Quantcast Example 13: Tailoring of Unreviewed Safety Question Process to Environmental Restoration Activities

 

Click here to make tpub.com your Home Page

Page Title: Example 13: Tailoring of Unreviewed Safety Question Process to Environmental Restoration Activities
Back | Up | Next

Click here for thousands of PDF manuals

Google


Web
www.tpub.com

Home

   
Information Categories
.... Administration
Advancement
Aerographer
Automotive
Aviation
Construction
Diving
Draftsman
Engineering
Electronics
Food and Cooking
Logistics
Math
Medical
Music
Nuclear Fundamentals
Photography
Religion
   
   

 

Share on Google+Share on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TwitterShare on DiggShare on Stumble Upon
Back
Example 9: Mitigating the Effects of an Earthquake
Up
Volume 2 of 2
Next
Example 14: Lessons Learned from a Readiness Evaluation Process


DOE-STD-1120-2005/Vol. 2
analyses to confirm assumptions used in the derivation of TSRs and to verify inventory certainties. Once
the six process vessels were removed and all required confirmations and approvals completed, the
limiting conditions of operations (LCOs) contained within the TSRs that were associated only with this
"mode" were no longer applicable. Additional TSRs were applicable during the subsequent "mode,"
including more detailed characterization of the pipe trench. Hold points were used throughout the
activities to ensure that assumptions, laboratory data, analyses, and approvals were obtained prior to
authorizing work.
WORK EXECUTION
Example 13: Tailoring of Unreviewed Safety Question Process to Environmental Restoration
Activities
The Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) process has retained the focus on protecting hardware that is
important to safety (Equipment Important to Safety). This example provides one way that responses to
the USQ questions on Equipment Important to Safety have been tailored to fit ER activities.
DOE G 424.1-1, Implementation Guidance for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question
Requirements, identifies seven questions that are an expansion of the three general questions identified in
10 CFR 830, Subpart B. Standard questions # 3 (probability of a malfunction of equipment important to
safety), # 4 (consequence of malfunction of equipment important to safety), and # 6 (malfunction of
equipment important to safety of a different type) all involve the issue of change impact to hardware
(equipment important to safety). These questions are focused on some form of hardware barrier
mitigating an undesirable event. Environmental restoration activities typically have a stronger reliance on
administrative controls and company level safety management programs as opposed to safety SSCs
Recognizing that administrative controls can provide a level of importance similar to that of safey SSCs
(see DOE-1186), one DOE site expanded their responses to USQD questions to better fit ER activities.
The responses address the standard "equipment important to safety" (e.g. there are none) and expand the
response to cover "controls important to safety" that replace the traditional hardware reliance. A typical
response to question # 3 is provided below as an example of the tailoring that has been used.
(3) Could the proposed change or as-found condition increase the probability of a malfunction of
equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the facility's safety analyses?
Yes
No
B-13


Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us

Integrated Publishing, Inc.