ML20054M372

From kanterella
Revision as of 00:21, 14 March 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Public Version of 10CFR50.59 Format for Safety Evaluation & Safety Evaluation Checklist for Lzp Tests/Procedures, Including Procedure LZP-1200-4 Re Classification of Liquid Release
ML20054M372
Person / Time
Site: LaSalle  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 06/10/1982
From:
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20054M371 List:
References
LAP-820-2, PROC-820601, NUDOCS 8207130029
Download: ML20054M372 (16)
v • d • e


Text

~

' . , ,N

_ . . . . T

., * ~. - *= ATTACHMENT F

  • LAP 82022 -

(? 931 cf 2) R; vision 19

", yy 10CFR50.59 FORMAT FOR SAFETY EVAL.UATION 20 STATION LA hu_c bow UNIT / f 2_.

SYSTEM Pv_sec-se 'QAbr ATiod TEST / PROCEDURE No

[ *f Q I?_00 TEST / PROCEDURE TITI.E N

- REVISION /

EQUIPMENT NAME hlEt m W ,a tu. E Aatt. IO._k Pc A.r _d 9/_A.gM (f o EQUIPMENT NUMBER _ ObIF K6ol, I6.) bla tet,rN tb.)hitc.4,oc 16) pts .N LOS DESCRIPTION OF TEST / PROCEDURE- -

L j % Q t , ; t- A cA a d kW G A AAw

., t z-SArcrfjustifyirg reasons EVALUATION:the decisicm Answer ths following questions with a "yes' er "n .

i' -

1.

Is the probabilief of en occurrence or th coresquence of en cecident, or m equipment

i. !7 i.:p,,,6ntYes to safeges No, Becmuse: previously ew:!ucted in the Finci Sciety A DA.e.t.a L'[mh M..c6 A dD d b os 2.

Is the possio* itity fer en cecident or rnalfunction of a different type th evoluoted in the Final Safety Analysis Report created? Yes - k _ No, Sec=use:

1 [AEdA U - A b ~ a-- A b c d 6 7 d- d 3.

Is the mergin*

Yes ei sciety, X- No, Secause:

es defined in the basis for eny Technieml Specifiention, NAete. h t.,ea M uAdw w 0, .

  • Nets:

, ,J yoof Any

o theanswer NRC checked "YES" should be reported in the Annual Report.

f.

,g 1

s 0207130029 820706 b PDR ADOCK 05000373 Perfermed N F '

Cete U<' '

k ~

P DR. . ',

w s, . , - mj/W ,,

, + ~ ~ '_

7 .,,, . .w .

- . ~ ...

., t

.- LAP-320-2 e .,. Ravision gg

. ATTACHMENT F P

A PII 7* 19 (Page 2 of 2) 21 fin?.!. ,

d ,. ,

- g SAFETY EVALUATION CHECKLIST 53) (10 CFR 5 -

TESTREVISION

/ PROCEDURE No. ~L.t(">12ae-

, ~

f. -

>i i Does this constitute a change to precedures as described in Safety Analysis Report?

,G

[ (25 ( ) NC ( k is t ::anga in == 7ecent:21 I;ec1tica:1cn fnvolved?

}.,

.- ,l

- 'to f 1

~

i,.. Y ..

' SAFITY.I7ALUATICl: _ . . . . . . . .

,C' and previds,sgecific russens t jus =ifying the tectsfen: Answer- I L

!s ene :r:babilir/

ac:icant, ce mifun cf :1cn an, cc: .- teca. et ::nsecuence cf 2n cf saf1:

m avatustad in the Final Safety Analysis Ke:cet,7 eil1:ad acui;. sn:. es ;rt facettse?

" Tes L MC, .

ws w k-F ,LS 4L L' .

2.

0 Is the :cssibilIr/ f:r in accidan: ce cat fune: .

% tygt can Re;:crt any crtvicusly citatad? evaluatad in Os Final Saft y 4:ly:!s1:n :( t ti f C p Yes K Me, Q. gAf i

OcJQ & A kR Q, Is de ears Scecificatien, riducad?of saft Yes y, as .rtned in ce basis f:r Any "e nnici 7

~

TC% 4

>%1a,

.. L Anv Ansser - Yes ( ) h~ 1 Recus- -

AliAnswrYNo((

f ---s i ec titcitar-

?.ag:!a =: y ~;mts f cn tut. :- n:Mc ?;r 9enee.

';.'[. - .

r Au==.M:*.:i n Ascaivec ( ) kf .

C o

at0TI: Initiata Pr:cem.trs/ Test

!=niementa:1cn l

T[ In1*8er .".T I /$s snoute ee . ,= u: = = =

[ annua.1 ct: r. = =0 .*:KC. r r : = d by kt A.

, I' __

r- .

ca:a 2.2 OgA

-e WW

,,g_.,yW*'7W"

  • a Y %4 'e

! l- -

- ~' .

-~

.. j . .

f. ' *. , ,' ATTACHMENT F '

- ~

!.A-7 820 r2 -

(rega s or 2} ..A ';v i .s i on I C

- . 1

, April. -7, y 10CTRSO.59 FORMAT FOR SAFETY EVAL.UATION D STATION /,A&oOA '

unit O -

SYSTEM _J4ESS

, TEST / PROCEDURE TITI.Etduwipe Ar

_ _ .. _ TEST /PRCCEDURE ,

s_ No L9E1330-41 We nets .

EQUIPMENT MAME # __ REVISION _ M EQUIPMENT NunsER r

[ _

~

DESCRIPTION OF TEST / PROCEDURE * - .

bW4M/W4I he>M hou?p'T $/4GN/)f W/C/ 26/d) I?lE N M'.f /Asi66i .

.c . . , . .

~- ..

I SArtif justifyiry rwssons EVAf the UATION:

decisforu Answer the following questions with ae "yes" spx

.- 1.

' Is the probabi!!ty of en occurrence or the corzequence of en accide equipment increased? i..wwrYes toK seisty as previously evoluoted ir, the .8inal Sc W ~ 'em - No, Becmses h w e% Mu , %

2.

evoluoted in the Finci Soisty Analysis_Yes Report created?Is t X _No, 3ecaus.:

  • f k 3.

Is the margin Yes 6 ofNo, safety, Secause: es defined in the basis for any Tec'mie=1 Seecification

, rsdue=d?

f g,

  • Note:

Any to theenswer NRC checked "YES" should be espertad in the Annuel Report,

(

Perfermec. :y s f n Ih octs w y f&

nfN"_

_- LAP'820-g

- *,- Rev i s ipn ' . ATTACHMENT F

? - Acril 7,19 (Page 2 of 2) 21 11nar

  • d -

g

-

  • SAFETY . EVALUATION CHECKLIST (10 CFR TEST /PROCEDUAE No. d'?//JJo-3/

f.,

REVISION __ h -

~

g

., . Does this constitute a change to procedur as described in.Safety Analysis Report?es

  • . .i. It: ( )

!C M j ., .favelvec7 is a =anga in == ecatui Icec1fiunion

.l I; '- 4M L. . " i r

SAi.rt C/ALUATICM: . . . . . +

[ and ;r:vics scocific reasens justifying the tectsfen:Ans.ee  :

i

.g 1.. ' )

i ac:idant, er a:alfunct1=n, of saft:7 etlaue j ec 4 E evatustad in the Final Safety Analysis As:ces, ;incressa? as ::nif:::!y p

Yes V No, h M G% M%% .

i L' .

2. ,

O tf;t than any grtvicusly evalua*Is tha :::ssibility far sn ac!

q } Recer. crtatad? in =a Fina) Saft:/ 4 ty:f t Yes d N fic, J *

{

MM/ M

_L#

3.. '

Scecific2 f=n, rtducadt _YtsEr V No, ce eargin4=-i=1 cf safety, a

\

~+

u.4 Af c/

- L Anv Ansseer

  • Yes ( )

. 7 A11 Ans; trs No (K} _

1

-' ' Atcuss: == scafve Wclear-

, [F.ap:12:::

> ---- " - nr Ce:::m.s.s .*gr :.5:nes. f.:n 1

l

\. L-

[ '

u L . -

a = .- :::t:n ?.scaf yed ( ) { '

M C *10TI: tat:ta:a ir:e=uarvrese '

s -

!=cicenta:1cn

--- A<rt ansaer = tat: 'yts' 1

s. cuic ::e ete:. ::: fn ma 7 t r 1 . . . d b y__ $

{ cnu1I t Or* :: =: .*IEC. _

r. -

ca .a ( -/- 8-- -

a.

_ _-w-

.P

-~ - - -_#

.e ' ' ~ '

-- - ,- , . . - - ,- ,..-._n- - , , - -

- - - - ~ w w

--~.-su-_ .,

ATTACNMENT F LAP S o.'2-(Page 1 of 2} Revis on I*c April 7, 10CFR50 53 FORMAT FCA SAFETY EVALUATICN 20 1-STATICM [d. M _d[n~

SYSTEM kSS UNIT b TEST /PRCCEDURE No ( E8 I 730~J~3 TEST / PROCEDURE TITLE bbdD , +3 O AT EqulPMENT NAME ' EVISION __

EQUIPNENT NunaER ^

~

DESCRIPTION OF TEST / PROCEDURE

  • w w s m ja c a u a R w y em%'W N &

., r. . 4 Mur N SArciYjustifyire reasons EVAf_UATICN:

the desistern Answer the following quest!ans with a "yes' or "no" t

  • , and provide spr.

1.

Is the probability

%ipment important to asis of an occurrence or the corcequence of en accide of increased 7

,Yes No, previously Becausa: evoluoted in the .*inal Sciety Analysis Re= ort QL.,u t tdv,g.4 % . .g g 4 2.

evoluered in the Fino! Sefery Analysis  ? -

Report creetIs th Yes V No, Becaus.e:

3. Is the margin of Yes _., No, Secause:ty, es defined in the basis for any Technic =I Specifi Qp ,(),,g i

l

  • Note:

Any to theanswer NRC checked "YES" should be reported in the Annual Recort.

l Per!cemaa. :y.:t gcts 6 / h .

Appreund 17 g A' 1

- 3k l

'^ ' <

, y. .

~ . ~ . . . -

t

._ I.AP-820.-2 ATTACanEur g g, g , g

,. 19

~

April 7, is (Page 2 of 2) 21 finaf el

- g

- SAFETY EVALUATION CHECKLIST (10 CFR 50.59 TEST / PROCEDURE No. 42*//D0 EJ RE'/I SION  % J.,

El

>i ', Does this constitute a change to procedures as described in Safety Analysis Report?

,7

[ (2: ( )  ?!C M

.i..,}fnvolste?lis a =anga in == "tennical Icecifica:1cn -

.(

. 'to ()4 -

. ,\- ..

sac-a f CIAt '!ATICit:

and ;r sids,s:scific reascas justifying ce tectsfen:Ansmer ?. ,

1. i Is taa ;r:bability of (n, ce=- snes. et :::nsecuence of in f- evatustad in me Final Safety Analysis Acces. In W lta, P

Yes g .acyrm+. 6%& & W A

[ ^

2. .

,  % ty;t can any ;rtvicusly Reccr: crua:at?

evalustad in : e Fina! Sa el

  • Yss Mta, g -

/ -. :ly:f s

.G .

3..

is the ariin ofreducast Pa"A t-safety, as defined in ce Dtsis f:r < ny ~<=M:11 y -

44, Scacific1:4:n,

~-

a u.

Yes W No, g '

. L any Ansuer ~ Y'es ( ) V

/7 ATT Answers Ma &

I \XtCut:* Lnt .*t 1!*It IEUCitat" ' -]

?.2y"J ! 2 **.-"i C4.W.s.$ ICM Lt==:- n-1 = !ar 9:ee.

1 .

[ '

':- u s ==.- n:t:n anca1iee ( ) l_ k .

L !CTI: Int:1ata 7r:cauurt/Tes: _.

i.

!=olsmenta:1:n An*/ in3'.ser Cat:*tt0 'yag'

' Sn0uld ha et:0** *n2 antraal er: r  :: c= l':.';EC. Et!"#0r" led Dy h'!~ b r' -

Oata

. O

. ==

_, W"N--'- - - - ' - ,,--r _

,-9 - -- y

~ ~ _;.az _

f' ' , ' -. '

ATTACHMENT F

} .

l AP 8202 2 ,

@aga 1 cf 21 Rsvis L:n 19.

"4 ,7;; f, jaf 10CFR50 59 FcRNAT FOR SAFETY EVALUATION STATION _ I UNIT _ ~

SYSTEM _ M

. T

..EST/_e- PROCEDUREM/ No#/NO ~d TEST / PROCEDURE TITLE W

  • td*x**M*At** .

EqulPMENT NAME - - -

AT N M8(EVISl0N _I EQUIPMENT NUM8ER _ _ _

DESCRIPTION OF TEST / PROCEDURE ' -

f W",? f M w - n m - s<ae m m.v .

r ,

SAren'justifyiry reasons EVAWATION: the decisica: Answer tha following questions with = "yes" cr 'no"

, and provide ses.if l.

Is the pechobility of an occurrence or the cor=equence of en ceciden of equipment increased? important Yes X _ No,to Because:

sciety es previously evclueted in the . inel

, % 4 . b_ J { *. , u ort

  • f & 4_ i t
2. I evoluoted in the Final Sciety AnalysisYesReport - X created?Is y t "r No, Beccuse:

d ? "^" "f W - ,

3.

Is the, Yes margin 'l _ciNo, sciety, Because:as defined in the basis For any Technic =I Saecific=ri ,

gg M yw,

, rsdue d?

  • Note:

Any to theanswr NRC checked "YES" should be repor*sd in the Annual Recort.

I.

// ,

!"i=rmcd51 -

_ c,,,s1/fll7j w sy /CD ,

. ' - - ~ ~

Q)q t

, _ _  ?.. - ~' ~

g y ,--e K ;f ' Y "

'~-~~--

.. I,,Ap.g2g.2 ATTACHMENT f R=visIcn y

-)

harl1 7, ;

~ '. '

(Page 2 of 2) 21 finaf I

. SAFETY TEST /PRocEcuggEVALUATl0N cyggggy . 00 CFR 50 53) .

NEVisIon ) _

Qlf -

as des bed *"9* EC Procedures n s fen ysgs Reporgy F

I /*3 L )

!E2 1 :nanga in == a,.. 30

t. in ,c i .,,,7 .-3 ,i .,ca m i u u:n

.f ' '

I L-*

i.

% bh , .

\

"g.t*a

._? :,,lALUA7tc,'t. -

r

d g -

[

    • 'Ida . !:Ecific rease,s j f oy 89 ves: Tens wt 3 g . .,g.

7 , e .eefsfen: },., l; ,-.  ;

I3 28 Or abfif ac:1 an:,=:r a g '<ty kr l". CC=r~sncs. :n, :an,,,',,~,, I

..., ,, j l

tvalu'.ad in =e [g,.',jg'},f,I g, 33,3y -}la ac t;uf .- n',]3 ,,,,,,,,,,

y., am e=

en Lda. g ,,, g*

"-*- 1.,eg,,,.. ?' &. ~

g% '

I3 DE ;c33fhfif:7s

' ,q  % m.V 2t can any crt

/

er: . u aer ,1c ig,'",vafn*nt r =aifun::f =n of-, .":':

"*C -

{

C. 3 e .-

== .rna.r s r I;:!

} ff ?o w .

  • fo
  • N_ ./ ,-_ ~

a . y:ir ECec f , , ,

e deffned {n i

- _ . . ggs9s f;r eny , _ ... _a._..,I

' 3,' ,

'. }

L

. -->3 4 AY l

  • ,av 2nt- r - ys, j 3 ,-

' 1 c; All Ans ges ,.go i L'C t 1!c % :lsgr. I f

- l]=.

= D-.4...f=-
.a.mnm.- w s;*, .. ,

l

~

f. .

L.b N O -~;?.d:n ?.acaj.,,,2 ( ) *

( ,

. "10' *.

Int:1'8 :4 p'C8WrT/Tes:

r

.: L =3I t*'enta M:n

"'I in,'atP =a::: #

=== = 3. ,,= ,.ae . ,'j.gi I

I*'4I PT Of": :: r [,a.[d' TNf"ntd b __ g/

.r ca a_ q /(0- < ~

(

1 p

,_ - ---*'llW'**

C~. ;_._l ATTACHMENT F (Paga I of 2) LAP 820-3 R; vision STATION I d. 10CFR50.59 4.[,// FORMAT ION FCA SAFETY April 7 20 EVAL SYSTEM _

//Aff _ _ UNIT _d -

-_ cTEST gs_ W /PRCC DURE No g 6//JJC.Q 5-TEST / PROCEDURE TITL~e~S ~/ afS dgeU _

EQUIPMENT NAME _ ~

~

REVISION __ 2

r. EQUIPMENT Nunsta L_

~

c_

DESCRIPTION OF TEST / PROCEDURE * .

A$ttb{st$ &

hh dU Y Y Y t

I -

SAFEiY EVALUATICN: Arc ;c the following quecions reemons justifyiry the decision:

1 with a "yes' er *no", and provide se Is the prebehility equipment importent to safe of an occurrence or the cor==quenc increased? _ _Yes es

_No, previously Because: evaluated in the Final Sc W g port 2.

la the poss~oility for en accident or malfunction of a diff evaluated in the Finoi Safety Analysis Report erent created?

type then any previously

& Yes ,2C ,.No, Beccuse:

Wft^ Y UAR-l l

3.

Is the

' _Yes margin ,V ei safery, as defined in the basis for en No, Because: y Technical Specification, reduced?

Note:

h Any to theanswerNRC checked "YES" should be reported i

(.

n the Annua l Report.

s Per crm=c r.=y-

. - _c;=_b/fQe sw y,N~0 x ,

e n gloin

,pr.mW"' - _ . . . - -

, .,e.--- ,,y.-~~m' '

~ ~ ~

o : * :. . ". ..

'....t

- LAP-320-2 .

R vision 19

,. ATTAC)(MENT F Apell 7 m ,-

(Page 2 of 2) 21 fina[ 1982

~J',

5 .' I SAFETY EVALUATION CliECKLIST TEST / PROCEDURE No. 0 (10 CFR 50.59) _

REVISION

[By /?J()-C$'

f. ' G-- ~

w

~

i *, Does this constitute a change to procedures

" as described in Safety Analysis Report?

f,, (2: ( ) '

p"*

Is a =anga :n ::: Tacnnt:21 5;:ec1 fics:1on !O %

}.. fnvcivec? -

.l

'to (N . \ *

.. r ..

SArTI- E7Ali:ATIC?I: _. .. .

and pr:vids,ssecific reascas justifying de factsicn:Answef the feli ,

i

' L.

Is ce =r:bability of (n. ccc::.- tnes. the ::nsecuence of 2n

-t ac:1:anc, or =alfunction of saft:7 niatad acuf::snc, u :rtvf:u:!y .

svatus:ad fn de Final Safaty analysis Ae: crc, incrtase?

[ Yes W l10, .

Q r

r, C 2. .

9 Is the pessibill:7 f:r an accicant er stifun::i:n of a :f ff.2- .i;

% Rescr: crts. tad?ty:a can any crtvfcusly evalua zd in :te FinaJ Saft:y L :ly:i Yes V'No, k

3.. is ;be margin of safety, as deffned in

Scecifica:1:n. reducad7 Dnsis fer sny ~c=M:2;

h. - "

'alhxML A.

Yes e, nv ant- r - v.s ( )

a

. Aii ens..en :fo 5

f k&cuI$*. .nc "T 3 'l$ 8 c faf

?.er:ia::ry C.:mn.uien zu r:- :2:1= !se C ence.

k b'

t. lu.n=r n ti:n Reczivec ( } 7
  • 1

<No, % Raccr: c tatad? l $ 5 - ha.$ fM & 3.. Er the ari in of safa:y, as daffned inX:teNo, 31 sis f:r any 74:n-f::t Scadficatien, ridur.ad? Yes kr., 1 Anv Anr.<er - Yes ( ) 7 All Anr ers no % At::ss: ine scii se titclear-f 2.aqu! t =: r Cat:n s.s 1:n i .tu. :- :1-* n far :.ence. . l . ( ?. ' au-------':n ?.aca1 res ( } , h Int:11ta 7recauurt/ Test L ., -toTI:  !=nienenta:1cn Any tar er ens:23 'yts' 7tr':r ed by .- > = - - p s..cuid te et::- :c in 23 U j ., tenu11 rt: r. :: : . KC. b [th [ Cata - '/ Y l l 1

  • ~

-@Wnm 9 ppg _ ,,, -- - -. n. n. - . _ . , , _ .__ . . . . _ _. -. __ . . .. , c :4 . . ATTACHMENT F t.AP 820 .

  • Revision 19 (Page 1 of Il Aprilf, lod 7

~ 10CFR50.59 FCRMAT FCR SAFETY EVALUATION _ STATION d., UNIT O' SYSTEM //4J[ TEST /PRCCEDURE No (B8 /176-d8 " ga  % Wnt denw 4 d ##.rf REVISI N Z-TEST /PRCCEDURE TITLE MMd9 EqulPMENT NAME e EQUIPMENT NUM81R . :. ?W CESCRIPTION CF TEST / PROCEDURE

  • Y & WAS

/UVAr$ f ah >46 #su M? . .. .. i

  • l c wide spr.ift: I SAfidTY EVALUATICN: Answer the following questions wie a "yes" er "no", and r

~ russons justifyirg the decisica-t

1. Is the probability of en occurrence or the corsequence of e egaipment is@:st todNo, safety as previously evoluoted in the Final Sciety A Beemasas, increased? Yes NY
2. Is the pansraility for en accident or malfunctionYes of aXdifferent No, E couse: type then evolueted in the Final Safety Analysis Report created?

~ ~ M t i

3. Is the margin of saisif, as defined in the basis for any Technic =1 Specific

' Yes V No, Secauses r Ebs

  • Note: Any answer checked "YES" should be rescried In the Annual
  • Report.

to the NRC j } f y & ft e.,e lZ _ em.- .;i m AM ty 5 g'lO V u ,.820 2 . .;, m . - _ .- - . ~ . . . - .. ._ g,g 19 . Apri! 7, 1982 ..,.5

  • AWACHMENT F 11 sina!'

' - - (Page 2 of 2) - m . c) SAFETY EVALUATION CHECKLIST (10 CFR 50.~3 g TEST / PROCEDURE No. [. 4//3M - - REV ISION 4-

g. < ,

Does this constitute a change to procedures , l as described in Safety Analysis Report? r i ' .J, It: ( ) !C Fl , p ;s a =anga :n == 7t=n1:.11 Icecificamen .su. ' ltntcivee? - .I ,o M . r . . . . . . . 'yt** :P ' ":' . s;;t77 g1A WATICil: Answer es felicwing cuss:1cas w12 i [* *i and pr; rids,s;ecific ruasens justifying ce decisica-I I C t. ts n. :reeamtlir/ cf #n. ce=r,nes. 2 ensec ence cf 23 r*r.....,7 .. - 6 ac:icanc, er =alfune:1cn of saf tr/ rils a,e equf:= int, is avalua:ad in me Final Safat/ Acalysts Ae:crt, inenssa? . . y .,  % no. F~ dukk bl9i 2* ta de ;cssibilf r/ :rf an ac:1 dant - caifune-ica :( t 2:f.4mnh b - tyn can any ;rtvicusly evalut ad n ca Final Saftr/ uly:f s - 2e:cre crsatad? Yts NC. =. . . M * * -

4. :t 3.. Ir ce ::zri in c safar/. as defined i :.' basis 1c, f:e any ~4=-1 Scecifiestien, reducad? Yes
  • - ins .1nsaer
  • Yes ( )

4 W46  ? A11 Answers Mcf j Recus:: ::= :::sive W lear P  ?.sy.:! 4::: / C.;::via.s Icn .

tu.
- :1: n .8ae :.enee. .

I . ('- . a . . . .. .n 2,,,1.,,1 t } L.- I Int:1sta Pr:causrs/ Test C icTI:  !=oleenta:icn r i . any nns er =11:11 *jes' 7tr':r-=d by /1 ~ s:cui: :e :c- :: in == b ., I nusi es:cr. :: =: .* KC. hu b 'b ' b .~

f. d
  • ,2

__p--__ Ne==go _,- _ '  ;--V.,- - - ~ - - . - . . ~ . _ _ _ ' i s . l . * ..  ?. - V.  !AP 820-2'6 ATTACHMENT F Revislon 19 (Page 1 of 2} AprII 7, 14A7 M 10CFR50.59 FORMAT FOR SAFETY EVALUATICN _ STATION [ d. d d UNIT C Y MM SYSTEM TEST /PRCCEDURE No G ?/ /110- f 2. . Mr.4useeur .reavau% as mt  ; f TEST / PROCEDURE TITLE 4,Ja. Arsma wM - REVISION EqulPMENT NAME "~~ EqulPMENT NUMBER -- OESCRIPTION CF TEST /PRCCEDURE - Os<A & lA, & , Aft /Ao& l L <. pas.f C ~ SAFETY i!VALUATICN: Answer the following questions with a "yes' cr "no", a ~ reasera justifyirg the decisform t

1. Is the probo' a ility of en occurrence or the conS ==quence ei en accident, Resort equipment ir.,-.6.t to safety as previously ewluoted in the . inal Sciety A increased?

Yes 1No, Secamss:

2. Is the possTollity fer on accident or malfunction Yes of Ta different No, Because: type th=

evolunted in the Final Safety Analysis Report created? 0 3. Is the margin of say* ty, as defined in the basis for any Technical Specific Yes C No, Secause: 0.a,&f*NA

  • Note: Any answer checked "YE5" should De re::orted in the Annuel Reecet. ,,

to the NRC s f ' Perfermee. =sy IU h - et: &n- .-- A ,.:=4 1 fi &% 1 7 (./ ..,m-eaww-e.-,. . _ _ -qm -p,,_ _ __ _. %Tpp,. _ . _ _ _ . . r- ----- . . . . _ _ . _ - - ~ . . . . . . . - .__ / -- - - - - J . . 1 i .. .Y..- . .e . t.AP-820 - ) g,yg,, _ __ .- - . ~ . . . - . . .- l

  1. APII 7' 1982 ATTACHMENT F 21 i\nat ~
  • - (Page 2 of 2) .

m .

) ,. g SAFETY EVALUATION CNECXI.ls7 (10 CFR 50.53)

TEST / PROCEDURE No. 4 78/4 Id

  • M.

- AEVISION / }.1 . Oces this constitute a change to procedures as described in Safety Analysis Report? o* . te: ( ) .!G F) .I. . 7 Iss a =anga in == "tenntcl 3:ecifica:1cn .i. . ,linrelste? - . .l ,, M ,. . . . . .. . Ansner* na felicwing r.:astiens w1:3 4 'y*2:' i LI SAFIT! E/A!.UATIC?l: and ;r: rids,ssacific reascas justifying cae fecisfen: l C Cs the :r:babilf r/ cf (n, ce=.-snes. :ht c:nsecuence cf in ac:it.anc. er .malfunctica of safte/ rsta ad t;ui:= tnt, 12 rrti:::1-/ svatuatad in :Me Final Safety analysis Acor:, incressa? . -? Yes T No, y e ,3 r g F. . . . .r Is tha ;cssibitirf f:r- in ac=1 dant or =aifunctica ef a di!farta: 2. C ^ tyga taan any ;rtvicusly evaluatad in =a Fina! Saft-/ : : lysis Yes fta, _  % Re:cr citatad? . . y n_ j > > 4 .I w 'g . >-. Q. . . ~ 3.. Is the urgin of safer /, as defined in Me, :Me basis f:r my "c:n-it:1 Scecific2:1:n, reducad? Yts a a.a. ; , m . .n 1 ?- anr Anra r ~ Yes ( l V ATT Ans.=ers No }d - sec =:: 13 : . sc1ti se ttuelear-Eag:!2:::/ C.:=rts.s f.:n tu= - n-~ ~n !;st :1 wet. . . .; j . u==.- - :i:n 3 scal sec ( ) l : L-f. ~ l Initiata Pr:cavurt/ Test C t0TT.:  !=clerenta:1:n 4 s..

  • ny tr.1 er =sc :11.'71s ' 7ted:r-ad by /

s // s.:ule :e :=-::: != um  % I

  • ts..211 reser- :: =: .t~C. b E 5 Ca a

.- i Y 1 M M Nyg,ww. '

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20054M372&oldid=2582519"