ML20084P509

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Minutes of 840322 Meeting W/Bechtel & NRC in Midland,Mi Re Regulatory Considerations Relevant to Plant Completion.Viewgraphs Encl
ML20084P509
Person / Time
Site: Midland
Issue date: 05/07/1984
From: Quamme D
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To: Harrison J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
CSC-7592, NUDOCS 8405180243
Download: ML20084P509 (49)
v • d • e


Text

_

t

. b. 3 4

Consumers ggr Dean L Quemme Site Manager Company ume ~~,

Midland Project: PO Box 1963. Mxiland. MI 48640. (517) 631-8650

/ PRINCIPAL STAFF VRA jf/ECPRP J/RA DE

\\/RA JRMs f RC OR'JA 5

+

May 7, 1984

'A0 SCS 07

,GA

.i L ENF File M

Mr. John J Harrison, Chief Midland Project Section U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 MIDLAND ENERGY CENTER GWO 7020 MIDLAND DOCKET NOS. 50-329, 50-330 NOTES AND PRESENTATION MATERIAL FROM THE MARCH 22, 1984 MEETING File: 0485.16.1 Serial: CSC-7592 0460.2 Attached are copies of the notes and presentation materials from the March 22, 1984 meeting held in Midland to discuss regulatory considerations relat-ing to the Midland Nuclear Plant compi ion.

p DLQ/ BHP /dmh cc: RJCook, Midland Resident Inspector DSHood, USNRC JCKeppler, Regional Administrator, Region III 3 !hh P

A 0

4

  • Y 11 as

,g)I OC0484-0001A-CN02

,,I i l

r

- 9 t A 9

C 2

?

MIDLAND ENERGY CENTER MEETING NOTES y

Subject:

Midland Nuclear Plant Completion Plan - Regulatory Considerations Meeting Date: Mar:b 22, 1984 Locatign: Conference Room A & B - Bechtel Building Attendees:

CPCo BPCo NRC

-S H Howell Sid Bernsen Jim Keppler J W Cook J A Rutgers Bob Warnick D L Quamme Bill Henry J J Harrison B H Peck T Valenzano Herb Livermore D Taggart J T Minor Pat Hiland

.B Palmer Bruce Burgess R J Landon Discussion:

1) J W Cook introduced the discussions and indicated that the purpose of the meeting was to provide a description of the status of the Construction Completion Program (CCP), discuss the lessons learned to date and describe the status of current studies underway.to explore ways to complete the project in a more efficient and effective fashion. He noted that a number of changes have occurred in the project status.since the CCP was formulat-ed.and initiated. As a result, CPCo management has concluded that some

. alternative approaches to the current CCP implementation procedures should be explored. A basic ground rule for these alternatives has been continu-ing compliance to the basic principles of the CCP.

~

w to OC0484-0001A-CN02

m e

D 4

f 3

2) Tim Minor and B. Palmer summarized the current status of Phase 1 activities and the experience to date.

In general, program implementa-tion and effectiveness is good - only small changes have been made as a result of experience feedback.

3) D L Quamme described the three issues that have identified through feed-back and planning studies as:

- There is a significantly greater work load for MPQAD quality control personnel during Phase 1 than that of the Bechtel engineering status assessment teams. This results in-Bechtel teams completing their work in a specific plant area (or module) well in advance of the NPQAD quality verification and inspection status assessment completion in the same area. This will inhibit efficient use of the status assess-ment teams and delay resumption of the safety-related construction com-pletion.

- There is a lack of Q-related work in 1984. This issue results from the present planning which emphasizes completion of the reinspection of all Q-related work in plant areas prior to resuming Q-related construction in the specific area.

- The release of Phase 2 work by module does not totally support the sys-tem turnover logic.

'OC0484-0001A-CN02 p

o J, 6 ib -

,1 w

g y

He then descEibed potential solutions that are being considered by Consumers Power to deal with the preceeding issues. They were as follows:

1.

Concerning the work imbalance between MPQAD and status assessment, solu-tions under consideration include:

a.

Destatusing of inspection records for commodities which need to be f

. reworked, replaced or deleted due to design changes. This would avoid duplicate reinspections or rework and inspections on items

'that will not remain as-is in the completed plan.

b.

Decouple area-related commodities from system-related commodities n

and permit system release for Phase 2 work prior to verification of area-based commodities, a

c.

Perform quality verification on turned-over systems at a later date I

but prior to completion of functional testing.

.2.

Concerning the~ initiatives to perform more Q-related work in 1984, the following'are being considered:

a.

Perform pipe hanger completion following the hanger reinspection ef-f

-fort but prior to completion of Phase I within the module or area.

i b.

Similarly' initiate installation of water-tight doors after.reinspec-

. tion of the adjacent area.-

(Note: Both a'and b would require some correction and completion of I

interfacing commodities such as the associated piping and in-

[

terfacing structures.)

c. -Coupletion of electrical panels and terminations following the panel reinspection.. Each panel could be thought of as a uniquely controlled area.-

OC0484-0001A-CN02'

-. ~

r=

o-C s

5 d.

Completion of electrical raceway and supports.

e.

Completion of instrument tubing.

f.

Repair, rework or replace as necessary items relating to dis-position of nonconformance reports.

Solutions being considered to provide better support of the system turn-over logic include:

'1.

Utilization of special procedures, provided for in CCP, in system releases to support near term milestones prior to the completion of Phase 1.

2.

Ultimately move to a total system release approach wherein systems or subsystems may be released for construction completion as soon as the status of the items to be released has been assessed, and quality of past work verified.

Quamme noted that some of the above items are already specifically addressed in the CCP. He further observed that all of the solutions i-dentified conformed to the basic principles of the CCP and that process controls are in place to accomplish these additional work items in ac-

cordance with the provisions of the CCP.

4)1 T.-Valenzano then proceeded to describe the process used to conduct the CCP Phase 1 activities and release of work for Phase 2.

He also described the basic processes being applied to control ongoing construction does not make uninspected Q items inaccessible. He noted that the control processes and procedures currently in place appear adequate to accomplish the propos-ed: activities within the framework of CCP. Only minor adjustments may be desirable to provide more efficient controls.

OC0484-0001A-CN02

x i

o e

4 4,-

_i

,k -1$,

,k

)-

s 6

fi s

3 s

k 5)..Following Valenzano's presentation, J W Cook summarized CP Company's short term program for' conduct of the CCP which requires carrying out all activities under thN.present programs, training and procedures. After

. q Consumers Power has completed the evaluatoins and reached conclusions s.

from the Project Planning Review, selected' initiatives would be reviewed as necessary with !Rd prior to implementa' tion.

a s

s He' reiterated that all' chan'ges to e$isting procedures will be subject to a i

s careful transition,inc_luding management review, updated training and suit-s -

able process controir,. Necessary changes to te recommended will meet the

' basic principlas,of CCP ' and also permit 'rtinning the project with maximum

. effectiveness.

6) During the ensuing discyssion, the following points were noted:

- The Commission's basics objective is to obtain confidence that the completed plant is built to the required quality standards. CCP should N

not be viewed as a " technical specification", in which each clarifica-tion requires revision and approval. TheCCP.becognizesthatimprove-ments would be identified and incorporated as e::perience was obtained.

- In' discussing the large number of nonconforma'ce reports anticipated n

a fromthereverificationeffort,Mr.Varhicknotedthatitshouldnotbe a

\\

]' ' c

~ '

necessary to identify each specific examp'le of a discrepancy if a single document can be used to identify and correct the condition. For ex-ample, if it is determined that a group of,itens are not longer conform-t, 1

N. %

ing because of-de, sign changes, a single document identifying the items s

affected shouldtbe sufficient.

L ll.

i, OC0484-0001A-CN02 gu

A.

z-a J---

l o

f B

f i

i i

l I

i l

ZO ZO Os

-b Q

O o

111 oc

~

>2 I

i 1

l l

I i

I l

1-.......

\\

MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT COMPLETION PLAN i

BACKGROUND I

l i

e NEW SCHEDULE REQ'D -FALL '83 i

e PROJECT STATUS CHANGED:

-CCP PROCEDURES l

-UNIT 1 DECOUPLING l

e PROJECT PLANNING TEAM FORMED I

l i

e DATA BASE EXTENSIVE i

-TO-GO QUANTITIES i

l

-REWORK ASSUMPTIONS l

-UNIT RATES e PROJECT SCHEDULE

-BOTTOMS UP i

l

-lNTEGRATED i

e MAJOR UNCERTAINTIES

-CCP ASSUMPTION VERIFICATION

-FINANCIAL LIMITATIONS l

l 1

= '. '

L CONSTRUCTION COWLETION PROGRAM l

~

BASIC PRINCIPLES:

A. MANAGEMENT REVIEWS ARE SCHEDULED AND HELD OF (1) ACTIVITY l

PLANIW8G FOR VERIFICATION AND STATUS ASSESSMENT AND (2) l RESULTS OF STATUS ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING PRIOR TO NEW WORK ACTIVITY.

i l

l E. A PROCESS IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT NO EXISTING NON CONFORMANCES WILL BE COVERED UP BY MEW WORK ACTIVITIES.

C. PROCEDURE

S TO CONTROL WORK DEFINITION AND RELEASE INCLUDING DEFINITION OF INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INSPECTION HOLD POINTS ARE IN PLACE.

D. INSPECTION AND CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL INVOLVED MUST HAVE RECEIVED ALL REQUIRED TRAMING.

c w - -, - - -,, - -,

,+-----,..,-,--------.-------,--,---m---.-m-.--.m==---------

- - - - - - -. - - + - -. - - -

O * *

(

1 L

SECTION ll l

STATUS ASSESSMENT /

QUALITY VERIFICATION PROGRAM (OVP)

UPDATE i

i

i t

i ACTUAL START OF PHASE 1 i

STATUS ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES l

DECEMBER 13,1983 ARCHITECTURAL S/A MODULE 340 t

i i

i i

l 4

i i

I i

O *,*

T l

INSTALLATION STATUS ASSESSMENT MANHOURS

  • i 1ST FIVE MODULES CIVIL MECH' ELECT INSTR TOTAL j

MODULE 1

102 1080 5480 1800 180 8540 120 4090 5980 4080 710 14,860 340 11,490 4730 2470 990 19,680 410 20 0

0 0

20 1

l 800 750 30 1710 0

2490 1

1 TOTAL 17,430 18,220 10,060 1880 45,590 15,000 EXPENDED THRU 3/9

  • ROUNDED

i 300_

l

)

MODULE 102,120,340, 410,800 INSTALLATION STATUS ASSESSMENT 200 -

MANPOWER CURVE I

t 1

ACTUAL

)

l

____ PLAN

}

\\

/

\\

I

\\

100_

l g

I

\\

I z

\\

l 5

i

~ ~ 's BPCO

/

\\

's i

\\

{

\\ %________________-

i i

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 4

I

.. ~ _ _ _, _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ - _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _.

INSPECTIONS INITIATED s

(BY COMMODITY) i FE STATUS ASSESSMENT COMMODITY Mechanical Instrumentation X

Electrical Instrumentation X

Mechanical Equipment (M-485)

X f

Electrical Equipment (E-62)

X Pipe Supports X

Valves (Welded)

X i

Valves (Mechanical)

Flued Heads Pipe Welds X

Pipe X

Concrete Pipe Cable Terminations X

Electrical Containment X

Penetration Assemblies r

Feed-Thru Adapter Modules Batteries / Racks I

Structural Steel & Framing X

Platform X

Equipment Supports X

l Shield Plates X

Whip Restraints X

i Jet Impingement Barriers X

l Fuel Racks Liner Plate X

Liner Plate Attachments X

Special Doors X

l Block Walls X

l l

Air Locks Concrete X

?

I t

INSPECTIONS INITIATED (CONT.)

(BY COMMODITY)

COMMODITY FE STATUS ASSESSMENT Concrete & Masonry Openings X

Decontaminable Coatings on X

l Concrete Miscellaneous Q Coatings X

Cable Tray X

Conduit X

Conduit Supports X

Wireways & Supports Trenches for Cable Boxes & Supports X

l Cable Tray Supports X

Slots i

i i

THRU 3/9 NCR'S IDENTIFIED 184

,,,c.,

)

i i

TRAINING

)

PHASEI s

)

APPROX.NO.

APPROX.NO.OF OF PEOPLE PROC., DWG. & SPECS i

MECHANICAL 100 80 l

l lNSTRUMENTATION 10 60

?

l ELECTRICAL 90 70 civil 70 70 WELDING 40 40 l

310 TOOL BOX REVIEW SESSIONS FOR THE CRAFTS........... 6 4L___..,..._.___._...__________._._..__..______._______._......__...._____.._.._.______

i

]

BECHTEL SELF-APPRAISAL TEAM (SAT) i

  • CONCEPT INITIATED OCTOBER 1983 i

l

  • PURPOSE:

i TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE TO BECHTEL MANAGEMENT THAT BECHTEL RESPONSIBILITIES ARE BEING PROPERLY CARRIED OUT

)

I l

  • SAT OPERATIONS:

e PROJECT FIELD ENGINEER (PFE) SELECTS / DIRECTS SAT o MONITOR STATUS ASSESSMENT TEAMS PROGRESS I

e PRIMARILY MODULE 340

  • ADDITIONAL AREAS AS DETERMINED BY PFE OR HIGHER AUTHORITY

!L -....--.--.---...-- ----.--.--

i SAT AREAS REVIEWED 4

(AS OF 3/5/84)

1. CIVIL / ARCHITECTURAL (COATINGS) l
2. CIVIL (PIPE WHIP RESTRAINTS) l
3. ELECTRICAL (TERMINATIONS)
4. ELECTRICAL (RACEWAY)
5. INSTRUMENTATION
6. MECHANICAL (HANGERS)
7. MECHANICAL (PIPING)
8. WELDING (PIPING AND HANGERS)

l l

SAT OBSERVATIONS l

FIELD ENGINEERING /MPQAD INTERFACE l

4 FORM COMPLETION 2

l l

PROCEDURAL RE-EMPHASIS / CLARIFICATIONS

\\

15 PROCESS EFFICIENCY / RECORD RETENTION l

3 i

SAT CONCLUSIONS 4

u

1. STATUS ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING SATISFACTORILY i

I

2. SITE MANAGEMENT WILL CONTINUE SAT MONITORING OF STATUS l

l l

ASSESSMENT TEAM ACTIVITIES l

l l

.--,-_--_--,---_..-.._,-.---,,._.--.v,---..-

--- m - -,,. --,. - _.-

i QVP/SA MANHOURS

  • 1ST FIVE MODULES CIVIL MECH.

ELECT.

TOTAL MODULE i

.i l

102 5270 8930 7800 22,000 120 5270 9730 7770 22,770 340 31,170 30,430 7170 68,770 i

410 3550 2120 8200 10,930 I

800 880 2270 3930 7080 i

i TOTAL 46,140 53,480 31,930 131,550 I

EXPENDED THRU 3/9 5300 I,

i'

  • ROUNDED

l l

300_

l l

MODULE 102,120,340, l

410,800 QVP & INSPECTION STATUS ASSESSMENT MANPOWER CURVE i

i 200_

i j

4

\\

/

/

l 100_

/

/

s

/

._.._._.. [ MPQAD

\\

EXCLUDES H.R.P.

l I

m FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

l l

r INSPECTIONS INITIATED (BY COMMODITY)

QVP COMMODITY

~

Mechanical Instrumentation X

Electrical Instrumentation Mechanical Equipment (M-485)

X Electrical Equipment (E-62)

Pipe Supports X

Valves (Welded) y Valves (Mechanical)

X Flued Heads X

Pipe Welds X

Pipe Concrete Pipe X

Cable Terminations Electrical Containment Penetration Assemblies I

Feed-Thru Adapter Modules Batteries / Racks X

Structural Steel & Framing i

X Platfora X

Equipment Supports

~

Shield Plates X

Whip Restraints X

l Jet Ispingement Barriers Fuel Racks l

1.iner Plate Liner Plate Attachments X

Special Doors X

Block Walle Air Incks X

Concrete l

L

j b

i QVP COMPf0DITY t

X Concrete & Masonry Openings X

Decontaminable Coatings on Concrete X

Miscellaneous Q Coatings X

Cable Tray X

Conduit X

i Conduit Supports X

f Wireways & Supports Trenches for Cable r

X Boxes & Supports Cable Tray Supports f

Slots I

l i

l l

l THRU 3/9 NCR'S IDENTIFIED 133 1

1 I

l l

I i

,., _. _,,. _ _..,,,, ~ _ _ _. _ -., _. _.. _ _, _ _ _ _, _ _ _.

l MPQAD i

INSPECTOR CERTIFICATION STATUS CERTIFICATION GOAL (ALL WORK):

1,239 (ESTIMATE AS OF 2/22/84) i i

i i

TOTAL NO. CERTIFICATIONS ACCOMPLISHED:

688 (AS OF 2/22/84)

% GOAL ACCOMPLISHED = 688 x 100 = 55.5%

1 i

1239 l

l QVP ASSESSMENT TEAM i

INITIATED DECEMBER 1983 ESTABLISHED TO ASSESS ADEQUACY OF l

QVP CONTROLS TEAM COMPOSITION

- QUALITY CONTROL VERIFICATION PROGRAM MGMT GROUP INSPECTION EVALUATION

- QUALITY ADVISORS STAFF l

PROJECT ASSURANCE ENGINEERING l

AREAS REVIEWED INSPECTION METHODS AND PROCEDURES l

  • USE AND CONTROL OF FORMS
  • PROGRAM PROCEDURES
  • COMPLIANCE WITH QVP DOCUMENT.

l

  • REPORTS
  • COMMUNICATION AND INTERFACES
  • CONTROL OF ACTION ITEMS l

.:=

1 l

i i

i l

i l

QVP ASSESSMENT TFAM CONCLUSIONS l'

i l

1. QVP PROCESS IS PROCEEDING IN A SATISFACTORY MANNER
2. OVP ASSESSMENT TEAM REVI EWS l

WILL CONTINUE l

I i

- - - - - - - ~ - - -.-

-.--.,u.

aa.

A m--a sa---

m 3

o e

l a.

t

?

e F

I f

I h

I i

l l

l i

t i

1 I

l l

1 I

ZO 8,

==#

CO 1

%^)'

6

~

l

&)

i l

l I

Y 6

i i

l I

l 0

l l

i

, - - - -,. ~, -.

.,-, ~,..- _

_l-l

./

/

. ;~

[*)

.~

l lSSUES_;;

~,

l

1. MPQAD PHASE I WORRLOAD MUCH GREATER THAN COMPLETION TEAM PHASE I SCOPE o

i 1

j

2. LACK OF Q-RELATED WDRK IN 1984

~

a l

3. RELEASE BY MODULE DGES NOT TOTALLY'SUPpdRT' l

SYSTEM TURNOVER LOGIC 1

l 1

SCHEDULE BASES PHASE I QUANTITIES / MANHOURS STATUS ASSESSMENT (BECHTEL SCOPE)

QUANTITIES HOURS i

MECHANICAL j

LARGE PIPE 26,000 L.F.

6,500

)

LARGE PIPE HANGERS 3,500 EA.

23,000 l

SMALL PIPE 39,800 L.F.

9,500 l

SMALL PIPE HANGERS 6,200 EA.

27,000 l

MISC 4,000 S/T 70,000 ELECTRICAL l

TERMINATIONS 44,200 EA.

12,200 EQUIPMENT 300 EA.

3,800

~

S/T 16,000 INSTRUMENTATION TUBING 35,200 L.F.

7,000 3

RACEWAY SUPP0RTS 6,700 EA.

40,000 11,000 COMMODITY LISTS DEVELOPMENT 51,000 AREA STRUCTURAL STEEL 1,3140 TONS 20,100 460 TONS 18,300 PLATFORMS

)

WHIP RESTRAINTS & JET BARRIERS 320 EA.

6,500 I

BLOCKWALLS 290 EA.

6,900 27,400 l

MISC.

79,200 l

TOIAL 223,200

]

SCHEDULE BASES i

PHASE I QUANTITIES /MAblHOURS i

TOTAL TOTAL

. HOURS 1R'S l

STATUS ASSESSMENT (MPQAD SCOPE) 4,500 44,000 ELECTRICAL j

2,800~

80,6U0 MECHANICAL l

2,500 110,600 CIVIL l

1,500 14,500 HANGERS j

SUBT0TAL 8,500 249,700 i!

QUALITY VERIFICATION PROGRAM (MPQAD SCOPE) 30,750 211,500 ELECTRICAL 64,000 147,000 MECHANICAL 26,500 84,300 CIVIL SUBT0TAL 128,250 442,800 f

HANGER REINSPECTION PROGRAM (MPQAD SCOPE) l 5,800 110,600 HANGERS I

GRAND TOTAL 142,550 803,100

i f

)

i l

I l

f l

Z O._

E D

Z J

O 8

O P

L1J Z

$o n.

i i

l l

l l

e-w

,,,a--<--

, e e

m,-~------

---,-e--

-e,----,,------~~---e---

l i

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS I

i

1. MPQAD PHASE I WORKLOAD MUCH GREATER THAN COMPLETION j

TEAM SCOPE i

e DESTATUS INSPECTION RECORDS DUE TO DESIGN CHANGES i

TO AVOID DUPLICATE REINSPECTIONS l

e DECOUPLE AREA COMMODITIES AND VERIFY INDEPENDENTLY FROM PHASE 11 SYSTEM RELEASE TO LEVELIZE WORK LOAD

\\

\\

  • QVP ON TURNED-OVER SYSTEMS DONE PRIOR TO l

FUNCTIONAL TESTING I

1 POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)

2. LACK OF Q-RELATED WORK IN 1984 i

O PIPE HANGER COMPLETION FOLLOWING THE HANGER l

REINSPECTION EFFORT l

l e INSTALLATION OF WATER TIGHT DOORS i

e COMPLETION OF ELECTRICAL PANELS AND TERMINATIONS e COMPLETION OF ELECTRICAL RACEWAY AND SUPPORTS i

e COMPLETION OF INSTRUMENT TUBING l

l e REPAIR / REWORK / REPLACE ITEMS RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF NCR'S t

i l.-..-.-- - --.-

l 1

i l

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) 1 l

l

3. RELEASE BY MODULE DOES NOT GUPPORT SYSTEM TURNOVER LOGIC i

e UTILIZE SPECIAL PROCEDURES OF CCP FOR SYSTEM RELEASES i

TO SUPPORT NEAR-TERM MILESTONES I

e TOTAL SYSTEM APPROACH l

L

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS

SUMMARY

l e SOME ITEMS ARE ALREADY ADDRESSED IN THE CCP l

l

  • SOLUTIONS IDENTIFIED CONFORM TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION PROGRAM (CCP) l i

e PROCESS CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE TO ACCOMPLISH THESE ADDITIONAL WORK ITEMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CCP I

)

i

i l

l i

I I

i 1

-.I g

z a

i O

o o

i l

O e

W 8

u) o i

0.

l l

l l

l l

1 I

I

__.-_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ~. _ - - _ -.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _. _... _ _ _,.. - _ _.

i i

PROCESS CONTROLS

\\

i PHASE 1 PROCESS i

'l e SCOPE e STATUS l

i ePRODUCT t

l l

PHASE I INTEHFACE WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES e IN ACCESSABILITY REVIEW e NON CONFORMANCE INSPECTION I

l

{

i i

i

i CCP PHASE I PROCESS IDENTIFI- )I j

CATIOM l

e i

COtet0006TY UST & DWG'S j

OPEN m'S oOcu-AAEIffATION UNINSPECTED CLOSED STATUS COtstAODITIES l

LATIO98 SA NCR'S &

CPQA NCR'S TO GO 8

COMPLETED WORK WORK CWP

'8 REVISED C00sSTR NCR'S MCTION I

STATUS I

TO GO I PUBICHLIST m

WORK SSESStBEN i

l ST s

cPoc AREA COORD800A E-I '

OPEN IR'S l

m CLOSED 1R'S l

I l

MODULE \\

i

)

l l

l RELEASE B/CP

4 PHASE I INTERFACE WITH CONSTRUCTIRN ACTIVITIES WORK PROCESS CONTROL I

PACKAGE SECHTEL COSO - CWR'S SECHTEL 3.0.P. - CWP'S BECHTEL 3.0.P. S/C - CWP'S ZACK S/C - TRAVELER / WORK RELEASE 1 r 8 & W S/C - FCP'S / WORK RELEASE

~

CONSTR.

REVEW l

FOR WORK j

ABEJTY ABS

= A C C E S S A. E.IT Y I

OF O-tTEMS

' Q* AND "O" INTERFACE NON *Q*& OTHER WORK NOT AFFECTED SY CCP j

t PROC S

WN3AD RE D

RELEASE l

REVEW WORK i

g f-l lNSPECTION -.-

g REQUIRED g

1 INSPECT j

PQCIR-As REQUIRED I

i i

NON CONFORMING l

CONDITION i

}

OC l

INSPECTION DISPOSITIONS' TO CLOSE

. o,-

i i

1 f

CONCLUSIONS THE CONTROL PROCESS AND PROCEDURES AS THEY CURRENTLY EXIST WITH MINOR ADJUSTMENTS ARE ADEQUATE TO ACCOMPLISH THE I

i PROPOSED ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF CCP i

l i

l

g e,

.a t..

j l

r e

l i

f 1

1 t

P

{

I M

l i

Z Z

O O

o f

b O

O z

uu 8

e I

l

. -l

i CONCLUSIONS 1

I SHORT TERM PROGRAM :

4 I

e CARRY OUT ALL ACTIVITIES UNDER PRESENT PROGRAMS, TRAINING & PROCEDURES l

1 e DEVELOP BASIS OF NRC,3RD PARTY CONFIDENCE BY PROJECT PERFORMANCE l

i e COMPLETE EVALUATION & DEVELOP CONCLUSIONS FROM PROJECT PLANNING REVIEW e CONTINUE TO REVIEW INITIATIVES INDIVIDUALLY IN DETAll WITH NRC 4

I l

4 4

i CONCLUSIONS ALL CHANGES TO EXISTING PROCEDURES WILL BE SUBJECT TO:

CAREFUL TRANSITION:

e MANAGEMENT REVIEW e PROCEDURE REVISION e TRAINING l

e PROCESS CONTROLS I

CHANGES WILL BE RECOMMENDED AS NECESSARY-TWO CRITERIA:

e MEET CCP BASIC PRINCIPLES e RUN PROJECT WITH MAXIMUM EFFECTIVENESS I

.v-

.v i

1 4

l CONCLUSIONS i

i SHORT TERM MILESTONES:

j e APRIL 10,1984 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING:

I SCHEDULE & COST CONCLUSIONS i

e COST DETAILS MID-JUNE 1984:

o CASE LOAD FORECAST PANEL REVIEW I

i i

I i

i

-~-

_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20084P509&oldid=4358631"