ML20034H344
| ML20034H344 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1993 |
| From: | CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034H343 | List: |
| References | |
| PN-30, NUDOCS 9303170173 | |
| Download: ML20034H344 (30) | |
Text
.,
a t
1 FO R.I \\lFORMATION 1
ON_Y--
1 a
'i!
- I
' i' v
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY-BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
[
PLANT OPERATING MANUAL' VOLUME XVIII UNIT 0 PROCEDURE. TYPE:
PLANT NOTICE
.. l PROCEDURE NUMBER: PN-30 PROCEDURE TITLE: INTEGRATED RECOVERY METHODOLOGY ~
-l t
REVISION 2
[
t Approved By:
99 4
/. ',
"EeS-- M 8f,47.ff / 3 ?!f j.
8 Unit 1 Plant. Manager / U6 t 2 Plant-Ma6ager.
Date/
l
/ // 9 J'-
Approved.By:
BNP Site Manager.
Date i
FOR lNFORWATION.
ON _Y
.. I
'Page 1-of 30.'
~.
OPN-30 Rev. 2 t
- 9303170173 930310-
- l PDR-ADOCK 05000324
-l P
PDR.
',2
.}( :n v.
_e_
x-m',.
c'--
1
[d;
)
f"
',\\.,45 -
' ' ['.
" j. 2, t.
,.)
. if l
LIST'OF EFFECTIVE PAGES i
E
'PN-30 h
Revision-
,f 1 2
.. [
t
,.4,
- a o"f 4
..i
.': f
.. y+
g 1
)
En 1
.' l; a
- -t
!i
,T i
- 1. )
i i
=.
' I h
i
'I t
l l
- t
.'s t
?011,\\ FOR VIAT ON' 1
ONLYi o,,_3o.....
,,,,2
,,,o.
r
'I
- i 3
r i [
4 5
-1 E
- i 1.0 PVRPOSE To establish the methodology for the recovery of BNP Units 1 and 2 from 1
the 04/21/92 forced outage to support safe and reliable full power.
operation.
For the unit' outages defined as B10BT9 and B210T9, this procedure-shall take precedence over related BNP procedures that, deal
+
with outage-scope control.
2.0 REPERENCES 2.1 July 23, 1992, Response to NRC Letter of June 23, 1992, Serial NLS 92-160 2.2 August 7, 1992, Memorandum to All Brunswick Site Managers and Supervisors from R. A. Watson, " Returning to Service" b
2.3 August 24, 1992, Memorandum to site Management Group from R. B.
Richey, " Outage Management and Coordination
- 2.4 September 10, 1992, Memorandum to Site Management Group from R.-B.
Richey, " Backlog Management During Current Outage" 2.5 Integrated Backlog Itse Report (as published by Outage Management Planning & Scheduling) 2.6 AI-96, Drywell Inspection and PNSC Outage Prestartup Checklist l
r Instruction 2.7 PN-31, *Line Management Self-Assessment of Readiness for Restart-of DNP Unit 2*
a 2.8 NGC 305-05, "Prioritizat_..+a Process f
3.0 SCOPE This methodology for recovery includes the identification, compilation, categorization, integrated scheduling control, and completion of open itema.
This procedure.provides a detailed mechanism to document system engineering review of the open itmos to support system readiness. The methodology for the outage scope control of the Integrated startup Schedule is established by this procedure.
The startup review process detailed by this procedure addresses plant f
I hardware related-issues. Organizational readiness is assessed via PN-l 31, "Line Management self-Assessment of Readiness.for Restart of BNP
-l Unit 2".
4.0 DEFINITIONS Terme defined within this section appear in bold-face throughout this procedure.
. t 4.1 Added work q
Tor the purpose of this procedure, the term added work is used to identify work items that are not considered emergent work but yet l
require addition to the outage scope after the Outage scope Freeze i
Date.
The following examples are considered added works I
I FOR INFORMATION 1
"" o " ' " '
or"->o a-J2 0,\\ _Y e
~..
- g l
6 s
A PRE-9/26 open item that was originally coded as.RESCH by h
the System Engineer that is subsequently changed to a NEED.
l
- 1 A POST-9/26 open item that was not coded by operations with a ISU or 2SU designator, that a. System Engineer subsequently q
wants added to the outage scope.
1 A non-IBIR'cpen item, such as a plant modification, that a-System Engineer wants to add to the outage scope.
t 4.2 Backloo Review Freeze Date This date defines the separation date in which Reference 2.1, Enclosure 2, methodology shall be terminated for processing our items in accordance with the July 23, 1992, response letter to the NRC.
This.date has been established as September 26, 1992. Work items identified before September 26,-1992, are commonly referred to as
- PRE-9/26 open j
Items".
i 4.3 Eneroent work a
f For the purpose of this procedure, the term emergent work is used '
to identify all new work items that have yet to be screened and scheduled.
4.4 Inteersted Backloo Itee Rooort (IBIR)
The IBIR is a computer printout produced by the ARTEMIS Computer System that details certain specific open items by system number.
The.IBIR database provides a listing for categorization and for establishing other schedule coding as identified in this procedure, j
The IBIR contains the following specific items:
-i Corrective WR/Jos
)
Backlogged Preventive Maintenance (PM) WR/Jos
- ]
-t Temporary Conditions (TC)
Temporary Caution Tags (TCT) l RTGB Deficiencies Disabled Annunciators
+
Hotside/Coldside Inspection Findings Open Engineering Work Requests (EWR)
Engineering Evaluation Report (EER) Actions Items Technical Support FACTS Action Items I
The IBIR removes the majority of duplication between WR/Jos and the remaining other backleg types (e.g., a plant deficiency having both an outstanding WR/JO and an associated Temporary Condition).
i 4.5 Intoorsted startuo schedule:
A management tool providing a common, all-inclusive schedule, directing performance of the majority of BNP activities and resources relative to the recovery'
[
of. Units 1 and 2 from. current' conditions to safe and reliable full power operations. The Integrated startup schedule is developed and maintained by Integrated Planning & Scheduling.
-l l
4.6 ooen Iteest Items that have the potential to affect component, subsystem, or cystem_ operations that must be evaluated and-J dispositioned. Examples'of open items are contained in Attachment' 1.
9 i
h ATl' N O
"9' OPN-30.Rev. 2 ONLY
p w
g Q
a f 40 5
4-r-+ki-
==
+--,,b..:
4 s
j o.
4.7 Operstor workarounds t Additional work or compensatory actions
{
(excluding: response to an initial equipment f ailure or event): that must be taken to l
- Sustain production availability or' capacity Maintain ECCS reliability-Comply with active or tracking.LCO action statements Obtain or verify operation indications or information.
~
Protect plant equipment Control radwaste leakage-Practice'ALARA Perform any' operations task Operator.Workarounds are measured by the number of RTCB indicator deficiencies, old clearances, caution tags, old LCOs,' disabled-annunciators, - jumper / wire removals, and increased f requency surveillances.
I 4.8 outaa. secoe Freene Date: This date definen the point in time when the outage scope additions / deletions become strictly
~
controlled. The: Outage scope Freese Date has'been established'as November 17, 1992.
4 4.9 schedule Isomet f
The term t;chedule impact applies to changes that affect the critical path, a system window milestone. completion, or a resource required to support schedule completion.
4.10 scope Addition Items that are new, unscheduled work resulting from equipment j
malfunctions.found during conduct of maintenance, inspections testing and engineering evaluations or items that may have existedL
-j prior to the outage which were omitted during the outage scope; development.
j
- t 4.11' Systee Readiness Review 1
The process whereby System. Engineers ensure the readiness of their
-)
assigned system by review of the 1BIR and other outstanding t
engineering / hardware-related issues.
4.12 Systne Readiness Review Packace f5RRP1.
The System Readiness Review Package.is the collection of documents used to confirm that a system is ready to support startup and that aj remaining open itees have been properly reviewed and 1
dispositioned. :The.SRRP is developed by the System Engineer and is reviewed by the BRC, PNSC and. BNP Site Manager (as. required)
- j for PRI-9/26 open items.
}
4.13 Urcent work
- l The term. urgent work is used. to identify any work l item that is of,
such a critical nature that Operations directs the work activity '
to begin before Integrated Schedule inclusion. Urgent work items.
y include' imminent personnel' safety issues,1 actions in. response'to-short-term LCOs, actions-to maintain safety system operability,1 f
work items"to correct significant operatorL distractions,-and new i
work. items.that directly-support critical path activities.
.l lq OPN.30'Rev. 2-Page 5 ^of 30 ONLY m
e e
q w
w
-[
~
-w wy
i l
+
5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1 BNP Site Manager I
i Responsible'for review,' approval, and implementation of.this f
procedure and all revisions thereto.
5.2 pnit 1 Plant Manaoer / Unit 2 Plant Manaoer Responsible for approving the post-startup reschedule of PRE-09/26 open. items and restart of their respective unit as Chairman of the PNSC.
c 5.3 Unit 3 operatier.c Manaaer / Unit 2 Doerations Manacer Responsible for maintaining a prioritized composite listing of-operator Workarounds.for their respective unit.
5.4 Manaoer - Technical Suonert Responsible for ensuring System Readiness Reviews are completed by.
the System Engineer in accordance with this procedure and presented to the Backlog Review Committee (BRC) and the Plant e
Nuclear Safety Committee (PNSC) as required for PRE-9/26 open
- l items.
5.5 Plant Nuclear Safety Committee Responsible for review and approval of PRE-9/26 IBIR open items-that will not be completed pri.or to startup as detailed later in this procedure. The PNSC secretary is responsible for: forwarding
(
completed System Readiness Review Packages to the BNP Site Manager and to Integrated Planning G Scheduling for post-startup l
implementation or pre-startup implementation.
i The PNSC shall screen for implementation or rescheduling based on nuclear safety implications.
The PNSC has additional post-outagl startup' responsibilities delineated in AI-96,'Drywell Inspection and PNSC Outage Prestartup
.i Checklist Instruction..
5.6 AD HDC Screenino committee-(AHSC) s The AMSC is a subcommittce of the-PNSC and is. composed of the r
~
Manager - Mechanical Maintenance, Manager - Shift Technical Advisor (STA), and Manager - BOP Systems. Alternates.may be
}
recommended by primary members and approved by the pertinent Unit-1 Plant Manager / Unit 2 Plant Manager.
The AMSC is responsible for:
.)
r 5.6.1-Validating PRE-9/26 category 7 coding. as defined in i
5.6.2 Identifying PRE-9/26 categories 7a and 7b activities to be-i included in the Integrated startup schedule.
]
5.7 Backloo Review Committee fBRC)
}
f The'BRC-is a subcommittee of the PNSC and is composed of'the.
4 following representatives: OMEM - Planning and Scheduling, Page 6 of 30 l
OPN-30 Rev. 2 Ox%
k ORMATIO.N j
OlVLY 1
k 4
Manager - Nuclear Systems - Technical Support, Operations (SRO),
NED Manager, Manager - Mechanical Maintenance, and an advisor from the General E16ctric company.
Alternates may be designated by primary members and approved by the pertinent Unit 1/2 Plant Manager. A BRC quorum is defined as a minimum of four representatives, including Operations.
The BRC is responsible for the review of PRE-9/26 open itses as follows:
5.7.1 Ensuring System Engineer's System Readiness Review Package is developed and processed in accordance with Section 6 and of this procedure.
5.7.2 Providing feedback to the System Engineer and rescheduling subsequent meetings to ensure additional requested technical input is included as required by the BRC.
5.7.3 The BRC is established only for the purpose of the initial review of PRE-9/26 category 2-6 open items.
5.8 Inteersted Plannino & Schedulino Integrated Planning & Scheduling is composed of the Manager -
Integrated Planning and Scheduling, the Manager - Site Work Force Control Group, and Operations (SRO) (or their alternates).
Integrated Planning & Scheduling is responsible for:
5.8.1 Schedulino PRE-9/26 work items as dictated by the system readiness review process described herein.
l 5.8.2 Integrating the initial Operation's screen of POST-9/26 WR/JO-related items into the schedule.
5.8.3 Control of the Integrated startup Schedule (outage scope) in accordance with this procedure.
5.9 System Encineer 5.9.1 Responsible for screening PRE-09/26 work items listed on the IBIR in accordance with Tigure 1 and development of the l
Systee Readiness Review Package (SRRP) as designated in-Attachments 2, 3, and 4.
5.9.2 Responsible for screening POST-09/26 work items listed on the IBIR in accordance with Tigure 2.
5.9.3 Responsible for ensuring that-all work items needad for startup are identified to Integrated Planning & Scheduling.
This applies to both IBIR listed work items and non-IBIR work items (plant modifications, etc.).
5.9.4 Responsible for review of non-IBIR based open issues that could impact system readiness, such as pending plant modifications, unanswered Technical Support Memorandums (TSMe), etc.
5.9.5 Responsible for ensuring that system outage scope additions and deletions are initiated / processed as required by this procedure.
FOR
\\l ORMATION i
Oh'Y I
E
4 5.9.6 Responsible for evaluating the integrated effects of work and/or engineering issues on the system and developing justifications to include or reschedule work items based on nuclear safety and reliability.
5.9.7 Responsible for presentation of the System Readiness Review Package to the BRC as scheduled with subsequent presentations to the PNSC (as required).
l 5.9.8 Responsible f or monitoring completion of startup items.
5.9.9 Responsible for monitoring the scheduling and completion of backlog items.
5.9.10 Responsible for the reviews identified on the Final System Readiness Review Form (Attachment 4) prior to startup.
6.0 INSTPUCTIONS 6.1 Svetem Review and Schedule control Process Overview Reference 2.1 provided a detailed process for how PRE-9/26 open items would be reviewed and scheduled. This process involves assignment of category numbers (per Attachment 7) to open items and then a comprehensive review of the Category 2-6 open items that were not expected to be completed prior to startup. Category 1 items are required for startup, while Category 7 items are i'
considered post-startup. To ensure Category 7 items were properly categorized, an AD HOC Screening Committee was formed to validate the category assignments.
The comprehensive review of the Category 2-6 items not expected to be completed prior to startup is accomplished by the Backlog Review Committee and the Plant Nuclear Safety Committee. BNP Site Manager approval is subsequently required to place the FRE-9/26 9
open item in the backlog for post-startup completion. This I,
process-is amended via Revision 2 of this procedure to require PNSC review / recommendation for only nuclear priority 1 - 4 open items to be rescheduled.
In addition, Site Vice-President approval is required for nuclear priority 1-4 open items on the i
r 3
systems identified in Attachment 8.
The review and approval i
levels for outage scope deletions are summarized in Attachment 9.
The collection of documents to process this PRE-9/26 open item review is referred to as the System Readinass Review Package (SRRP) and contains " exception forms" (Attachment 3) for any Category 2-6 item to be completed post-startup.
The traveler for the SRRP (Attachment 2) also contains System Engineer's acknowledgement of reviews for non-IBIR open items.
The initial scope for the Integrated startup schedule is formed by this PRE-9/26 open item review / exception process.
on September 26, 1992, the original review / exception process (dictated by reference 2.1) was discontinued and superseded with p
new processes as detailed by this procedure.
Emergent work items initiated after September 26, 1992 are commonly referred to as l
POST-9/26 open items.
After September 26, 1992, System Engineers continue to categorize emergent work items but do not complete exception forms for those
" ~ " " " " '
FOR lWORMATION ONLY u
i
." i items that are not scheduled for pre-startup.
The Final System.
3 Readiness Review (Attachment 4) assures final assessment of. system i
readiness and considers backlog additions and/or changes since the 1
September 26, 1992 date.
-{
Deletions from the outage scope (Attachment 5) of either PRE-9/26-or POST-9/26 items are controlled to ensure that proper reviews of system readiness are completed.
Following ERC reviews,.the System Engineer (s) and Operations Engineer shall review and process all outage scope deletions, followed by the applicable Unit 1/2. Plant Manager, PNSC and BNP Site Manager review / approval.
These reviews i
ensure that syetem readiness is maintained while accommodating outage scope deletions for schedule validation.
The Outsgo scope Freese Date, November 17, 1992, is the.date at I
effective.to provide. strict which regimented processes becomes control of outage scope. Upon issuance of revision 1 to PN-30, additional outage scope additions and deletions are made as described herein. Any additions to the outaga scope reflected in..
the Integrated startup schedule made prior _ to this procedure; revision are considered official, irrespective of what process
- j added the outage work scope.
System Engineer recommended outage scope additions and deletions are accomplished within a controlled process (Figure 2) to ensure outage scope control and schedule integrity. Operations'makes an.
initial screen of emergent WR/Jos and determines whether to add to the outage scope or reschedule for post-startup. This initial.
i screen is followed by a System Engineer review to add emergent j
work to the outage scope. If the outage scope addition has' significant schedule impact (per a schedule. analysis by Outage Management), then additional approvals are required by the pertinent Unit-1/2 Plant Manager and BNP' Site Manager for_ schedule inclusion (Attachment 6).
Added work additions to the outage scope are also subject to the l
controlled process (Figure 2) to ensure scope control and schedule integrity. Approved changes to the outage scope are then made to the Integrated startup schedule.
Summarizing, PRE-9/26 and POST-9/26 open itses are reviewed,.
dispositioned, and scheduled by.different processes (Figure 1 and 2).
However, once :in the Integrated startup-schedule, they can '
l only be removed via a common deletion process. These processes:
provide a common strict outage scope control until.the Final System Readiness Reviews are completed by.the System' Engineer.
~!
The processes establish the comprehensive technical basis for.
system readiness to support startup. The reviews of outage: scope; additions / deletions and backlog changes since.the SRRP approval'
'l protect the technical basis throughout. execution of the' Integrated' i]
Startup Schedule.
-)
The following sections provide specific details on implementation of the-System Engineer review and integrated scheduling processes l
described by this *overviewF and are divided an'follows:-
. System Engineer. Review Scope Lj IBIR Categorization and Coding
't SRRP Preparation / Documentation SRRP Review and Approval Process l
SRRP Revisions 1
Outage Scope Deletions i
l, Page-9 of'30 OPN-30 Rev. 2 FOR Ih FO RMATION-i Oh LY.
1 a
a
4 PRE-9/26 Open Item Review Process POST-9/26 Emergent Item Review Process Integrated.Startup Schedule Scope control Methodology l
Final System Readiness Assessment 6.2 System Enoineer Review scene 6.2.1 Prior to startup, the responsible System Engineer shall review open items on the system.
open itees will be documented in accordance with this procedure. In this review, the System Engineer must consider the following three sources of relevant system information:
Integrated Backlog Item Report'(IBIR) open itees Non-IBIR based engineering / hardware issues Emergent issues not-yet captured by IBIR and/or other routine work processes Note: As detailed under section 4.4 of this procedure,'the IBIR contains specific information related to hardware and/or engineering issues on a system.
6.2.2 The non-IBIR based information that must be considered by the System Engineer to ensure a complete review include:
Pending Plant Hodifications (PMs)
Unanswered Technical Support Memorandums.(TSMs)
Outstanding NED " Blue Memos" Outstanding Direct Replacements (not captured by an EWR listed on the IBIR)
Outstanding Equipment Decommissioning Packages'(EDPs;-
not captured by an EWR listed on the IBIR)
Non-FACTS Technical Support Action Items 6.2.3 The System Readiness Review Traveler (Attachment 2) shall be used to document the System Engineer's review of the non-IBIR open issues.
6.2.4 Emergent issues that invalidate previously considered open j
items on the IBIR shall be identified to the BRC/PNSC (as applicable) by the System Engineer and the appropriate outage scope addition / deletion form generated.
6.3 IBIR Cateoorization and Codino 6.3.1 The IBIR categorization and coding proceso supports the-control of the Integrated startup schedule scope associated
[
with hardware corrective actions. The IBIR startup-related codes to be used in the Integrated Planning &: Scheduling' t
process are as follows:
i Catecorv #
Code Femarks
\\
1 PRE Automatically coded by ARTEMIa-to indicate completion l
required prior to startup 2-6 (PRE-9/26)
NEED Indicates System Engineer.
t technical assessment that completion would enhance the technical performance of the system from an availability or reliability perspective.:
OPN-30 Rev. 2 Page 10 of 30 OYY
7 2-6 (PRE-9/26)
RESCH Indicates System Engineer supports post-startup completion of the item and completes the required Exception form.
2-6 (POST-9/26)
NEED Indicates that a 15U or 25U designator has been assigned to the associated WR/JO (or other work item type) for completion prior to startup.
2-6 (POST-9/26)
RESCH Indicates that a 15U or 2SU designator has n21 been assigned to the associated WR/JO (or other work item type) for completion.
7, 7a POST Automatically coded by ARTEMIS to indicate post-startup completion.
7b NEED Technically qualifies as a 7 but by its unique nature should be worked prior to startup.
The categorization screening criteria is detailed in of this procedure.
ARTEMIS codes new items with a leading asterisk (*) for WR/JO-related open items with an " initiation date* of after i
September 26, 1992 (i.e., POST-9/26).
6.3.2 System Engineers review the rout.ne updates of the IBIR and categorize new work items.
The categorization process continues for emergent work until unit startup to provide for a continuous characterization of the system's backlog.
6.3.3 The PNSC Secretary shall transmit the PNSC-approved changes recommended for PRE-9/26 open items (i.e., change a PRE-9/26 open item from a NEED to RESCH) to Integrated Planning &
Scheduling for IBIR update and schedule revision.
6.4 SRRP Preparation / Documentation 6.4.1 The System Engineer will review open items and develop a SRRP f or presentation to the BRC and subsequent PNSC review (as applicable). The SRRP shall include:
Integrated Backlog Item Report (IBIR; System Readiness Review Traveler (Attachment 2)
Request for Pre-Startup Corrective Action Exception Form (s) (Attachment 3) 6.4.2 The System Readiness Review Traveler shall be used by the System Engineer to document review of the non-IBIR open items.
6.4.3 Exception Forms are required for all PRE-9/26 IBIR open items that are category 2-6 that are not expected to be completed prior to unit startup. The System Engineer shall FOR IV ORMATION m.
OEY
9 A
ensure that the necessary exception forms are included in the ERRP.
6.4.4 Multiple open items can be documented on a single Exception-Form if.the integrated effects do not render the system unfit for startup. Examples of open backlog items that can be combined for evaluation must meet all of the following criteria common system same category same issue or problem a
common basis for rescheduling 6.5 SRRP Review and Approval Process 6.5.1 The BRC shall coordinate evaluations of the SRRP as presented by the System Engineer according to the guidance in Attachments 2, 3, and 4.
The SRRP is then presented to the PNSC for review as required by Attachment 9..
6.5.2 The recommendation of the PNSC and pertinent Unit 1/2 Plant Manager will then be forwarded to the BNP Site Manager for his review and approval as required by Attachment 9.
6.5.3 To ensure that all non-IBIR open items have been reviewed, This all systems must be considered for startup readiness.
review is required whether or not the system has any PRE-9/26 open item exception forms.
E.5.4 PRE-9/26 open items with a category 2-6 that are not expected to be completed prior to startup must have either:
An exception form (Attachment 3) completed by the System Engineer and recommended by the BRC to the PNSC (as required by Attachment 9)
EE An " Outage Scope Deletion
- form (Attachment 5) developed / recommended by the System Engineer and Operations Engineer as summarized in Attachment 8.
6.5.5 If the required review groups / management concurr that the SRRP open items can be rescheduled, the items are forwarded to Integrated Planning & Scheduling.
If these review groups / management do not concur that the SRRP open items can be rescheduled, then the items shall be, referred to the BRC (or System Engineer / Operations Engineer as appropriate) for additional review or forwarded to Integrated Planning &
Scheduling for work.
6.5.6 The original evaluation forms shall be collected by the PNSC secretary and transmitted to the vault for filing.
6.6 SRRP Pevisions 6.6.1 Copies of previously approved exception forms may be used in the development of a new SRRP provided that new open itees do not invalidate the justification for the previously approved exception. Revised SRRPs supersede any previously approved SRRPs on a system.
FORIN ORMAT O r a 22 er ao on->o a
- 2 O\\LY s
1
- g 4
6.6.2 ERRP revisions are not recuired to reflect approved Outage j
Scope Addition / Deletion Form changes (Attachmente 5 and 6).
i The System Engineer will consider these as part of their Final System Readiness Review (Attachment 4) deliberations.
6.7 Outace Seone Deletions 6.7.1 outage scope deletions for both PRE-9/26 and POST-9/26 category 2-6 work items coded as NEED by the System Engineer' are accomplished via Attachment 5,. Outage Scope Deletion Form. This form is originated by a System Engineer and-requires concurrence by an Operations Engineer. The form is l
then routed to the applicable Unit 1/2 Plant Manager, PNSC and BNP Site Manager for review and approval as summarized in Attachment 9.
Note that the required reviews and approvals are derwndent upon the nuclear priority assigned i
?
to the open itse and the system affected by the item.
6.7.2 Items _that are deleted from the pre-startup Integrated
}-!
startup schedule are rescheduled for completion by Integrated Planning & Scheduling.
i 6.7.3 The following guidance shall be'used by the. System Engineer and operations Engineer in their recommendations to reschedule an open itee:
The item is not needed to comply with the Brunswick Plant Technical Specifications.
The consequences of not completing the work item would I
not affect the ability of any safety system to satisfy its design function.
i The result of not completing the work is not likely to result in reduced safety system availability, increased forced outage rate, or reduced capacity factor in, the time frame before it is completed or resolved.
The item does not adversely affect nuclear safety, f
6.7.4 Outage scope deletions consider current plant status and startup schedules, and whether these items may be i
t rescheduled after atartup to better utilize existing resources to complete high priority work.
,{
6.7.5 The System Engineer responsible for the item (s) will validate the appropriateness of the priority assigned to the-work activity and provide the Operations Engineer and Unit 1/2 Plant Manager with the necessary background information~
to make the approval decisions detailed above.
l l
6.7.6 For both PRE-9/26 and POST-9/26 open itees, the Outage scope Deletion Form (Attachment 5) shall be used.for the deletion of an item that is in the Integrated startup schedule.
t I
6.7.7 Approved scope deletions shall be reflected in the IBIR and transmitted to Integrated Planning & Scheduling (and a copy to the pertinent System. Engineer).
j j
l t
FOR IN ORMATION
- Page 13 of 30 j
OPN-30 Rev. 2 ON _Y 1
l 1
..]
b
=
e 6.8 PRE-9/26 Open Itee Peview Process 6.8.1 Figure 1 depicts the review process for PRE-9/26 IBIR open s
itees.
The System Engineers provide category numbers and delineate all PRE-9/26 category 2-6 items as.*NEED" or "RESCH" per section 6.3.
The System Engineer develops exception forms (Attachment 3) for PRE-9/26 category 2-6 open itses not needed to be completed prior to startup.
6.8.2 Any changes to the System Engineer's category numbers and coding annotations shall be made to the IBIR database' following reviews of the BRC, PNSC and/or BNP Site Manager (as applicable).
h 6.9 POST-9/26 Emeroent Item Review Process 6.9.1 For emergent WR/JO (and related backlog items, such as'an.
i EWR, Temporary Condition, etc.) Operations makes the initial
~
2 screen on whether-the item should be completed prior to startup. WR/JO-related items will be assigned startup' codes f
via AMMS using the ISU or 25U designator.
L 6.9.2 All POST-9/26 omergent work items (both IBIR based and non-j IBIR based) are subsequently reviewed by System Engineers.
Items which the System Engineers deem necessary to be completed / resolved prior to startup must be identified for schedule inclusion by the System Engineer in accordance with l
Figure 2.
6.9.3 POST-9/26 emergent work items shall be categorized by the System Engineers.
i 6.9.4 Non-WR/JO item startup codes may.be assigned by the System Engineer as deemed pertinent.
1 6.10 Intecrated Startup Schedule Seone control Methodoloey t
6.10.1 PRE-9/26 IBIR open items coded as NEED by the System Engineers before the Dutage Scope Freese Date are l
automatically included in the Integrated Startup:
Schedule.
ll 6.10.2 PRE-9/26 IBIR open items determined to be a NEED by'
-i the System Engineer after the issuance of Revision 2 to this procedure are considered Added work. An' Outage 1
Scope Addition Form'(Attachment 6) as depicted in Figure 2' is required for addition of added-work items into the schedule.
6.10.3 During the initial screen of emergent work POST-9/26 i
WR/JOs,.. Operations may add directly'into the Integrated Startup Schedule open items determined to be urgent work and required J f or completion prior to -
startup. All other emergent POST-9/26 WR/JO-related?
open items required to be completed' prior.to.startup-will be coded as ISU or:25U in AMMS and an outage-Scope Addition Form submitted.
Urgent and ISU and 2SU.
designations by Operations may.be based upon judgement <
and/or prioritization codes.
~
6.10.4 System Engineers will make.a second screening per their daily reviews. All non-urgent emergent work and r
- l
- ~
~
Page 14 of 30 t-U'* R IM**ORMATION 1
OPN-30 Rev. 2
. ONLY j
?
C 1
b;s' h
> -
- 1 9
added work open itses being requested for addition to l
the outage scope will be-submitted by the System Engineer on an Outage Scope Addition Form for management consideration of schedule impact in j
accordance with Figure 2.
i 6.10.5 The outage Manager.shall indicate.the. levels of
.i approval necessary based on schedule impact determined r
from.the schedule analysis..Dutage Scope Addition Forms will'be routed for management approval (s) based.
on schedule impact of the_ emergent or added work item.
.i Non-impact work items and Maintenance fill-in work may be added directly to the Integrated startup schedule by the outage Manager without additional. management-i approval.
6.10.6 The Outage Manager shall have the authority to place.
.~'
into the. Integrated startup schedule any NEED that-has critical path schedule impact.'For these items, the.
completion of the Outage Scope Addition Form.and.
approvals may follow the scheduling of the' item (s).
6.10.7 Non-WR/JO related items that are. considered pre-.
sta'rtup by the System Engineer and do not have field activities (such as review / disposition of a-Technical Support FACTS item) may be identified as.NEED by:the System Engineer without Integrated. startup schedule, i
inclusion.
In this case, an-outage Scope. Addition Form shall not be necessary.
6.10.8 POST-9/26 work items shall only be deleted from the i
Integrated startup schedule scope.(or rescheduled j
post-startup).via Attachment 5, outage Scope Deletion-Form.
!b 6.11 Final System Readiness Assessment 3
6.11.1 Prior to startup, the assigned System Engineer shallt make a' final determination of startup readiness by i
i review of outstanding open items on their systems.3,
The System Engineer will document this' final review.by.
completion.of the TFinal System Readiness Review" form q
4 (Attachment 4).
This~ form requires' System Engineer; sign-off.that all IBIR open items.have.been properly; dispositioned and:that non-IBIR open items:-have also been reviewed to assure startup readiness...This
. f cumulative review prior'to startup shall include PRE-9/26 and POST-9/26 open items, their disposition,;and.
system-operability' status with regard to outstanding items.
6.11.2 After-review and approval'of the;* Final'Systeml Readiness".for'a' system, any subsequent emerging work will be prioritized in'accordance with normal BNPt
'[
procedures.
C 6.11.3.
Non-system ~related items'(commitments, et e'. ) shall'be' presented-by their specific' sponsors >in accordance j
5 with AI-96, "Drywell-Inspection andLPNSC Outage.
~
Prestartup checklist _ Instruction * ' (e.g., Managerf-
' Regulatory Compliance for status of regulatory' commitments).
Page 15.of 30 DPN-30 Rev.~2 FO' R INnO3W ATION
,1 ON_Y-1 g-
,.w.
u
i l'
j
'4 6.11.4 A.seniorimanagement assessment is. completed per the requirements. of PN-31~, "Line Management Self-Assessment of Readiness For Restart'of BNP Unit 2*.
6.11.5 Prior'to~ requesting startup,'the Unit'l Plant Manager-I
/ Unit 2 Plant Manager shall confir; to the BNP Site, Manager-that PRE-9/26 and. POST-9/26 open iteep have j
been properly reviewed and dispositioned.
l
.y 7.0 FIOURES L[
7.1 Figure 1, Evaluation Flow Chart Pre-09/26/92
~$
~
7.2 Figure.2, Evaluation Flow Chart Post-09/26/92 j
8.0 ATTACEMENTS' 8.1
. Attachment.1, Examples of open items.
6 8.2, System Readiness Review Traveler 8.3,.Requent For Pre-Startup. Corrective Action Exception" i
8.4 Attachment'4, Final System Readiness Review I
B.5, Outage Scope Deletion i
i 8.6, outage Scope Addition
.i 8.7, Open Item Categories
- I
.8.8, Focus Systems i
8.9,. Outage Scope Deletion Process, Review and Approval Requirements Matrix
}
f h
i
)
-II 1
s FOR INFORIV ATION 1
() f 3 II Page 16 of 30' OPN-30 Rev. 2 l
I 1
?
2.
1.
-I
i FGURE 1 Pre 09/26/92 Item Evaluation NTEGRATED BACKLOGITEM REPORT (IBIR Work items)
System Engineet AHSC t
Cat 7 Cat 2 6 Exe Cat 1-6. 7a & 7b YES i.
o tJED Int e gra t e d Erc Startup o
Schedule a
m e
,(Except)
Integrateo 5
tJ5D
'O Er Sys/O S he v ing PE Engr Cumulative
"( *
- I
- " "h Startup Review pg jg f
Mg PNSC S
p g
( x ep4
( eletioni (Al 96)
IE Site.
M9 RA to g4 I Of 2 (Deletion)
M-Curre nt Site
'O 9
- See section 6.7.1 m
9
/
Pla nt Stanup f
FOR LNFORMATJON oa-so a 2
OEY
.9 FIGURE 2 Post 09/26/92 1:em Evaluation
& Schedule Scope Control ADDED EtER3ErmVCXK YKNK Att w,wo i,
,r System Engineer Ops Daily Reviews
_N/ Review URGENT Cat 7 Cat 1-6, 7a & 7b rnD o
(cesi cel Pa tti)
Out Mg' te integrated Schedule
^
Startup int egr ate d Planning &
naty '
Schedule Scheduling l
o fGD (Accision) u Cumulative Sys/ Ops ts Startup RtSOH RA Engr /
[
Review 1 of 2 l
nezH t
tED (Deletion),,
Startup (Acci.on)
PNSC Exc
- tED
( Al-90) tap Site
( A edition)
Mgr /
e RISCH (Dele t.on),,
gj
,g 1 or ?
Site.
tED YES Mgr f
R!LOH (Deistion) sit e to Mgr j
Curre nt. -
See Section 6.7.1 l
3 p
1 lON r se 28 er ao OPN-30 Rev. 2 ON _Y
- f' 11 r{
Attachment
' '~ ~
s.
Pogo 1Iot;1
?
EIAMPLES OF OPEN ITEMS
,j
'i t
't
- ' Corrective WR/JOs l
Backlogged Preventive Maintenance (PM) WR/Jos
.}
- ' Temporary Conditions.
(TC) l
- . Temporary Caution Tags (TCT) i; i
' * RTGB Deficiencies Disabled Annunciators
't
- Hotside/coldside Inspection Findings Open Engineering Work Requests (EWR)
' Engineering Evaluation Report-(EER) Actions Items
'l
.3 Technical Support FACTS Action Items
- -j Pending Plant Modifications (PMs)
Unanswered Technical Support' Memorandums (TSMs).
Outstanding NED
- Blue Memos' Outstanding-Direct Replacements (not captured by an E601 listed on the IBIR)_
j 1
Outstanding Equipment. Decommissioning Packages' (EDP))(not captured' by a '
IBIR EWR)
Non-FACTS Technical Support Action Items q
- s Instrument Rack Replacement /Refurbishmen't Items Miscellaneous Steel Walkdown Items rj Miscellaneous' Wall Items
, i:
Lcos 1
- Technical Specification Surveillance Testing.
j
- ! commitments
- Preventive Maintenance Activities i
- 1
>'I Notes-
-j
- -- contained ~in the IBIR l
a* Items will be' included in the. Integrated startup schedule as appropriate.
but not necessarily reviewed by the BRC.
,i i
- b i
- FOR: MOAVATION-
]
ONLY 1
'Page 19fof 30-70PN-30_.Rev. 2 y
q i -
1
.g 1
+
s
. ~
s ss v,
e
'Attcchment-2 P:ge 1 ef 1 SYSTEM: READINESS REVIEW TRAVELER
~
SYSTEM ID #
UNIT # -
SYSTEM NAME
~-
SYSTEM ENGlNEER REVIEW
SUMMARY
(The System Engineer shallinitial each item below to confirm that the required reviews have been completed)
IBIR open items (including the proper dispositioning of open items)
Pending Plant Modifications (PMs)
Unanswered Technical Support Memorandums (TSMs)
Outstanding NED
- Blue Memos" Outstanding Direct Replacements (DRs) (not captured by an IBIR EWR)
Outstanding EDPs (not captured by an IBIR EWR) i Non-FACTS Technical Support Action items l
REM ARKS (The System Engineer can provide any additional relevant information deemed necessary to provide a complete summary of system readinessi
.t i
System Engineer Signature / Date BACKLOG ;
Systern Endirieer /c
'IBIRDsts' BRC Review Datel BRC Chairman Signature COMMITTEE J Presenter
+
REVIEW (S) f g.
BACKLOG REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Committee Chairman Date -
PNSC REVIEW System Engineer /
- IBIR Date PNSC Review Date
' PNSC Chairman
~i Presenter Signature l' PNSC RECOMMENDATION (PNSC Review Required for Systems with Priority 1 - 4 Rescheduled Open items, y
otherwise, only Plant ManaDer Approvalis Required for All Systems)
PNSC Chairman / Unit 1/2 Plant Manager Date BNP SITE MANAGER APPROVAL (Required for Systems with Priority 1 - 4 Rescheduled Open items on Focus Systems *).
BNP Site Manager Date
=
.l FOY INFOR'N ATlON 1
ONLY-o m-30 ae. 2
Attactment 3 Paga 1 of 3 (Examplo) t REQUEST FOR PRE-STARTUP CORRECTIVE ACTION EXCEPTION ITEM BDENTFICATION s EYSTEM o a UNIT a todentify becAkg item numberts), i.e. WR/JO 9, TC c. Ceutron Top c. etc....I REFERENCE DOCUMENTS (odentify allreference documents such as EWRs, EERs, A CRs, ! ACTS, Front Mod es. end other becAlop item as not identified above..)
b DECCRIPTION
' (this section should fully describe the problem such ther the reader clearly understands the deficiency...evoid using cryptic descr&tions frans some of our databases thet prornpt confusion... note that the descriptions in the source detsbese/ document typically do not provide e complete undsrstanding of the issuel I
(for issues that can be quantitatively described, provide values, e.g., 20 drops / minute from velve packing leek, etc.]
I txcernow cAncony I I 2.
Act n to w. y., pre....t.ty yn.m
.a.emy, i
11.
htu no I cent oweet n top.m n.3 ma. 51
..au.ed i..wa.a.it.
1 13.
Act n i. e.n. th. D on b et th. p6.nt, g i 2.
tno.a o e. un
.*.ed. se m i emene.h.d w.4 eso us om. -
mi. i... un.s.ad. i.uppet w.m.ni.i n with.n th.
istA.h.d
.ek ei ut
-j w
I 14 Act n to c way with e.ck.i.d e nm.m. e i.d i
13.
t
- n. the co,.at out.o..
e.i si.m. wh.cei c.ines be phy c ey.cew s.h.d w.th.n th.
i.aA.h.d w.. eso. wt oce..
e 1
i b.
Act n t.
dd....
.i. w ete.una.
I 14
(
) 6.
Act n 1. met. 14.ev ev. plant ep..teng e.h bety.
I I 5.
- Can be w. eked on hn. ee.ou... Op.e.t
- n..oprov.3 tud.wl.
Operatione Approval b
JUSTSF1 CATION fi.e.. provide the technicalbasis for why this exception end the associatedplant status is acceptabiel i
fthis section is used to describe 'whyis it acceptable to startup the Unit with this deficiency *., edditionally, if this deficiency effects one of the following issues, then its irrnpect on that issue rnust be fully / clearly described: safety 5ystems eveilabHity, reliability, operetor workerounds,
}
F compensatory rnessures in place, and vulnerability to new problems whHe operating with the deficiency....I lthis section should address whether the deficiency is expected to worsen during the operating cycle and the essociatedimpact}
(to provide additional technicaljustification, invect on Probabilistic Risk Analysis, PRA, can be referenced in this section]
i q
(nots that this section is not a just)fication for the exception a chosen, such es, justify why engineering is uneveilable...rether this section l
1 provides the basis for startup ther could be applicable for any exception ! chosen)
(This section can be used to justify multiple becAlog items on e single system if the integrated effects of those items do not render the system l
unfit for startup.)
i t
ii REQUESTOR NAME / DATE
[
(Print)
BACKLOG REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION BLN:[
]
[
i System Engineer's Concurrence
/
l l Recommended l 1 Not Recommended Commmeo Chairmen Date PNGC RECOMMENDATION (PNSC Required for only Priomy 1 4 Exceptions, otherwise Plant Manager Approvelis required for all Exceptionel f
( ) Recommended
! 1 Not Recommended PNSC Chairmen i Urut 112 Plant Menaper Date I
ENP SITE MANAGER APPROVAL (Required for all Prionty 1 4 Exceptions on
- Focus Systems *).
i I ) Approved 1-)Disepproved BNP Site Manager Date f
'ontinuation Pepe Attached I
]
i FOR,WORMATION OPN-30 Rev. 2 Page 21 of 30 i
- Att.cchment 3 Pega 2'cf'3 4
. ~.
REQUEST FOR PRE-STARTUP CORRECTIVE ACTION EXCEPTION -
ITEM IDENTFICATION #
EYSTEM IDF UNfT #
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS f
DESCRIPTION a
l cAnoony aca now e
l l 2.
Act n to mm wy ca.. scy v.i n wa.6e.
}1.
be no ee.e w eent.e,c n top-eien.1 me. 51 i...aw*.d te m n.nt.
e v
l. I 3.
An n se..n.. v. D en t et th put.
I I 2.
Ene no e vn wed. i n.c ishi n.d wwk me ut oma.
u.i
... un.am to.wpperi ns nn niet n,ath n e..med 6 d wek me us a
Acian to seaw y w th e. eke.d s--en-ni ede.d 1 - l 3.
I 14.
a e eh. enm ns eutae..
on...
I ) 5.
Act n to ad.
pe.ie wwk
.we..
I l4 siwee awh A seines t phy.c.nv.ce.awdi.hed witi.i th..Habb.h.d work.6e wl d h
l I e.
Aci n i. n
.w y m.
. pw.t no. mv. --
I r 5.
c.n e,.
6.d 6n. e.
u.
on..s n..m.
.t t i.-l.
i' Operation. Approval.
JUGTIF1 CATION (i.e., provide the technicalbasis for why this esception and the associatedplant status is ecceptabiel l
f
-. l i
h REQUESTOR NAME IDATE i-forinti r-BLNi!
l ~
- [
ILACKLOC REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION h
System Engineer's Concurrence a
! l Recommended l I Not Recommended Committee Chairmen.
Date PNSC RECOMMENDATION (PNSC Reouired for ordy Pnonty 1 4 Exceptions, otherwise Plant Monoper Approvst is esquired for mit Exceptions)
I = l Recommended 1 i Not Recommended PNSC Chairmen Date
}
-1 BNP &lTE MANAGER APPROVAL (Required for oli Priority 1 - 4 Exceptions.on
- Focus Systeme*)
-}
l ' l Approved l ) Disapproved f
BNP Sete Meneper Date' Continuation Pope Attached 1
)
i, FORR ORMATION l
1 ONLY.
OPN-30;Rev.'2 Page'22 of 30-
k
-Attcchment 3-
'P09) 3 cf 3 r
.I REQUEST FOR PRE-STARTUP CORRECTIVE ACTION EXCEPTION (Continuation Page)
I Additional Comments -
ITEM IDENTIFICATION a UNIT #
v NAME / DATE:
ORGAN!ZATION:
I l
l I
1 NAME / DATE-ORGANIZATION:
i i
I
~
NAME I DATE:
ORGANIZATION:
l a
i NAME / DATE:
ORGANIZATION:
I i
i FOR INFORWAT!ON ON X
~
OPN-30 Rev. 2
~
<Page 23 of 30 r
y y
Att.0ctnament 4 P gi' 2 cf 1-FINALLSYSTEM. READINESS REVIEW-UNIT #
SYSTEM ID #
SYSTEM NAME-SYSTEM ENGINEER REVIEW
SUMMARY
(The system Engineer shaltinitial each item below to confirm that h:/she has completed the required reviews)
IBIR open items (including the proper dispositioning of open items)
Pendi.ng Plant Modifications (PMs)
Unanswered Technical Support Memorandums (TSMs).
Outstanding NED
- Blue Memos" Outstanding Direct Replacements (DRs) (not captured by an IBIR EWR)-
Outstanding EDPs (not captured by an IBIR EWR)
Non-FACTS Technical Support Action items REMARKS (The System Engineer can provide any additional relevant information deemed necessary to provide a
{
complete summary of system readiness)
System Engineer Signature / Date TECHNICAL SUPPORT MANAGEMENT REVIEW & APPROVALS
.l
- Supervisor Signature
-. Date -
Sub-Unit Manager Signature Date
- l Tech Support Mgr Signature
~ Date.
-i COMMENTS:
i
)
.l e
- j q
FOR,NFORLV ATION Page 24 of-30
)
OPN-30 Rev. 2 ONLY-
-Pag 3'I of 3' OUTAGE SCOPE DELETION SYSTEM ID #
UNIT #'
SYSTEM NAME
- S Item # :.
Reference Priority #
Cat #
Technical Basis for Rescheduling
~
ltems -
l 1
2 i
t' 3
4 l
5 6
e 7
r 8
RECOMMENDATION System Engineer Date Operations Engineer Date PNSC REVIEW & APPROVAL (Required for all Priority 1-4 deletions)
Ii PNSC Chairman Date UNIT 1/2 PLANT MANAGER APPROVAL (Required for all deletions) i Unit 1/2 Plant Manager Date
.I BNP SITE MANAGER' APPROVAL (Required for Priority 1-4 " Focus Systems" deletions) l BNP Site ManaDer Date j
'i
=0 R.lh FOR MATION ONLY r e 2s er so-i
- -30
.. 2
l
- .3..
!'.,q
{
Pag 3 1 of 1 I
OUTAGE SCOPE ADDITION i
SYSTEM ID #
UNIT #
SYSTEM NAME REQUESTOR NAME / DATE:
i ITEM #:
REFERENCE (S):
DESCRIPTION:
i BASIS FOR ADDITION:
-t I
t SCOPE ATTRIBUTES: (for all NO responses, provide impact details belowl EngineerinD (DR, Mod), etc.) Available Yes ( )
No [
]'
Materials / Parts Available Yes ! ]
No ( )
Funds / Resources Available Yes ! ]
No ( )
ALARA impact Consistent With Goals Yes l-1 No i J REQUIRED PLANT CONDITIONS / SPECIFIC IMPACT DETAILS:
I m
OUTAGE MANAGEMENT EVALUATION Schedule Analysis Results / Comments:
i
~
f Outage Manager Approval:
Date.
f Additional Approvals Recuired: ( ) Unit 1/2 Plant Manager
']. BNP Site ManaDer '
[
UNIT 1/2 PLANT MANAGER APPROVAL:
i Unit 1/2 Plant Manager -
Date 1
BNP SITE MANAGER APPROVAL:
i BNP Site ManaDer Date j
TOR-I \\ FOR V ATION i
raee 2e *
- on-30 nev. 2-ONLY i
Pags I of'2 CPEN ITEM CATEGORIES Catego ry Description 1
ACTIONS TO MEET OPERABILITY REQUIREMENTS IN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 1.e.,'is this item needed to meet operability requirements in Technica1' Specifications?-
i
-6 i
2 ACTIONS TO MATERIALLY IMPROVE SAFETY SYSTEM AVAILABILITY
.{
i.e.,
is this item necessary.to ensure the systems remain in an operable status for the balance of each unit's fuel cycle 7 3
ACTIONS TO RISTORE THE DESIGN BASIS OF THE PLANT i.e., ie it required to ensure that,the system will-perform its intended functions per its design basis?
4 ACTIONS TO COMPLY WITH DOCKETED COMMITMENTS RELATED TO THE CURRENT OUTAGE' i.e., is there a regulatory commitment that requires resolution prior to startup?
5 ACTIONS TO ADDRESS
- OPERATOR WORKAROUNDS" i.e., is this item a Caution Tag,' Disabled Annunciator, and/or RTGB indicator deficiency?
i 6
ACTIONS TO MATERIALLY IMPROVE PLANT OPERATING-RELIABILITY
'i.e., is it necessary to ensure the system (s) remains in 6
an operable status for the balance of each unit's fuel' j
cycle?
i l'
7 OTHER a.
Item is not a Category *1-6" t
b.
Item is not required to support a Category -l-6" c.
Itam has to do with rust removal, cosmetic O
improvements, housekeeping, etc., within the power-block and does not affect plant operation d.
Item is for non-plant' infrastructure improvements;'
4 i.e.,
vehicular and. trailer maintenance, plumbing; mit conditioning, welding machines,' cranes, et c.1 t
FOR MORIV A-ON j
' ()l \\[(, [.
Page 27 of:30;
.0PN-30 Rev. 2 x
y v
v r
w Ps91 2lofl2.
s,
.~g',
category Description e.
Item can be. classified as MINOR MAINTENANCE Non-Safety Related Non-Environmentally. Qualified Clearance not required
' System boundary integrity not violated PMTR can be included in repair instructions No written procedure. required
-No.in-plant welding required =
Transient combustibles less than specified in
+-
OTPP-14 Not security rslated No fire seal or fire protection boundary violated f.
Item can be readily worked on line,:does not affect safe and reliable operation, does not require an LCO or ASSD impairment to be generated to allow itito be worked, and it does not impede the ability of Operationc to' perform necessary. surveillance and -
monitoring functions.
l E2Ig: Work items that_are related'to Direct' Replacements, Plant.
Modifications, and Snubbers on' safety-related systems should not be categorized as 7's.
Exceptions to completion should be documented per the established process..= Insignificant. mechanical joint leakage may be classified as a-7 if no.significant other deficiencies are identified for.that item or if_the component is scheduled.to be-replaced'during a future work activity..
7a.
ADMINISTRATIVE a.
Item is for' modification support.-(e.g., part reservations, rebuilds.of components for spares)-
b.
Item is for administrative purposes only (e.g.,
timekeeping of'I&c support of plant modifications)_
7b.
MISCELLANEOUS BENEFITS, SAFETY,.ALARA Items which pertain to ALARA,' contamination. control,;
personnel safety, or need.to be left on the schedule-
~)
because they have' some other ' justifiable' plant' benefit.
. Examples-Item could be. worked prior.to startup.with 4 Rem exposure. Once the plant.is on the.line
-}
exposure would be.17 Rem.
l t
a
?OR
\\ FORVATIOl\\
OEY l
i OPN-30 Rev. 2-Page 28 of 30
- l
yr
- i i
^
Pag 2 1 of -1
)
~
POCUS SYSTEMS I
Emergency Diesel Generators (5100, 51054 5110, 5111, 5112, 5113, 6202)
Diesel Generator Emergency Power (5095)
Switchyard-(5065, 5135, 5145, 5200, 5250, 5260)
Instrument Air / Nitrogen (6135, 6152, 8270) j; I
Reactor Protection System (1050, 1080) l Residual Heat Removal (2045)
CAC (Venting) (2070) j
)
Service Water (4060)
'l-DC Power (5075, 5080, 5085, 5090, 5215, 5230, 5240, 5245, 5255)
Plant Electrical (AC) (5170, 5175, 5185, 5195, 5205, 5210)
PCIS (1011)
Main Steam /-EHC (3020, 5010)-
Condensate / Feedwater (3070) t Fire Suppression / Detection (6175, 6180, 6195,'6205, 9300)
. )-
. a SBGT (7071) _
l-i e
a
?
l v
a
,k
.t rOY l\\ FORN ATION 1
OEY h
'OPN-30 Rev. 2 Page 29 of 30' I!
1 i
~
s..
FOR INFORMATION
- i n '
I i
OUTAGE SCOPE DELETION PROCESS REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS MATRIX
?
The reviews and approvals required for deletion of items from the outage scope are displayed in l
'l the matrix below. The Outage Scope Deletion Form, Attachment 5, is utilized to document the necessary reviews and approvals.
i FOCUS SYSTEMS
.NON-FOCUS SYSTEMS System Engineer System Engineer Priority Supervisor Supervisor 1-4 Operations Engineer Operations Engineer PNSC PNSC' Unit 2 Plant Manager Unit 2 Plant Manager Site VP System Engineer System Engineer Priority i
Supervisor Supervisor
>4 Operations Engineer Operations Engineer Unit 2 Plant Manager Unit 2 Plant Manager l
P i
i TO R I \\ FOR V ATION ONLY
)
OPN-30 Rev. 2 Page 30 of 30 i
.. - -.