|
|
| Line 17: |
Line 17: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:. . | | {{#Wiki_filter:}} |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS procedures that require a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation as described l in Section 6.5.3.2.d.
| |
| b.
| |
| Review of all proposed tests and experiments that affect nuclear safety.
| |
| : c. Review of all proposed changes to Appendix "A" Technical Specifications.
| |
| : d. Review of all proposed changes or modifications to plant systems or equipment that affect nuclear safety.
| |
| , e. Review of the safety evaluations that have been completed under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59.
| |
| f.
| |
| Initiation or review of investigations of all violations of the Tech-nical Specifications including the reports covering evaluations and recommendations to prevent recurrence.
| |
| : g. Review of all REPORTABLE EVENTS.
| |
| : h. Review of facility operations to detect potential nuclear safety hazards,
| |
| : i. Performance of special reviews, investigations or analyses and reports thereon as determined by the 50RC. ,
| |
| J. ' Review of the Facility Security Plan and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation, or N0k M* involve a potential decrease in the effectiveness of the plan, per 10 CFR 50.54(p).
| |
| : k. Review of the Facility Emergency Plan and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation, or involve a potential decrease in the effectiveness of the plan, per
| |
| @ CFR 50.54(q).
| |
| : 1. Review of the Fire Protection Program and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation. 'l
| |
| : m. Review of all unplanned on-site releases of radioactivity to the environs including the preparation of reports covering evaluation, recommendations, and disposition of the corrective action to prevent l recurrence. (
| |
| )
| |
| : n. Review of changes to the PROCESS CONTROL MANUAL and the OFF-SITE DOSE CALCULATION MANUAL. '
| |
| l REVIEW PROCESS l
| |
| : 6. 5.1. 7 A technical review and control system utilizing qualified reviewers shall function to perform the periodic or routine review of procedures and changes thereto. Details of this technical review process are provided in Section 6.5.3.
| |
| HOPE CREEK 6-8 Amendment No. 52 9404190216 940413 PDR ADOCK 05000272 l P PDR
| |
| | |
| 1 1
| |
| 1 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS
| |
| : f. All REPORTABLE EVENTS.
| |
| g.
| |
| All recognized indications of an unanticipated deficiency in some aspect of design or operation of structures, systems, or components that could affect nuclear safety; and
| |
| : h. Reports and meeting minutes of the SORC.
| |
| AUDITS 6.5.2.4.3 Audits of facility activities shall be performed under the cognizance of the OSR staff.
| |
| These audits shall encompass: g y Q
| |
| : a. The conformance of facility operation to provisions contained within !
| |
| the Technical Specifications and applicable license conditions.-at-
| |
| --1;ast on:: per 12 months; b.
| |
| The performance, training and qualifications of the entire facility staff.-et 1:a:t once per 12 months +.
| |
| c.
| |
| The results of actions taken to correct deficiencies occurring in facility equipment, structures, systems, or method of operation that affect nuclear safety. at !c::t Once per 5 = cath:;
| |
| d.
| |
| The performance of activities required by the Operational Quality Assurance Program to meet the criteria of Appendix B,10 CFR Part 50
| |
| -st leset ence per 24 months; g g, ]% - onse-pen4+2-months +ThefeeH ty-Emergency Plan end-4mple
| |
| : f. -The-Fae414ty-Secur4ty41an-and-imp 1:::nting procedur-es at- !eaet enes-
| |
| -par-12 months +.
| |
| g.
| |
| Any other area of facility operation considered appropriate by the General Manager - Quality Assurance and Nuclear Safety or the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer 6 l
| |
| : h. The facility Fire Protection Program and the implementing procedures.
| |
| -at--least-onee-per 21 months +.
| |
| i -The fire preteet4cn and icss prevention progrc: imple::ntatier :t--
| |
| -least-onee-per-12-months-utilizing either : qualified off :it: ,
| |
| l licensee 41-re-proteet4on-engheee(+)-cr en cuteide independent fire = l
| |
| -peeteet4en-eonsultant. ^r.cutside independent # ire peetection cei
| |
| -cultant ch:l' be utt'!:ed at le::t once per 26 :0 nth:; :nd ;
| |
| : j. The radiological environmental monitoring. program and the results thereof.et leas + enca per 1? month (
| |
| : k. The 0FFSITE DOSE CALCULATION MANUAL and implementing procedures.44
| |
| -4eest ence per 24 enths; l l
| |
| n g. - c,p 4k e a. ice oss p m W io^ Pre r % !
| |
| HOPE CREEK 6-11 Amendment No. 52 mpkneMMon ME^3 On cuWde. Whpt<dut Arc. pvatuMM tt A G. i l
| |
| | |
| l l
| |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS l
| |
| 1.
| |
| The PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM and implerr inting procedures for process-ing and packaging of radioactive wastes.at leset once pee-24-mont4m-
| |
| -ami, m.
| |
| The performance of activities required by the Quality Assurance Program for ef fluent and environmental monitoring.-at 1:::t n : per 12 er,th .
| |
| The above audits may be conducted by the Quality Assurance Department or an independent consultant. l by the OSR staff. Audit plans and final audit reports shall be reviewed
| |
| [
| |
| RECORDS AND REPORTS j j 6.5.2.4.4 Records of OSR activities shall be maintained. Reports of reviews and audits shall be prepared and distributed as indicated below; a.
| |
| The results of reviews performed pursuant to Section 6.5.2.4.2 shall be reported to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer at least j monthly.
| |
| b.
| |
| Audit reports prepared pursuant to Specification 6.5.2.4.3 shall be forwarded by the auditing organization to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer and to the management positions responsible for the areas audited (1) within 30 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by the Quality Assurance Department, and (2) within 60 days after completion of the audit for those audits l conducted by an independent consultant.
| |
| 6.5.2.5 ONSITE SAFETY REVIEW GROUP (SRG)
| |
| FUNCTION 6.5.2.5.1 The.SRG shall function to provide: the review of plant design and operating experience for potential opportunities to improve plant safety; evalua-tion of plant operations and maintenance activities; and advice to management on the overall quality and safety of plant operations.
| |
| The SRG shall make recommendations for revised procedures, equipment modifica-tions, or other means of iroroving plant safety to appropriate station / corporate management.
| |
| RESPONSIBILITIES 6.5.2.5.2 The SRG shall be responsible for:
| |
| a.
| |
| Review of selected plant operating characteristics, NRC issuances, industry advisories, and other appropriate sources of plant design and operating experience information which may indicate areas for improving plant safety. -
| |
| : b. Review of selected facility features, equipment, and systems.
| |
| : c. Review of selected procedures and plant activities including main-tenance, modification, operational problems, and operational HOPE CREEK 6-12 Amendment No.52
| |
| | |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS
| |
| : b. A Safety Limit Violation Report shall be prepared. The report shall be reviewed by the SORC. This report shall describe (1) applicable circumstances preceding the violation, (2) effects of the violation upon unit components, systems, or structures, and (3) corrective action taken to prevent recurrence.
| |
| : c. The Safety Limit Violation Report shall be submitted to the Commission, the General Manager - Quality Assurance and Nuclear Safety and the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer within 30 days of the l violation.
| |
| : d. Critical operation of the unit shall not be resumed until authorized by the Commission.
| |
| 6.8 PROCEDURES AND PROGRAMS 6.8.1 Written procedures shall be established, implemented, and maintained covering the activities referenced below;
| |
| : a. The applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978.
| |
| : b. The applicable procedures required to implement the requirements of HUREG-0737 and supplements thereto.
| |
| : c. Refueling operations.
| |
| : d. Surveillance and test activities of safety-related equipment,
| |
| : e. Security Plan implementation.
| |
| : f. Emergency Plan implementation,
| |
| : g. Fire. Protection Program implementation, gg g,g,g ,
| |
| : h. PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM implementation. ard 6,g.t.fj i 0FFSITE 00SE CALCULATION MANUAL implementation.
| |
| J. Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environment monitoring.
| |
| 6.8.2 Each procedure and administrative policy of 6.8.1 above, and changes thereto, shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with spec fication 6.5.1.6 or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures.
| |
| 6.8.3 On-the-Spot changes to procedures of Specifidation 6.8.2 may be made provided:
| |
| : a. The intent of the original procedure is no,t altered;
| |
| : b. The change 1s approved by two members of the unit management staff, at least one of whom holds a Senior Reactor Operator license on the unit affected; and HOPE CREEK 6-15 Amendment No. 52
| |
| | |
| +
| |
| l l
| |
| i INSERT A Procedures of 6.8.1.e and 6.8.1.f shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with the Facility's Security and Emergency Plans or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures.
| |
| l 1
| |
| l l
| |
| 1 l
| |
| l
| |
| | |
| LCR 94-10 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 4 l
| |
| MARKED UP PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION PAGES SALEM UNIT NO. 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-70 DOCKET NO. 50-272 l
| |
| t l
| |
| I i
| |
| | |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS I 1
| |
| OUOPUM (continued) )
| |
| shall consist of the Chairman or his designated alternate and four members l including alternates.
| |
| Eg5PONSIBILITIES 6.5.1.6 The Station Operations Review Committee shall be responsible fort
| |
| : a. Review of: (1) Upper tier administrative procedures within the scope of Regulatory Guide 1.33 (2/78), and changes thereto and (2) Newly created procedures or changes to existing procedures that require a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation an described in Section 6.5.3.2.d.
| |
| : b. Review of all proposed tests and experiments that affect nuclear safety.
| |
| : c. Review of all proposed changes to Appendix "A" Technical Specifications.
| |
| : d. Review of all proposed changes or modifications to plant systems or equipment that affect nuclear safety,
| |
| : e. Review of the safety evaluations that have been completed under the provisions of 10CFR50.59.
| |
| : f. Investigation of all violations of the Technical Specifications including the reports covering evaluation and recommendations to prevent recurrence.
| |
| : g. Review of all REPORTABLE EVENTS.
| |
| : h. Review of facility operations to detect potential nuclear safety hazards.
| |
| : i. Performance of special reviews, investigations or analyses and reports thereon as requested by the General Manager - Salem I operations. l
| |
| : j. jReview of the Facility Security Plan and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 IkfQ$th, safety evaluation, or involve a po,tential decrease in the effectiveness of the plan, per 10CFR50.54(p).
| |
| I
| |
| : k. Review of the Facility Emergency Plan and implementing' l procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 safety I evaluation, or involve a potential decrease in the effectiveness ofl g lan. per 10CFR50.54(q). j
| |
| : 1. Review of the Fire Protection Program and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 saf ety evaluation.
| |
| i SALEM - UNIT 1 6-9 Amendment No. 133 l l l
| |
| l
| |
| . . , - . r r v -
| |
| | |
| _ . _ . ,- _ = - - . -- . . - . . . -. . -
| |
| 1 l
| |
| ADM8N857 RAT 8VE CONTROLS REVIEW 6.5.2.4.2 The OSR staff shall reviews '
| |
| a.
| |
| The safety evaluations for changes to procedures, equipment, or systems; and tests or experiments completed under the provisions of !
| |
| 10CFR50.59, to verify that such actions did not constitute an unreviewed safety question;
| |
| : b. Proposed changes to procedures, equipment, or systems, and tests or experiments that involve an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10CTR50.59;
| |
| : c. Proposed changes to Technical Specifications or to the Operating License;
| |
| : d. Violations of codes, regulations, orders, Technical l Specifications, license requirements, or of internal procedures or instructions having nuclear safety significance; l
| |
| : e. Significant operating abnormalities or deviations from normal l
| |
| and expected performance of plant equipment that affect nuclear safetys l
| |
| : f. All REPORTABLE EVENTS; l
| |
| g.
| |
| All recognized indications of an unanticipated deficiency in some aspect of design or operation.of structures, systens or components that could affect nuclear safety; g
| |
| : h. Reports and meeting minutes of the Station Operations Review Committee.
| |
| ~.
| |
| AUDITS 6.5.2.4.3 Audits of facility activities shall be performed under_the cognizance of the OSR staff. These audits shall encompass {fM[oQm,
| |
| : a. The conformance of f acility operation to provisions contained within the Technical Specifications and applicable license conditions.4t-least-cece p:e medhe,-
| |
| : b. The performance, training, and qualifications of the entire facility staff.-* 1edet ence per 12 ::nthe.
| |
| c.
| |
| The results of actions taken to correct deficiencies occurring in facility equipment, st ructures , systems, or method of operation that affect nuclear safety.at-least enee per 5 -rathe-
| |
| : d. The performance of activities required by the Operational Quality Assurance Program to meet the Criteria of Appendix B to 10CFR50, -at leset r-c p-- ?A -aa*h=
| |
| SALEM - UNIT 1 6-12 Amendment No. 133
| |
| | |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS AUDITS (continued)
| |
| : e. --The Ferility r- rge-cy Pl?" *ad ' p!=-ent.ing precedurer 24-
| |
| -4eest :nre p:r 12 er * "
| |
| : f. '" h a r=c114*y ca~ ri*y Dian and imp 1===a*'a0 p-^ceduree 24 4 east--ence per 12 enths,.
| |
| : g. Any other area of facility operation considered appropriate by the General Manager - Quality Assurance and Nuclear Safety or the l bD Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer.
| |
| E % OM htt Y ttM h. The Facility Fire Protection Program and implementing k% pWkMr\% procedures.st-least once par 9A m^n*h=-
| |
| pap %mMW6
| |
| . i Phe fire pr;teetion and leen ""=u="* inn nennram imn1==="ta'le-
| |
| $ND 40 b 'at-least - ence -per - 12 ~ oath = "t 11! ting alkheh a q"alified of f she-.
| |
| g g Em u.ees.e-m.-pr.t. awn - e ng t r --r m -r e n ~ * -id- <ad gene.nt nr probeetlon-conewltant_ na autside indep=adaae *ir= pen *=*<nn-
| |
| [ 0 T1 M consultant-shall-be utilized 2* 1 east ^=ce per 36 ~^aths, (1MSOG .
| |
| : j. The radiological environmental monitoring program and the results thereof.at leae* ^nca p=" iS man *h=.
| |
| l The above audits may be conducted by the Quality Assurance Department or an ,
| |
| independent consultant. Audit plans and final audit reports shall be reviewed by the OSR staff.
| |
| BECORDS AND REPORTS 6.5.2.4.4 Records of OSR activities shall be maintained. Reports of reviews and audits shall be prepared and distributed as indicated below:
| |
| : a. The results of reviews performed pursuant to Section 6.5.2.4.2 shall be reported to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer at least monthly,
| |
| : b. Audit reports prepared pursuant to Section 6.5.2.4.3 shall be forwarded by the auditing organization to the Vice President and chief Nuclear Officer and to the management positions responsible for the areas audited (1) within 30 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by the Quality Assurance l Department, and (2) within 60 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by an independent consultant.
| |
| )
| |
| i 6.5.2.5 ON-SITE SAFETY REVIEW GROUP (SRG) '
| |
| FUNCTION )
| |
| )
| |
| 6.5.2.5.1 The On-Site safety Review Group (SRG) shall function to provide I the review of plant design and operating experience for potential opportunities to improve plant saf ety; the evaluation of plant operat t:ns and SALEH - UNIT 1 6-13 Amendment No.133 l
| |
| - . . -- . . . . .. . - - - - l
| |
| | |
| . _ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ m _ .. __ _ __
| |
| 4 i
| |
| ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS '
| |
| I
| |
| ; 6.8 PROCEDURES AND PROGRAMS 6.8.1 Written procedures shall be established, implemented and maintained covering the activities referenced below I l
| |
| : a. The applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978.
| |
| : b. Refueling operations.
| |
| : c. Surveillance and test activities of safety related equipment.
| |
| : d. Security Plan implementation.
| |
| : e. Emergency Plan implementation.
| |
| : f. Fire Protection Program implementation.
| |
| e m ch c,.8.t.a
| |
| : g. PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM implementation. 4M b.6 \ C.j
| |
| : h. OFFSITE DOSE CALCULATION MANUAL implementation.
| |
| : 1. Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental monitoring.
| |
| 6.8.2 Each procedure and administrative policy of 6.8.1 above, and changes thereto, shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with Specification 6.5.1.6 or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures.
| |
| 6.8.3 On-the-spot changes to procedures of 6.8.1 above,may be made provided:
| |
| : a. The intent of the original procedure is not altered.
| |
| b.- The change is approved by two members of the plant management staff, at least one of whom holds a Senior Reactor Operator's License on the unit affected,
| |
| : c. The change is documented and receives the same level of review and approval as the original procedure under Specification 6.5.3.2a within 14 days of implementation.
| |
| SALIM - UNIT 1 6-17 Amendment . 133
| |
| | |
| o .
| |
| INSERT A Procedures of 6.8.1.d and 6.8.1.e shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with the Facility's Security and Emergency Plans or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and-reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures.
| |
| d i
| |
| 1 1
| |
| [
| |
| l i
| |
| l l l.
| |
| | |
| a h .6 4 A r 4 pbckw J a -
| |
| k- a R " ~ - > * "> .* -+4 1 4-, - +A e M.-,
| |
| h LCR 94-10 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 5 MARKED UP PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES SALEM UNIT NO. 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-75 DOCKET NO. 50-311 l
| |
| l i
| |
| | |
| __ _ _ _ . . __ =- _ _ .
| |
| * ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS RESPONSIBILITIES 6.5.1.6 The Station Operations Review Committee shall be responsible fort
| |
| : a. Review of (1) Upper tier administrative procedures within the scope of Regulatory Guide 1.33 (2/78), and changes thereto and (2) Newly created procedures or changes to existing procedures that require a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation as described in Section 6.5.3.2.d.
| |
| : b. Review of all proposed tests and experiments that affect nuclear safety,
| |
| : c. Review of all proposed changes to Appendix "A" Technical Specifications.
| |
| : d. Review of all proposed changes or modifications to plant systems or equipment that affect nuclear safety.
| |
| : e. Review of the safety evaluations that have been completed under the provisions of 10CFR50.59.
| |
| : f. Investigation of all violations of the Technical Specifications including the reports covering evaluation and recommendations to prevent recurrence.
| |
| : g. Review of all REPORTABLE EVENTS.
| |
| : h. Review of facility operations to detect potential nuclear safety hazards.
| |
| : 1. Performance of special reviews, investigations or analyses and reports thereon as requested by the General Manager - Salem Operations,
| |
| : j. fReviewoftheFacilitySecurityPlanandimplementing fffQ$ej, procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation, or involve a potential decrease in the effectiveness of the plan, per 10CFR50.54(p).
| |
| : k. Review of the Facility Emergency Plan and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation, or involve a potential decrease in the effectiveness ofj the plan, per 10CFR50.54(q). >
| |
| : 1. Review of the Fire Protection Program and implementing procedures and changes thereto that require a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation.
| |
| : m. Review of all unplanned on-site releases of radioactivity to the environs including the preparation of reports covering evaluation, recommendations and disposition of the corrective action to prevent recurrence.
| |
| l SALEM - UNIT 2 6-9 Amendment No.112 l l
| |
| | |
| 1 i i ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS REVIEW 1
| |
| 6.5.2.4.2 The OSR staff shall review: )
| |
| : a. The safety evaluations for changes to procedures, equipment, or systems; and tests or experiments completed under the provisions of 10CTR50.59, to verify that such actions did not constitute an unreviewed safety question;
| |
| : b. Proposed changes to procedures, equipment, or systems; and tests or experiments that involve an unreviewed safety question as defined in 1CCFR50.59;
| |
| : c. Proposed changes to Technical Specifications or to the operating License;
| |
| : d. Violations of codes, regulations, orders, Technical l Specifications, license requirements, or of internal procedures or instructions having nuclear safety significance; l
| |
| : e. Significant operating abnormalities or deviations from normal l and expected performance of plant equipment that affect nuclear safety; l
| |
| : f. All REPORTABLE EVENTS; l
| |
| : g. All recognized indications of an unanticipated deficiency in l some aspect of design or operation of structures, systems or components that could affect nuclear safety; l
| |
| : h. Reports and meeting minutes of the Station Operations Review l Committee.
| |
| AUDITS 6.5.2.4.3 Audits of facility activities shall be performed under cognizance of the OSR staff. These audits shall encompass: 4he fo//owin
| |
| : a. The conformance of facility operation to provisions contained within the Technical Specifications and applicable license conditions, at-4eest-enec per 12 -: nther
| |
| : b. The performance, ' training, and qualifications of' the entire facility staf4 at-least-once per 12 centhe,
| |
| : c. The results of actions taken to correct deficiencies occurring in facility equipment, structures, systems, or method of operation that affect nuclear safety.at least ence per 5 eenther-
| |
| : d. The performance of activities required by the operational Quality Assurance Program to meet the Criteria of Appendix B-to 10CFR50. at least ence-per 24 months-l SALEM - UNIT 2 6-12 Amendment No.112
| |
| | |
| . . ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS AUDITS (continued)
| |
| : e. The-Foo444+y-Emergency "lan end--implementing-peosedurer :L Ok usc.d. least-once-per-12 m:nths,
| |
| : f. ch: F::ility :: rity P1:n :nd impler nting precedure it
| |
| -1.ceeg_ono por 17 men
| |
| * h e -
| |
| g.
| |
| ..$ MN O( Any ther area of facility operation considered appropriate by the General Manager - Quality Assurance and Nuclear Safety or the k (\Yt, Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer.
| |
| YkLkt% h. The Facility Fire Protection Program and implementing ON kDS5 procedures. at--lea-t en:: per 2i ::nths.
| |
| pf2W.T\MOA
| |
| : 1. -The-44se - protect ica -ad la== pc-su = a
| |
| * i n a program impl emen baMon-
| |
| -- e t lenet ener per 12 centhe utilizing citber : ;ualified ef f eite if@gM"t0vt 44eensee-44re-protectier enginees44) er an euteide independert fi- -
| |
| m _..m_ .a_o_.
| |
| _p -. _.,_ _ -..,.._. ~ _._.%
| |
| MDM ::kbbkEEEk bhSkk b5 btili ch 5k kE:bS bkbb bb hh obthh OM de y j. The radiological environmental monitoring program and the results thereof.** 'e~t ener per 12 m:nthe.
| |
| p TWC d'4n The above audits may be conducted by the Quality Assurance Department or an independent consultant. Audit plans and final audit reports shall be reviewed Consubd, jby the OSR staff.
| |
| RECOEDS AND REPORTS 6.5.2.4.4 Records of OSR activities shall be maintained. Reports of reviews !
| |
| and audits shall be prepared and distributed as indicated below: )
| |
| I
| |
| : a. The results of reviews performed pursuant to Section 6.5.2.4.2 shall be reported to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer at least monthly.
| |
| : b. Audit reports prepared pursuant to Section 6.5.2.4.3 shall be forwarded by the auditing organization to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer and to the management positions responsible for the areas audited (1) within 30 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by the Quality Assurance Department, and (2) within 60 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by an independent consultant.
| |
| 6.5.2.5 ON-SITE SAFETJ REVIEW GROUP (SRGi f FUNCTION 6.5.2.5.1 The On-Site Safety Review Group (SRG) shall function to provide l
| |
| the review of plant design and operating experience for potential opportunities to improve plant safety; the evaluation of plant operations and maintenance activities; and advice to management on the overall quality and safety of plant operations.
| |
| SALEM - UNIT 2 6-13 Amendment No. 112
| |
| | |
| ' ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 6.8 PROCEDURES AND PROGRAMS 6.8.1 Written procedures shall be established, implemented and maintained covering the activities referenced below:
| |
| : a. The applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978. -
| |
| : b. Refueling operations.
| |
| : c. Surveillance and test activities of oafety related equipment.
| |
| : d. Security Plan implementation.
| |
| : e. Emergency Plan implementation.
| |
| : f. Fire Protection Program implementation. exce94 (o.8.\.d Oncl G 6.I,6.j
| |
| : g. PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM implementation.
| |
| : h. OFFSITE DOSE CALCULATION MANUAL implementation.
| |
| : i. Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental monitoring.
| |
| 6.8.2 Each procedure and administrative policy of 6.8.1 above, and changes thereto, shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with Specification 6.5.1.6 or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures. g 44 6.8.3 On-the-spot changes to procedures of 6.8.1 above may be made provided:
| |
| : a. The intent of the original procedure is not altered,
| |
| : b. The change is approved by two members of the plant management staff, at least one of whom holds a Senior Reactor Operator's License on the unit affected.
| |
| : c. The change is documented and receives the same level of review and approval as the original procedure under Specification 6.5.3.2a within 14 days of implementation.
| |
| SALEM - UNIT 2 6-17 Amendment No. 112
| |
| | |
| 1
| |
| . l l
| |
| INSERT A Procedures of 6.8.1.d and 6.8.1.e shall be reviewed and approved in accordance with the Facility's Security and Emergency Plans or 6.5.3, as appropriate, prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures.
| |
| i l
| |
| l l
| |
| i l
| |
| I i
| |
| i
| |
| ~ '
| |
| | |
| l
| |
| .j LCR 94-05 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 6 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE HOPE CREEK UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-57 DOCKET NO. 50-354 l
| |
| l
| |
| | |
| l 1.8.1.33 Conformance to Reculators Guide 1.33. Revision 2.
| |
| February 1978: Ouality Assurance Program Reauirements (Operation)
| |
| HCGS complies with ANSI N18.7 1976/ANS-3.2, as endorsed and modified by Regulatory Guide 1.33. The contents of the plant operating procedures will comply with the applicable requirements of Section 5.3 of ANSI /ANS-3.2-1982. See Section 17.2 for further discussion of quality assurance during plant operation, b
| |
| 1.8.1.34 Conformance to Reculatorv Guide 1.34. Revision 0.
| |
| December 28. 1972: Control of Electroslac Wald Procerties Regulatory Guide 1.34 is not applicehle to HCCS because the process is not used.
| |
| See Section 1.8.2 for the NSSS assessment of this Regulatory Guide.
| |
| 1.8.1.35 Conformance to Reculatory Guide 1.35. Revision 2.
| |
| January 1976: Inservice Inspection of Unerouted Tendons in Prestressed Concrete Containment Structures j Regulatory Guide 1.35 is not applicable because HCGS does not have a prestressed concrete containment.
| |
| e 1.8.1.36 Conformance to Reculatory Guide 1.36. Revision O.
| |
| . February 23. 1973: Nonmetallic Thermal Insulation for i Austenitic Stainless Steel i
| |
| HCGS complies with Regulatory Guide 1.36.
| |
| ; See Section 5.2.3 for further discussion and Section 1.8.2 for. the NSSS assessment of this Regulatory Guide. ;
| |
| 1 E&thiOA 15 Mt.n M OC. Qui $k bPCjuP ACdU d N5 N bah C4. Y proNWons d b M 1 ks5uYWe 9rqyan dessed M h%w n.1.4 %&As" cpems % dn Equences. l N i
| |
| . 1.8-22 l Revision 0 HCGS UFSAR i April 11, 1988 l
| |
| | |
| . . . _ .. _ _ __ _. .__ _ _ _._ .m __ _ . _ . . _ . . _ . _ , . . _ _
| |
| : 3. Proposed test or experiments that involve an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10CFR50.59.
| |
| : 4. Proposed changes to Technical Specifications or to the Operating License.
| |
| : 5. Violations of codes, regulations, orders, Technical-Specifications, license requirements, or internal procedures or instructions having nuclear sa fe ty significance.
| |
| : 6. Significant operating abnormalities or deviations from normal and expected performance of plant equipment that affect nuclear safety.
| |
| : 7. All reportable events.
| |
| , 8. All recognized indications of an unanticipated deficiency in some aspects of design or operation of safety-related structures, systems, or components that could affect nuclear safety.
| |
| : 9. Reports and meeting minutes of the SORC.
| |
| 13.4.2.1.2 Audits /wOE IEF N M U1 D.
| |
| Audits of facility activities that generall are required to be per formed under the cognizance of OSR 4n ecceslaner with om
| |
| -Ster.d ud T+eh M 1 Specif!cnt!en: 2re litteA belou-
| |
| : 1. The conformance of facility operations to provisions contained within the Technical Specifications and applicable license conditions at least once per 12 months.
| |
| : 2. The performance, training, and qualifications of 'the entire facility staff at least ance per 12 months.
| |
| -l 13.4-9 lICCS-UFSAR Revision 0 April 11, 1988 l
| |
| l
| |
| .I
| |
| | |
| 1
| |
| ~
| |
| l n
| |
| : 3. The results of actions taken to correct deficiencies occurring in facility equipment, structures, systems, or method of operation that affect nuclear safety at least once per 6 months.
| |
| : 4. The performance of activities required by the Operational Quality Assurance Program to meet the critoria of Appendix B, 10CFR50, at least once per 24 months.
| |
| : 5. The Facility Emergency Plan and implementing procedures at least once per 12 months
| |
| : 6. The Facility Security Plan and implementing procedures 'at least once per 12 months.
| |
| j 7. Any other area of facility operation considered appropriate by the General Manager - QA and Nuclear Safety Review or the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer.
| |
| : 8. The Facility Fire Protection Program and implementing procedures at least once per 24 months.
| |
| : 9. An independent fire protection and loss prevention program inspection and audit shall be performed at least once per 12 months utilizing either qualified offsite licensee personnel or an outside fire protection firm.
| |
| : 10. An inspection and audit of the fire protection and loss prevention program shall be performed by a qualified outside fire consultant at least once per 36 months.
| |
| : 11. The radiological envirotunental monitoring program and the results thereof at least once per 12 months.
| |
| The above audits may be conducted by the Quality Assurance Department or an independent consultant. Audit plans will be reviewed by OSR prior to issuance, w
| |
| 13.4-10 HCCS-UFSAR Revision 1 April 11, 1989 THIS PAGE TtDV14TIot4 ALM R AR
| |
| | |
| 13.4.2.1.3 Records Records of OSR activities will be prepared and maintained. Reports of reviews and audits will be distributed as follows:
| |
| : 1. The results of reviews performed pursuant to Section 13.4.2.1.1 shall be reported to the Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer at least monthly. l e.s,2. 4.3 2 . Audit reports prepared pursuant to Section -13.E.2.1.2 O f O c Tec.h s t d shall be forwarded by the auditing organization to the h'MC. BOWS Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer and to the l (qnd b(-\h man 36ement positions responsible for the areas audited l
| |
| k-\g(p] 'm 1) within 30 days after completion of the audit for those gg audits conducted by the Quality Assurance Department and
| |
| $cdig \~) 'l,\k 2) within 60 days after completion of the audit for those audits conducted by an independent consultant.
| |
| 13.4.2.2 Onsite Safety Review Group The Onsite Safety Review Group (SRG) was established and functioning l prior to initial fuel load. The functions of the SRG include: the review of plant design and operating experience for potential opportunities for improving plant safety; the evaluation of plant operations and maintenance activities; and advice to management on the overall quality and safety of plant operations.
| |
| The SRG makes recommendations for revised procedures, equipment l modifications, or other means of improving plant safety to appropriate station / corporate management.
| |
| 13.4.2.2.1 Organization '
| |
| The SRG consists of the Onsite Safety Review Engineer and three dedicated, full-time engineers, k
| |
| o ,
| |
| 1 13.4-11 l llCGS UFSAR Revision 1 April 11, 1989 I
| |
| i
| |
| | |
| . _ . _ _ _ m , . . . ~ . m . . ._ __ _ _
| |
| 17.2.17 Quality Assurance Records l
| |
| Records necessary to demonstrate that activities important to !
| |
| quality have been performed in accoraanc* with applicable requirements are identified and maintain <d in accordance with l Regulatory Guide 1,88, as noted J.n Section 17.2.2. Documents shall be considered valid records only if stamped or initialed or signed and dated by authorized personnel or otherwise authenticated.
| |
| Record types, as a minimum, comply with applicable technical specification requirements and include operating logs, maintenance and modification procedures and related inspection results and reportable occuriences.
| |
| Design and other QA records are replicated via microform and stored in record facilities at the generating station and at offsite locations.
| |
| The Nuclear Department is r e s ,, m > f.il e for t ment storage of station records. The reten:le, period ards; permanent storage location; and rathods of control, identification, and retrieval are specificd by administrative procedure. Individual station department heals are responsible for submitting applicable de;~rteent records i.o the designated location for retention, 1NU 17.2.18 Audits
| |
| - y Audits of PSE6C and supplier organizations that implement the QA programareperformedbyQAtoverifycompilancewiththeapplicable 3rtions of the program through personnel interview and T *i ew of applicable oocuments and records, as required. An annu6 audit schedule is prepared, identifying audits to be performed and their , i
| |
| [requency. _
| |
| Audits are conducted by audit teams comprised of a certified lead ,
| |
| auditor and certified auditors, and technical specialists (when deemed necessary).
| |
| i 0
| |
| l 4
| |
| 17.2-42 ;
| |
| HCGS-UFSAR Revision 5 May 11. 1993 o
| |
| | |
| Audits are conducted using preestablished written procedures an'd checklists. Areas of deficiency revealed by audits are reviewed with . management and are corrected in a timely manner.
| |
| Required corrective action is documented and verified. Followup action, including reaudit of deficient areas, is performed.
| |
| The audit program conducted by QA includes, but is not limited to, the following activities covered by the QA program:
| |
| : 1. Operation, maintenance, and modification
| |
| : 2. Preparation, review, approval, and control of design, specifications, procurement and requisition documents, it tructions, procedures, and drawings
| |
| : 3. Inspection programs 4 Indoctrination and training
| |
| : 5. Implementation of operating and test procedures
| |
| : 6. Calibration of measuring and test equipment
| |
| : 7. Fire protection I ;
| |
| : 8. OtherapplicableactivitiesdelineatedinTable17.2-/
| |
| The audit data is analyzed and a written report of the results of each audit is distributed to appropriate management representatives -
| |
| of the organization (s) audited, as well as other affected management l personnel. Included in the report is a statement of QA program effectiveness. QA is audited by independent auditors at least every l two years to verify implementation of the corporate QA - program.
| |
| I Reports of these audits are directed to appropriate PSE&G management personnel.
| |
| k O l j
| |
| 17.2-43 ]
| |
| HCGS-UFSAR Revision 4 April ll, 1992 {
| |
| l
| |
| | |
| 1 PROPOSED INSERT FOR UFSAR SECTION 17.2.18 Audits of PSE&G and supplier organizations that implement the QA program are performed by QA to verify compliance with the applicable portions of the program, through personnel interview, observation of activities in process, and review of applicable documents and records, as required. An annual audit schedule is developed to identify the audits to be performed and their frequency. A dominant factor in audit schedule development is performance in the subject area. Audii schedules are revised so that weak or declining areas receive increased audit coverage and strong areas receive less consistent with the audit schedule frequency requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations and the UFSAR. Audits of the selected' aspects of operational phase activities are performed with a frequency commensurate with safety significance and in a manner to assure that biennial (2 years) audits of safety related activities are performed. A list of operational phase activities subject to the audit program is provided in the Technical Specifications and in Table 17.2-1. To provide added flexibility in scheduling Technical Specification audits of operational phase activities, a 25% extension to the biennial frequency is permitted. The biennial audit frequency and the 25% extension are not applicable to those audits whose frequencies are mandated by the Code of Federal Regulations.
| |
| l
| |
| | |
| LCR 94-10 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 7 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE SALEM UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SALEM UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 a
| |
| 'l l
| |
| | |
| outside the range of 3 to 12 percent for E-308, E-309, and E-316 is considered rejectable.
| |
| : 6. Production welding parameters are monitored on a spatcheck basis by the field welding supervision and the Field Quality Control Group.
| |
| Regulatory Guide 1.32 - USE Of_ LEE STANDARD 308-1971. " CRITERIA EOR C1 ASS 1E ELECTRIC SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR TOWER GENERATING STATIONS" The Salem Station design satisfies the requirements of IEEE Standard 308-1971, thereby conforming with the intent of the Regulatory Guide The Salem Station Operational Quality Assurance Program will conform with the regulatory position as set forth in the Regulatory Guide, Regulatory Guide 1. 33 - OUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAkt Rl_QUIREMMIS n
| |
| (OPERATIOyl, 2/78 (endorses N18.7-1976/ANS 3.2)
| |
| The Salem Station Operational Quality Assurance Program will conform with the regulatory position as set forth in the Regulatory Guide Regulatory Guide 1.34 - fE1TBOL nF ELECTROSLAG WELD PROJERTIES h Electroslag welding of Nuclear Classes 1 and 2 components is confined to the area of reactor coolant piping elbows. These are made from cast clamshells of ASTM A351 Gr. CF-8M j oined together on longitudinal seams by the electroslag process. Welding of these components was performed under specified weld procedure control monitored by Westinghouse. PSE&G also established that the shop production welds were in conformance to the procedure qualification.
| |
| *'k* 05'skiO'v\ C 4- -
| |
| jGAen ,s Ahbh aud* Fawn 6es Y'dd b p(c'(tS504 Oh M b h k W 4 CLC DTW b6N E Seth\0A \'l.'l..%
| |
| * bdik[ 3A-16 CjOME(W5 k GLAb'ik he. GendcJ.
| |
| SGS-UFSAR Revision 7 July 22, 1987
| |
| | |
| - ... .. . -_- - . . ~ . . .- . . - . . . - - . . . ...
| |
| Design and other QA records are replicated via microform and stored in record facilities at the generating station and offsite locations.
| |
| The Nuclear Department is responsible for the permanent storage.of station records. The retention period for records; permanent storage location; and methods of control, identification, and retrieval are specified by administrative procedure. Individual station department heads are responsible for submitting applicable 0l department records to the designated location for retention.
| |
| 17.2.18 Audits ItMU
| |
| [Eudits of PSE6G and supplier organizations that implement the QA program are performed by QA to verify compliance with the applicable portions of the program through personnel interview and review of applicable documents and records, as required. An annual audit schedule is prepared, identifying audits to be performed and their pequency. M
| |
| _( >
| |
| j Audits are ennducted by audit _ teams comprised of a certified lead auditor, certified auditors, and technical specialists (when deemed necessary).
| |
| Audits are conducted using preestablished written procedures and checklists. Areas of deficiency revealed by audits are reviewed with management and are corrected in a timely manner. Required corrective action is documented and verified. Followup action, including reaudit of deficient areas, is performed.
| |
| , The audit program conducted by QA includes, but is not limited to, the following activities covered by the QA program:
| |
| : 1. Operation, maintenance,.and modification.
| |
| : 2. Preparation, review, approval, and control of design, specifications, procurement and requisition documents, instructions, procedures, and drawings.
| |
| 17.2-40 SCS-UFSAR Revision 11 July 22, 1991
| |
| | |
| l 1
| |
| : 3. Inspection programs.
| |
| : 4. Indoctrination and training.
| |
| : 5. Implementation of operating and test procedures.
| |
| : 6. Calibration of measuring and test equipment.
| |
| : 7. Fire protection.
| |
| # I
| |
| : 8. OtherapplicableactivitiesdelineatedinTable17.2-[
| |
| The audit data is analyzed, and a written report of the results of each audit is distributed to appropriate management representatives of the organization (s) audited, as well as other affected management personnel. Included in the report is a statement of QA program effectiveness. QA is audited by independent auditors at least every l 2 years to verify implementation of the corporate QA program.
| |
| Reports of these audits are directed to appropriate PSE&G management personnel.
| |
| Cl 1
| |
| 1 17.2-41 SGS-UPSAR Revision 10 July 22, 1990
| |
| | |
| PROPOSED INSERT FOR UFSAR SECTION 17.2.18 Audits of PSE&G and supplier organizations that implement the QA program are performed by QA to verify compliance with the ,
| |
| applicable portions of the program, through personnel interview, observation of activities in process, and review of applicable documents and records, as required. An annual audit schedule is developed to identify the audits to be performed and their frequency. A dominant factor in audit schedule development is performance in the subject area. Audit schedules are revised so that weak or. declining areas receive increased audit coverage and strong areas receive less consistent with the audit schedule frequency requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations and the UFSAR. Audits of the selected aspects of operationti phase activities are performed with a frequency commensurate with safety significance and in a manner to assure that biennial (2 years) audits of safety related activities are performed. A list of operational phase activities subject to the audit program is provided in the Technical Specifications and in Table 17.2-1. To provide added flexibility in scheduling Technical Specification audits of operational phase activities, a 25% extension to the biennial frequency is permitted. The biennial audit frequency and the 25% extension are not applicable to those audits whose frequencies are mandated by the Code of Federal Regulations.
| |
| 1 i
| |
| l l
| |
| l 1
| |
| I l
| |
| | |
| I LCR 94-05 LCR 94-10 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 8 INFORMATIONAL COPIES OF APPLICABLE EMERGENCY PLAN SECTIONS HOPE CREEK AND SALEM UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-57, DPR-70 AND DPR-75 DOCKET NOS. 50-354, 50-272 AND 50-311
| |
| | |
| SECTION 17 a.
| |
| EMERGENCY PLAN ADMINISTRATION 17.1-Besponsibility Ganeral The Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer has the overall.
| |
| responsibility for the development and updating of emergency planning and coordination of the plans with other response organizations. The organization for coordination and direction of emergency planning matters is shown in Figure 17-1.
| |
| The Emergency Preparedness Manager has been delegated the authority to approve the Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures for adequacy and consistency. He is assigned the responsibility for ensuring that the Imergency Plan and Implementing Procedures are appropriately interfaced with the plans, procedures, and training of offsite support agencies as required to maintain suitable timely notifications and development of protective action recommendations.
| |
| Review and Annroval of Emergency Preparedness Documents As appropriate,.the applicable Station Operations Review Committee (SORC) reviews emergency plans and procedures as they relate to nuclear safety in accordance with Technical Specifications. The General Managee of Statien. Operations approves plans and procedures applicable to his/her station in accordance with Technical Specifications. The review and approval of the Emergency Plan, Implementing Procedures, Event Classification Guide, and Emergency Preparedness Administrative Procedures will be done in accordance with Table 17-1.
| |
| Irainina Procedures / Lesson Plang It is the responsibility of the Emergency Preparedness Manager to review and revise the Training Procedures / Lesson Plans in accordance with the Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Training Program. The Training Procedures / Lesson Plans are based on the approved Emergency Plan and Procedures.
| |
| 17.2 Revisions Revisions to the Emergency Plan, and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures are made whenever such changes are necessary to ensure that the Emergency Plan can be-implemented. The details are contained in the Emergency Preparedness Administrative-Procedures.
| |
| AIEP 17.1 Rev. 2
| |
| | |
| Any holder of the Emergency Plan, and/or Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures may prepare revision (s) to any section or procedure. Under normal circumstances, implementing procedure l l
| |
| changes are coordinated by the department head responsible (Table 1 I
| |
| 17-1) for the given procedure.
| |
| A revision request form is filled out by the person preparing the revision with a description of the revision requested by signing and dating the form.
| |
| A list of each section or procedure is maintained in front of the Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures indicating the latest revision number and effective date.
| |
| 17.3 Distribution All revisions are distributed by the Document Distribution Group in accordance with Nuclear Department Administrative Procedures.
| |
| The document holder revises the document, signs a receipt form, and indicates the date revisions were received or entered.
| |
| The form is then returned to the Document Distribution Group.
| |
| 17.4 Automatic Review The Emergency Plan and associated documents are reviewed at least once each year. As part of the review, the Event Classification Guide is reviewed with the state and location governments. The Emergency Plan and associated documents are updated and procedures are improved, based upon training exercises / drills, and changes onsite or in the environs. Agreement letters from offsite agencies and local support groups are verified or updated biennially or when caanges/ revisions to the Plan are implemented which could affect their responsibilities. Updating of telephone numbers is done quarterly. The Emergency Preparedness Manager coordinates this review and requests that each person responsible for a controlled copy of each Emergency Plan submit revisions as necessary.
| |
| 17.5 Independent Review The Emergency Plan and associated documents receive an independent review on an annual basis, by the General Manager -
| |
| Quality Assurance / Nuclear Safety Review. Management directives provide instructions for evaluation and currection of audit-findings, training, readiness testing, and emergency equipment.
| |
| The results of the review and actions taken are forwarded to the Station General Managers, the General Manager - Nuclear Services, the Emergency Preparedness Manager, and the reviewers. The records of these reviews are retained for five (5) years.
| |
| AIEP 17.2 Rev. 2
| |
| | |
| - . TABLE 17-1
| |
| * REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY PLAN DOCUMENTS
| |
| **GM ** STATION !
| |
| i QA/ OPER GM STATION RESP. EP SAFETY REV STATION DOCUMENT QUALI. MGR MGR REV. COMM OPS.
| |
| l EMER PLAN As As ALL Yes EP Mgr. Yes req. required GM-SGS SECTIONS GM-HCGS I SGS OM-SGS As As ECG Yes -OPS Yes req. required GM-SGS HCGS OM-HCGS As As ECG Yes -OPS Yes req. required GM-HCGS ARTIFICIAL ISLAND EMERGENCY PLAN IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES SGS l 100S Yes OM-SGS-OPS Yes As As GM-SGS' i- 200S Yes OM/TM/ EPM- Yes required required GM-SGS 300S Yes As Yes GM-SGS required RP/C Mgr-SO HCGS 100H Yes OM-HCGS Yes As As CM-HCGS 200H Ves OPS Yes required required GM-HCGS OM/TM/ EPM-300H Yes As Yes GM-HCGS required RP/C Mgr-HC EOF GM-SGS GM-HCGS 400 Yes EP Mgr. Yes As As Yes 500 Yes GM-E&PB Yes required required Yes ,
| |
| 600 Yes Mgr.-Rad. Yes Yes Pro. Serv.
| |
| 700 Yes EP Mgr. Yes Yes ENC Yes Pub. Info. Yes As As GM-SGS-800 Mgr. required required GM-HCGS Security As As GM-SGS 900 Yes Sec. Mgr. Yes required required GM-HCGS EP Admin As As GM-SGS 1000 Yes EP Mgr. Yes required required GM-HCGS Please see Notes on page 17.5 AIEP 17.4 Rev. 2
| |
| | |
| TABLE 17-1 (cont)
| |
| IiOTES :
| |
| -
| |
| * Procedures undergoing revisions that are editorial will require approval of the Emergency Preparedness Manager OliLY.
| |
| ** Review required if 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluation was performed.
| |
| AIEP 17.5 Rev. 2
| |
| | |
| l LCR 94-05 LCR 94-10 NLR-N94051 ATTACHMENT 9 INFORMATIONAL COPIES OF APPLICABLE SECURITY PLAN SECTIONS HOPE CREEK AND SALEM UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-57, DPR-70 AND DPR-75 DOCKET NOS. 50-354, 50-272 AND 50-311 1
| |
| i
| |
| | |
| i SAFal. CARDS INFORMATION DETERMINATION ON Eb Nmne Wh h SECURITY AUDITS Title M I*d/ A*4 ta/3ndk/2%.
| |
| 13.1 Auditefgusy Orgaalsath b om {2 EMOVE Dr 3bolM A management audit la conducted of the physical security program, with the exception of the Personnel Access Program, every 12 months by individuals independent of the security organization. Normally these audits are conducted by the Quality Assurance Department; however, the services of an outside organization may be used. The results of the audit and -
| |
| evaluation and recommendations for any corrections and improvements are documented and reported to the General Manager- Nuclear Services. The reports are maintained for five years and are available for inspection by authorized representatives of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in accordance with the requirements of 10 trR 73.56, audits of the Personnel Access '
| |
| Program are conducted every 24 months following an Inillal audit within 12 months of program tmplementation.
| |
| 13.2 S.comf Audits i
| |
| The management audit nonnally conducted by the Quality Assurance Department includes but is not limited to the following:
| |
| (1) Review and audit of the Security Plan, Contingency Plan, Training and
| |
| , Qualllication Plan, and their implementing procedures.
| |
| (2) Emluation of the physical protection system and set.urity practices effectiveness (3) Review and evaluation of the physical protection system testing and maintenance program.
| |
| ]
| |
| , (4) Review and audit of the LLEA response commitments. I (5) Assessment of the effectiveness of Safeguards Information protection.
| |
| 13.3 dudit RCD 9tts Audit reports address compilance with Security I'lans and evaluation of the effectiveness of the physical protection system. In instances where non-compliance exists. or the l SP Rev.4 l Page 40 of 43 I
| |
| | |
| effectiveness is in question, recommendations for corrections or linprovernents will be made.
| |
| 13.4 KtaR90psL9AudIta Audit findings are tc;xarted to the General Manager - Nuclear Services. The Manager - Site Protectioni is directed to resolve any deficiencies in a timely matiner.
| |
| SAFEGUARDS INFORM ATION DETERMINATION Name 'S'6bt 'bu<<Y Title Snie huAh ia 2enddN b'Eab Organization YSEKr Date_ EEMOVE D -
| |
| 3/10 [4'l b5 37 Rev.4 rage 141 of 43}}
| |
