ML20134L270

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 0 to Design Control Process
ML20134L270
Person / Time
Site: Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date: 01/03/1997
From: Bibby J, Haseltine J
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20134L236 List:
References
PROC-970103, NUDOCS 9702180392
Download: ML20134L270 (5)
v • d • e


Text

- . . _ _ _ -. . . -- _

E 1

Connecticut Yankee Decommissioning

Design Control Process GRPI l l

1 Revision 0 )

l

// W97 Prepared oy: Date:

l V Jeffrey F. Bibby l

Approved by: Date: #[3/I) l y John D. Hase'Itine 9702180392 970206 I PDR ADOCK 05000213 P PDR

i a

) Design Control Process GRPI l

i

, M

Modify the Design Control process for Connecticut Yankee to fulfill the commitments .

provided in the December 4,1996 Enforcement Conference and provide appropriate  !

controls for the " Nuclear Island" and the remainder of the plant activities for decommissioning. j Roles:  !

J. Bibby Responsible for overall process development, coordination i of reviews and process implementation.  !

l S. Sarver Responsible for providing needed interface with the new  ;

FSAR change process. .

S. Milioti Responsible for providing needed interface with the new Safety Evaluation process.

I F. Perdomo Responsible for providing needed interface with the new Licensing Commitment management process.

D. Sabean Responsible for providing definition of systems needed for l decommissioning to support defining applicability of Design i Controls.

S. Weyland Responsible for providing definition of " nuclear island" to support maintenance of applicability definition.

Group ActivityManagers Responsible for review and comment.

QA Reviewer (TBD) Responsible for QA review and comment.

J. D. Haseltine Responsible for manual / procedure approval.

NTD Representative (TBD) Responsible for developing a training program and qualification process.

l l

4

?

r

. 2

)

! f.GSSEli

, The plant modi 6 cation process will consist of 2 parts. Systems, structures and components

! (SSC's) that are credited at any time to support spent fuel storage operations (e.g; the ,

I

" nuclear island") will be processed in accordance with an updated version of the current

Design Control Manual. A revision is currently in progress that will incorporate most of L the lessons learned associated with the Virgilio Inspection. A subsequent revision is  ;

i required to address all commitments associated with the December 4,1996 Enforcement i j Conference and to reflect the 2 part process. Changes to these SSC's will be defmed by 3 DCR's, MMOD's or MSEE's.

i The second part will be based on YAEC's " Decommissioning Work Package" process (AP-0103). As with this process, certain Decommissioning activities (e.g; removal of the 4

reactor vessel) may be defined by a DCR dependent on the complexity of the activity. l 1

l Starting with the current 5 unit DCM, a CY umque revision will be generated and a new j Decommissioning Work Package procedure will be developed based on the following

! activities:

i-

!

  • Coordinate with the Design Control Working Group to fmalize the in-progress i " change 1 to revision 3" of the DCM. This change will incorporate the Millstone based

! (Bob Cox) "PI-10" review, many of the lessons learned from the Virgilio Inspection, j and user feedback from implementation of revision 3.

( ,  !

!

  • Coordinate with Tom Miller (YAEC) to gain a full understanding of Yankee Rowe's l process. Differentiate as appropriate between the controls for " nuclear" changes

! versus " commercial" changes. Utilize input from the definition of systems needed for i decommissioning and the plans for the evolution of the " nuclear island" to support this j differentiation.

l i

  • Gain an understanding of the Design Control process used by other plants in some stage of decommissioning (e.g; Trojan), as well as the best practices from operatmg i plants (e.g; Entergy, NYPA and input from INPO and EPRI PSE) to ensure best  !

i practices are incorporated.

1 j' * . Ensure all commitments made relative to the composite of the 1996 Inspections are

- fulfilled. (Formal commitments will be established).

4 j

  • Coordinate with other group related efforts to update processes such as 50.59  !

Reviews (Steve Millioti), FSAR Changes (Steve Sarver), maintenance of Licensing

l Commitments (Fred Perdomo), Corrective Actions (Jim Foley), MEPL Determinations 4 (Pete Clark), and Work Identification and Authorization (formerly controlled by the DCM Chapter 2 EWR process).

{

i l

m. ..,
p. .

-g_... a .y. * - , he

s b

f h

3 i

i

i
  • Generation of a CY unique process will require developing CY unique EDI's.

Coordinate with Seabrook and Millstone to transition from the 5 unit EDI manual.  ;

! Incorporate other Instructions determined to be appropriate later to facilitate j unplementation.

I

+ e Generation of a CY unique process will also require updates to various NGP's.

Develop and submit PAR's as appropriate once the DCM is approved.

J e Establish training requirements and coordinate with NTD to train members of the Decommissioning staff.  :

i The revised, CY unique Design Control process is planned to be complete by 7/1/97 in  !

accordance with the attached schedule. ,

4 i

Internersonal:

i The following interpersonal relationship guidelines will be used to maximize efficiency of the effort and avoid duplication ofefforts:

. A liaison has been developed with Yankee (Tom Miller) to ensure best practices are j incorporated from Rowe's decommissioning experiences. Similarly, contacts should be j made with other permanently shutdown plants such as Trojan. ,

  • Contact will be maintained with Millstone and Seabrook Design Process Liaisons to ensure enhancements made to their processes are reviewed for applicability.

e Contact will be maintained with other plants in the industry through INPO to ensure

? best practices are incorporated as applicable.

  • Decommissioning of nuclear power plants is relatively new with only limited industry l

'. experience. " Thinking outside the box", particularly with regard to non-nuclear, d commercial changes will be encouraged.

  • Feedback from the group leads will be maintained to ensure that the Design Control Process fulfills all needs. Periodic meetings will be attended as necessary.

J a

4 i

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

~

ee97 1**S ID Task Name Duration NovlDec Jan l Feb l Mar l Apr l May l Jun l Jul l Aug l Sep l Oct l Nov l Dec Jan l Feb l Mar ! Apr l May l Jun l Jul l Aug l Sep 1 Coordusate with the DCWG to 60d DCM Revision 2 CY PORC Approval 7d C Approval 3 Staff Trained to Rev 3/ Chang 7d Rev 3/ Change 1 Training / implementation 4 Coordinate with YAEC for Bes W E YAEC Input 5 Definition of DCM Related C/ 30d ,

5 Closure of C/A Cmi Li as 7d CIA Commitment Completions 7 Ds.4,+a of Decommissio God Dwp Procedure :L. 4c- :

8 Revision of CY/MP DCM 60d DCM Revision Development l' E 9 50.59 Process Cc.@vea 30d 59.59 Prxedure (Steve Niilloti) 10 FSAR Change Process Devel 30d -

FSAR Cwnge Procedure (Steve Sarver) l 11 MEPL Detemunation Process 30d j '. -MEPL P ocedure (Pete Clark) 12 Work identificatxm and Autho 30d EWR Substitute Proceduie l

13 NGP PAR's submitted for Del 7d l'%:eletion PAR's 14 Review and Comment of Prop 30d eview IWlod 15 Disposition of Comments 7d omment Disposition '

16 QA and JDH Approval 1d 1JMt Approval 17 PORC Approvalof Procedure 7d popC Approval 18 Training Program Developme 15d Training l'

19 DCM Effort Complete 1d f[New Process In-Place Upgrade of EDrs 60d 20 l' pY Unique EDrs Development 21 EDI Approvals 7d EDI Approvals l

Task Summary Roned Up Progress N Project:

Progress - RoNed Up Task 7/gg .

Date: Fri 12/27/96 Milestone $ Rolled Up Milestone Q hf/M Page1

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ . _ _ _ . -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20134L270&oldid=2872236"