Does the wording of each flowchart element comply Yes No NA with the content and intent of the corresponding step of the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID #

2. Have all steps of the corresponding technical Yes No NA guidelines been incorporated into the E0P?

Discrepancy ID #

3. Are cautions referenced at the points specified in Yes No NA the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID #

4. Are all instructions and cautions in the E0P derived Yes No NA from corresponding technical guideline steps and cautions?

Discrepancy ID #

5. Do all numerical values in the E0P correspond to Yes No NA those specified in the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID #

6. Do the E0P entry conditions correspond to those Yes No NA specified in the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID # ._

7. Does the sequence of operator actions and decisions Yes No NA correspond to that presented in the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID # .

i

8. Does the association of override statements correspond Yes No NA to that defined in the technical guidelines?

Discrepancy ID #

9. Are cross-references consistent with those identified .Y No NA l in the technical guidelines?

T i\{ es l Discrepancy ID # -nD $Nh '

l r\~t\\ 5' ~

()kg i

l Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 48 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

Attachment A Page 41 of 41 E0P SECTION E: COMPATIBILITY HITH THE CONTROL R00H

1. Are as-labeled designations used to identify specific Yes No NA components, alarms, controls, and instruments?

Discrepancy ID #

2. Are. component locations specified when appropriate Yes No NA (e.g., the least-experienced intended user might be unfamiliar with the location, or when failure to do so may cause confusion)?

Discrepancy ID #

3. Is the determination of identified states (value, Yes No NA trend, position, etc.) of plant parameters as specified in the E0P adequately supported by plant instruments, approved instructions, or other appropriate sources of information?

Discrepancy ID #

4. Are the values of plant parameters specified in the Yes No NA E0P within the range of the respective control room instruments?

Discrepancy ID #

5. Are the units of measurement for values of plant Yes No NA parameters as specified in the E0P the same as those presented on the respective control room instruments?

Discrepancy ID #

6. Are the values of parameters specified in the E0P Yes No NA expressed to a precision consistent with the accuracy and precision of the respective instru-mentation?

Discrepancy ID #

V0h, g o W; 0%D Proc. 1.3.4-13 Rev. 2 Page 49 of 49 RTYPE H7.01

_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20151F948&oldid=2968323"