ML20199A777

Forwards Rev 108 to EPIP Index,Rev 23 to EPIP 1.2, Notification & Rev 7,App 1 to EPIP Forms

ML20199A777
Person / Time
Site:	Duane Arnold
Issue date:	01/19/1998
From:	IES UTILITIES INC., (FORMERLY IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20199A782	List: ML20199A777
References
NUDOCS 9801280086
Download: ML20199A777 (3)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

\

Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Project: Duane Arnold Energy Center

Subject:

Transmittal of File: A 304 To Whom it May Concern: ,

We are forwarding, in accordance with Appendix E to 10CFR50, three controlled copies (one tc, r4RR and two to NRC Region 111) of our Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan Revision Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure /. 2- Revision &

( Corporate Plan implementing Procedure Revision l

Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Telephone Book Revision (The Emergency Telephone Book is considered to be proprietary to IES Utilities)

Insert the revised document (s) in your files and discard the obsolete one(s). No proprietary information is contained in these revisions. Information considered to be proprietary to IES Utilities has been marke'd

- in red brackets as specified in pages containing proprietary information. The Emergency Telephone Book is, in total, considered to be proprietary to IES Utilities.

Very y yours, Manager, me gency lanning ec: Manager, Nuclear Licensing Emergency Planner NRC Region III (2) k NRC Resident Inspector j

/ J O

9001200086 990119 PDR ADOCK 05000331 y PDR i

EN21 Rev, e

- ________________j

t-s DAEC EMERGENCY PI AN REVISION EVALUATION introduction 10 CFR 50.54(q) states in part, "The Nuclear Power Reactor Licensee may make c Commission approval only if such changes do not decrease the effectiveness of ,

changed, continue to meet the standards of Section 50.47(b) and the requiremen Evaluntion 33 % EPIP12. Aldskb This evaluation conducted for proposed revision M' :o e OAEC l'!an er 1.0 Circle the affected planning standards:

50.47(b) hR 50. A l 2.0 Do$p the proposed revision still meet the affected planning standards?

h No (circle one) 3.0 Described the method used to determine the response to 2.0, j

including, appropriate documentation orjustification.

%d on e1. umA e $ soc *rkso 47(hYA (M i inc%eKo.47fd% \ k c W~_15 vicam-l as aA emdaumed -lb AAr* asedEAP/2 A)dAL-b '

4.0 Has the degree of effectiveness of the Plan been changed?-

Yes

@ (circle one) 5.0 Describe the method used to determine the response to 4.0, including appropriate documentation or justification.

.m mea n-/k , wm in &r%/m/A-rw h&!n>AnMda% -

hA MJY$2. $ t h f r & v v.i n ~r -;

summary to compik+e ne Wi%tibn ;woce ss. im Aniea b A denfa- d e, -

1.0 Do the proposed changes require NRC approval prior to implementation?

Yes h (circle one)

PLAN EVALUATION CONDUCTED BY:

C%en hem 4 7AiW'.EP6cee. /-&- As Name Title Date

. EVAL ATION APPROVED BY:

Name' x

l

%d I-/9-N Supervisen,' Emergency Planmng Date EP420 Rev. O

s ASSESSMENT OF ACCEPTABILITY OF PLAN C11ANGE PER 10 CFR 50.54(q) 11/3/97 Due to some of the emergency preparedness-related regulatory guidance is dated and has become superseded in recent years. DAEC and the Emergency Planning Dept is taking percautions to ensure that screening of Emergency Plans and Implementing Procedures changes are properly reviewed for the process ofimplementation of 10 CFR 50.54(q), in determination if the change has decreased the effectiveness of the plan whether the overall effectiveness of the plan was decreased.

Also during the interum period that this process is being fully procedurealized and included into ACP 106.1 procedure, EP is using the old form (EP form EP-020) with this attached explainatior'. The form EP-020 and this attachment provide documentation to ,

show evidence that EP evaluated Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedure changes i to determine that this change can be made without prior NRC approval and continues to meet the standards of paragraph 50.47(b) and the requirements of Appendix E to this part.

E.' Dept is using the following questions in conjuction with the form (EP-020) questions to successfully satisfy screening to conclude that a particular change is acceptable without prior NRC approval:

1. Yes No_ DOES THE CHANGE DECREASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PLA lESULTING IN THE LOSS OF REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT ADEQUATE PROTECTION CAN AND WILL BE TAKEN IN THE EVENT OF A RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY AS REQUIRED BY 10 CFR 50.47 (a)?

2. Yesh DOES THE CHANGE RESULT IN THE LOSS OF ABILITY TO MEET ANY OF THE STANDARDS OR APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN 10 CFR 50.47 (b) AND (d) OR ANY NRC-APPROVED ALTERNATIVES TO THOSE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS 7

3. Yes_ No DOES THIS CHANGE DELETE OR CONTRADICT ANY OTHER REGU ATORY REQUIREMENT 7 IIADOCSiCURIXX3EPEPIPRV. DOC n -