Text

Draft Rept on Revised Construction Inspection Program
	ML20137M675
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/01/1996
From:	Castleman P, John Nakoski; NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20137M638	List: ML20137M631; ML20137M675;
References
	PROC-961001, NUDOCS 9704080151
	Download: ML20137M675 (54)
	v • d • e

- - - - - - - _

p

/gR req <4>

g y

co**

DRAFT REPORT ON THE REVISED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM OCTOBER 1996 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION DIVISION OF INSPECTION AND SUPPORT PROGRAMS INSPECTION PROGRAM BRANCH I

i 8684 8845' M82 2 PDR

9-f O&

g y '

4W@

DRAFT REPORT ON THE REVISED CON'STRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM

, OCTOBER 1996 OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION 1 DIVISION OF INSIECTION AND SUPPORT PROGRAMS INSPECTION PROGRAM BRANCH

~

DRAFT REPORT ON THE REVISED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM Patrick I. Castleman -

e John A.'Nakoski Inspection Program Branch Division of Inspection and Support Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation US Nuclear Regulatory Connission s

October 1996

8 DRAFT REPORT ON THE REVISED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM a

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

I. Executive Summary ................................................... 1 II. Background .......................................................... 2 A. History ......................................................... 2

8. Lessons Learned ................................................. 4 1

C. Expected Licensing and Construction Environment ................ 10 4

III. C I P Impl eme nt a t i on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A. Preoperation Inspection Programs ............................... 15

, B. CIP Description ................................................ 17

C. Inspection Findings and Inspection Followup .................... 19

! D. NRC Organization ............................................... 28 E. Actions Associated with Future CIP Reactivation ................ 30 )

F. Out s t andi ng Pol i cy I s sues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 '

IV. Acronyms ........................................................... 37 I

V. References ......................................................... 38 ATTACHMENTS: Program Documentation

1. Draft Inspection Manual Chapter 2512

2. Tables of Inspection Procedures Assigned to Future Preoperation Phase Inspection Manual Chapters

3. Inspection Procedure Form and Content Guidance !

Sample Inspection Procedures l

4. CIP Information Management System (CIPIMS) Description !

l l

DRAFT .

CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR EVOLUTIONARY AND ADVANCED REACTORS I. EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

In 1991, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) started a revision to the Construction Inspection Program (CIP) governed by Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 25I2, " Light Water Reactor Inspection Program - Construction Phase." The rurposes of this project were to address programmatic weaknesses in the NRC construction inspections that had been identified during the licensing of several plants, and to develop an inspection program to meet the needs of evolutionary and advanced reactors. Program development continued into the mid-1990's, when, because of NRC staff resource constraints and a lack of nuclear power plant construction, the project was suspended upon completion of the program's generic features. The program described in this draft report presents a framework from which the CIP can be reactivated to support NRC inspections at a future nuclear power plant. At that time, many of the issues and assumptions described in this report will have been clarified, which will allow the CIP to be finalized. The revised CIP can be applied to plants licensed under either 10 CFR Part 50 or 52.

The CIP described in this document assumes that the program will be reactivated to support the first new construction project, and that the experience gained from the implementation of the CIP at this plant will be ,

incorporated into further refinements to the program. This report describes the process and assumptions used in developing the new program, and forwards a draft revision to IMC 2512. New features of this inspection program include a continuous NRC onsite inspection presence that matches inspector expertise to ;

inspection needs, an inspection procedure format that more clearly defira he attributes (and associated acceptance criteria) that must be inspected, M dedicated CIP Information Management System (CIPIMS) that is to be used u ,

implement the CIP in concert with the inspection manual. Many of the featu~.s )

described in the report, such as Sign-As-You-Go (SAYG0) and construction project sequencing, are the result of interactions between the NRC and the nuclear power industry, including the Nuclear Energy Institute. '

Attachment 1 to this report is the draft revision to IMC 2512; attachment 2 contains tables of preoperation phase inspection procedures; attachment 3 i provides inspection procedure format and content guidance; and attachment 4 I provides a description of the CIPIMS. I l

1

DRAFT I

II. BACKGROUND A. HISTORY OF THE REVISED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM ,

1 In 1991, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) began to revise l the Construction Inspection Program (CIP) to incorporate lessons learned !

from previous construction experience and to accommodate requirements ' i for future reactors that would be licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. The l initial objectives for revising the CIP were established in references l 12 and 13, and the staff's overall plan of action to develop the CIP were transmitted to the Commission in SECYs92-436 and 92-134 -

(references 2 and 3, respectively). The revised CIP that resulted from this effort provides enhanced guidance and capabilities for the gathering, recording, and reporting of construction inspection l information. The program improvements.have centered on the use of a systems-based inspection planning methodology, computerization of the ;

inspection program, and a continuous onsite inspection presence l throughout plant construction. I At the start of program development, a working group was estaoikhed to I collate the construction inspection experience from throughout the NRC. '

This grcup pursued several avenues of inquiry, and the concepts that best suited the needs of the NRC were incorporated into the CIP revision. The more significant issues are discussed in various places within this report, and in the SECY papers pertaining to this topic (see ,

references). The working group completed its activities in late 1992. l Two parallel, interdependent paths were taken in revising the CIP. One path, which revised the program's policies and structure, resulted in the draft documentation contained in this report. The other path was the developmen't of a personal computer-based system that would assist future NRC staff in implementing the CIP. l Data Base Management System Development -

l As discussed in SECY 92-134, a data base development program was l embarked upon to provide the capability to record inspection information -

l in a retrievable and repeatable format. A contract was established with j the US Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL). Under I this contract (JCN L-2502), PNL was to develop a series of relational .

data base management systems that would be integral to the revised CIP.

The prototype system was developed for application by the NRC resident 1 inspector office at the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant construction site, and j could have been adapted to construction inspections at other sites at which construction might have resumed. The eventual objective of the l JCN L-2502 project was to develop a more capable management system based on the lessons learned from developing the Bellefonte Data Base Management System (DBMS). This final system was intended for deployment at future nuclear power plant construction sites.

2 I

DRAFT Data from the 268 Bellefonte construction inspection reports, which dated from the mid-1970's, was manually transcribed and categorized into a format that was compatible with entry into a data base. Late in the development of the Bellefonte DBMS, an electronic text search and retrieval capability, using ZYIndex software, was incorporated. In support of this, all of the Bellefonte inspection reports were scanned into electronic format. However, in late 1994, as part of a restructuring of its nuclear power program, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) cancelled the Bellefonte project. Also, because there i were no other deferred plants at which construction was resumed, the prototype DBMS was never deployed, and was therefore never field tested to see how well it assisted in the recording and display of inspection information during a construction project.

The main lessons learned from the Bellefonte DBMS were that, for such a !

system to be useful, it would need to be user-friendly (fairly simple to '

operate and easy to, understand), and the inspection data would need to- i be collected and recorded in a structure that was compatible with a i DBMS. Based on in-office testing, the staff found that, for l computerizing the records of a previously existing body of construction !

inspect. ion reports, the. text search and retrieval capability was more ,

useful than a data base in reconstructing the status of a construction l inspection program. This characteristic was primarily due to the limited functionality of the DBMS, which resulted from the attempt to

" force-fit" data that was never intended to go into a data base.

Experience at the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant I

In 1994, during the final phases of construction inspection at Watts Bar, all the Watts Bar inspection reports were scanned into electronic format so that they could be searched with ZYIndex software. The 1 objective of doing this was to allow NRC staff to assess the i completeness of the construction inspections, which had been ongoing <

since the 1970's, at that site in preparation for the issuance of its l operating license. Although this system did not precisely mimic the direction taken in the development of the data base system, the .

. construction inspection program reconstitution effort at Watts Bar l proved the viability of using computerized methods to store and retrieve l inspection information, and to use that information to develop

~

conclusions on the safety of a plant's construction and conformance to construction permit conditions in support of plant licensing.

Future Reactors At the same time the revised CIP was being developed, NRR was developing policy for implementing 10 CFR Part 52. As part of this effort, NRR ,

reviewed the designs for two evolutionary nuclear power plants, the !

General Electric (GE) Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) and the i Combustion Engineering (CE) System 80+. The staff intended to revise !

l 3 l l

l

DRAFT the Bellefonte DBMS into a generic system that could conform to both the 10-CFR Parts 50 and 52 licensing processes. This generic system, called the CIP Information Managemont System (CIPIMS), is described in attachment 4 to this report. The CIPIMS and revised inspection program documentation were modeled on the GE ABWR, since this design was the farthest along in the 10 CFR Part 52 licensing process when CIPIMS development began. ,

For the future, NRR staff had intended to update the CIP and CIPIMS to design-specific versions as design certification was completed for different evolutionary and advanced nuclear power plant designs. These -

design-specific systems would then be modified into plant-specific varsions as applications for construction permits or combined licenses were submitted by applicants and reviewed by the staff. Although the ABWR was used as the model on which to base the program's structure, very little effort would be required to adapt the program to a different design.

Suspension of CIP Development In late 1994, because of a reevaluation of NRC priorities, and the lack of a final design certification for any plant, NRR decided to suspend the project to revise the CIP upon completion of the generic CIPIMS.

The program was to be put in a condition from which development could be resumed at some time in the future upon receipt of a license ,

application. This report is intended to achieve this objective. I B. LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS NRC CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION EXPERIENCES, OBSERVATIONS FROM OTHER PROGRAMS AND ATTRIBUTES OF THE REVISED CIP A variety of programs, activities, and experiences were researched in developing the revised CIP. Among these were the most recent NRC construction inspection programs that were implemented at US sites, including Seabrook, Comanche Peak, South Texas, Watts Bar, and Bellefonte. Also reviewed were nuclear power plant construction and inspection practices overseas and the use of modular construction .

techniques in the US shipbuilding industry.

The lessons learned and the associated attributes of the new CIP that ,

are discussed in this section represent an amalgamation of the insights gained during the above reviews. The purposes of this section are to summarize experience that has been used in developing the CIP and to provide a list of issues that should be considered by the NRC staff when reactivating the CIP. Individual insights are not discussed in detail, nor are they mapped to their sources.

4

DRAFT t s 4

Inspection Program Management a o For future construction projects, the objectives of the inspection program should be derived from the conclusions that will be needed

, to support the NRC licensing decisions that will be made when construction is complete. This approach will enhance the likelihood

~

that enough inspection data will exist to assess the adequacy of j' plant construction and readiness to commence operations. These objectives should be considered in establishing the inspection methodologies to be employed (e.g., inspection sample selection, inspection type, etc.) and the format and content of inspection documentation, o In the past, construction inspections were often scheduled on the basis of inspector availability. Inspections were therefore

! performed on activities that happened to be in progress at the time j of the inspection, resulting in a less-than-optimum sample

! selection. Because the revised CIP plans for a continuous onsite presence of inspectors, future construction inspections should be scheduled on the basis of construction progress. All aspects of the construction inspection program, including inspection planning, scheduling, preparations, and implementation, should be conducted in a way that will ensure all necessary attributes are properly inspected.

o The proper mix of skills and experience among inspectors, particularly during the NT0L phase at a plant, is necessary to ensure effective implementation of the inspection program, o For future plants, the CIP must be able to support NRC action on a licensee's certification of readiness to load fuel, or that all ITAACs have been completed satisfactorily. The inspection staff i

should be fully aware, in advance, of all issues the licensee will address in its certification.

o To ensure expeditious closure of NRC activities at the end of

. construction, NRR and regional management must work together to ensure that the status of all inspection and licensing issues are tracked and raised to the appropriate level of management.

' ~

o Inspection results must be assessed to verify that inspection requirements are met, and that they support the objectives of individual inspection procedures and of the construction inspection program.

o In some past cases, the CIP did not consistently guide NRC i

inspectors and managers toward effectively integrating inspection findings. These failures to integrate findings generally resulted from both programmatic and implementation weaknesses.

4 5

DRAFT To address this problem, the revised CIP incorporates the concept of significant findings, and the ability to group several findings to support one conclusion (like an ITAAC or a SAYG0 point), in the CIP Information Management System (CIPIMS). This formalized structure for integrating findings will assist NRC managers in developing an accurate characterization of the adequacy of plant construction.

o A plan for the transition from the construction phase to the operations phase should be made well in advance of the completion of plant construction. This transition plan, which can be viewed as an exit strategy from the CIP, should be based on projected inspection -

workload, and must account for necessary turnover of issues.

o It is necessary to ensure that each phase of the preoperational inspection program is properly completed. To the maximum extent possible, all issues (such as licensee test exceptions or construction deficiencies) must be closed out before the programs are officially considered complete. Items that are carried over into the operating phase must be extensively documented, and, in particular< their closure requirements must be identified, o The reduction of the number of resident inspectors assigned to a plant should be delayed until after the completion of construction and preoperational testing. This delay will limit the distractions on the operations resident inspectors by providing construction inspectors who can close out remaining open items and respond to any construction-related issues that emerge. This practice would also enhance the quality of the turnover of inspection responsibility from the construction phase to the operations phase. Resident inspection staffing should remain enhanced until acceptable operational performance has been demonstrated.

o There have been several cases in which allegations were filed very late in plant construction, and the NRC was not always ready to respond to the late filed allegations. NRC management should ensure that the agency's program for addressing allegations will allow the timely evaluation of the safety impacts, technical merit, and the -

impact on a plant's readiness to operate, of any contentions that surface late in the construction process. The improved inspection documentation required by the revised CIP will assist NRC management .

to appropriately and expeditiously review and evaluate any allegations before the authorization to operate is scheduled to be issued.

6

DRAFT Inspection Program Structure and Implementation The program must be structured to guide inspectors to inspect needed items, and to provide a coherent and simple method for them to record necessary information.

o Onsite inspections should begin during site preparation before the COL or CP is issued. A continuous onsite inspection staff must be established and maintained throughout construction. To ensure that' the wide variety'of construction activities are covered by appropriately qualified inspectors, and because of the phased nature of many of those activities, the mix of expertise among the resident inspection staff should be rotated.

o Inspection requirements should be made as objective as possible, lending themselves to clear determinations that critical attributes either have or have not been met. Establishing discrete, objective inspection requirements would limit the need for subjective interpretations of acceptability, and major inspection program conclusions can be based on a sizable body of accumulated objective information.

o Objective inspection requirements should be established, to the maximum possible extent, for systems, structures, and components, as well as for plant programs. Each inspection procedure should clearly state how much inspection should be performed in order to consider the procedure complete.

o Constructing a plant in a short period of time means that activities will happen rapidly and in parallel with each other, which will place significant demands on inspection resources. Planning and scheduling therefore need to be closely coordinated with plant construction plans.

Inspection Documentation At the end of the construction process, it will be imperative that the NRC possesses a fully documented body of inspection data to support the findings that need to be made to allow plant operation.

o In some past construction projects, inspection reports did not fully document all areas that had been evaluated during plant construction. The resulting incomplete inspection documentation resulted in a lack of auditable trails that could be used to respond to questions raised during the process leading up to issuance of an operating license. Also, inspection reports did not always clearly identify the items that had been inspected in the plant.

7 t

i i

DRAFT The revised CIP requires that individual samples (such as identification numbers for welds, pipe supports, and cable terminations) be recorded in the CIPIMS. In addition, each construction inspection in the future should be considered satisfactorily complete only after supervisory or management i personnel determine that the inspection is fully documented. ,

2 o In the past, NRC inspection reports generally focused on the deficiencies identified during the inspections, without providing

, much detail on positive inspection findings. Such unbalanced -

inspection reporting resulted, in some cases, in the NRC staff

having to perform extensive reviews during the final stages of plant i licensing to provide additional information to support licensing i decisions, In some cases, the staff reperformed inspections that had already been done but had not been properly recorded. To reduce j the necessity for performing such followup reviews, future

. construction inspections should document both satisfactory and unsatisfactory findings. i Quality Processes i

o Because NRC inspections are done on a sampling basis, the CIP must guide inspections toward asscssing the effectiveness of the licensee's quality programs. To the extent possible, all construction inspections should assess QA/QC effectiveness, and the results must be thoroughly documented and integrated. Ideally, the breadth and depth of the NRC's verification that a plant's QA/QC is effective will be such that any demonstrated or alleged lapses in quality can be shown' to be isolated in nature, as opposed to being generic. ,

o The assessment process must begin with inspections of the design engineering process, including engineering quality assurance, to ensure that the licensee can accurately translate high level design requirements into detailed engineering and fabrication drawings. -

o The licensee's management of quality control records is an integral part of the quality process. In order to verify the overall adequacy ,

of licensee QA records management process, the CIP must inspect all aspects of QA/QC records, from creation through storage.

8

l DRAFT o The identification of construction problems, and the timeliness and extent to which they are corrected, are effective measures of licensee management's control over onsite activities. NRC experience shows that, if the licensee deals thoroughly with corrective action, including the identification and correction of root causes, there is a good chance that the overall quality of the construction is good. If these areas are weak, it is likely that there are lapses in quality; such a case would be evident if repetitive problems occur.

Future Construction Techniques Throughout the development of the revised CIP, it was assumed that future plants will be built with extensive use of modular construction techniques in order to meet the rapid construction goals that have been established by the nuclear industry.

o Because of the expected rapid pace of future nuclear power plant construction, the NRC will need to exert more effort than in the past to ensure that construction inspection does not become a critical path activity. A scheduling program has been included in the CIPIMS to assist in inspection planning.

o To assist in more effective inspection scheduling, the licensee's construction plan should be incorporated, if possible, into the construction inspection schedule. This schedule should be updated as the construction plan is modified.

o Technical reviews and design engineering inspections should begin in conjunction with application review, since initial design engineering will be done during this phase.

o Depending on the extent of modular construction employed, the inspection staff should consider the locations at which inspections need to be performed. In general, however, critical attributes should be inspected onsite to the maximum feasible extent.

o Scheduling modular construction inspections may be difficult, since the fabrication of modules and major plant components could begin many months before the COL is issued and the first structural concrete is poured.

o The development of new engineering design technologies will need to be accounted for as the inspection procedures for the revised 2511 and 2512 inspection programs are developed. For example, it is likely that computer aided engineering (CAE) will be used to perform detailed plant design. The NRC currently has no guidance for inspecting CAE.

9

4 DRAFT o A licensee's plans to transport and install modules in a plant need j to be assessed to identify potential modes of degradation. Modules l will require inspection to verify that they have not degraded during transit or installation. Examples include: verifying that a licensee applies enough additional stiffening to a module's structure to allow it to be lifted, and; ensuring that modules are -

able to be lifted from the top, as well as being supported from l beneath.

l o Depending on the extent and location of automated welding, there may be opportunities to economize NRC inspection resources if repeatable, high quality processes are verified to be in use.

C. EXPECTED LICENSING AND CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT The purpose of this section is to outline aspects of the expected licensing and construction environment that will impact the structure and implementation of the CIP.

The assumptions used in this section were derived from a variety of sources that were reviewed throughout CIP development, including the projected use of advanced / modular construction techniques and resulting construction inspection requirements for evolutionary LWRs. When the CIP is reactivated, the staff should review the actual licensing and construction environment, identify conditions that differ from those discussed here, and modify the CIP as nacessary.

Licensing Future US nuclear power plants may be licensed under either 10 CFR Parts 50 or 52, as discussed in references 1, 2, 3 and 5. The CIP, including IMC 2512 and the CIPIMS, has been structured to accommodate either -

licenting method. Because 10 CFR Part 52 includes ITAACs, it is the more limiting process in terms of constraints on the CIP. The CIP has therefore been modeled around 10 CFR Part 52. In terms of the CIP, the only substantial programmatic difference between the two licensing methods is that, for plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 50, matters pertaining to ITAACs can be truncated from the CIP without any adverse impact on the remainder of the inspection program.

10 s

._. _ . . _ . _ . .--_.-..-m . _ m - ..m.- --__._..--_--....-._m. .m. .. .._.-_.m.m.. .u . . - - _ - - - - _ < m-_

. , a 1

POSTULATED COMPOSITE CONTRUCTION AND LICENSING SCHEDULE

^C QUARTER i [8 F7 f6 F5 F4 F3 F2 F1 it R D 14 15 5 17 p p Ho 11 1 H2 H3 H4 11 5 h6- 11 7 11 8 11 9 RO R1 R2 ~ " R4 I a 2 MLSTN00001 O Application for Combine t.icense Submi: led MLSTN00002 O Begin Site Preparation MLSTN00003 O Start Excavation j MLSTN00004 O Begin RPV Fabrication e

MLSTN00005 O Start Offsite Fabncation of Systems / Modules

' ' ' ' ~ ' ~ " ~ ~ " " ' ' " " " " ~ " " ' " " " ' " " " ' ' " " ' " " " ' " " ' " ' " ' " " ~

MLSTN00006 'U'St's TIirbine"BI5E5Eg'C'onstSc5en' '

MLSTN00007 issue Combined License i MLSTN00008 Inspect Bedrock -

i MLSTN00009 Start Basemat/First Concrete l MLSTN00010 O start Onsite ElectricalWork MLSTN00012 O Start Onsite Mechanical Work ,

MLSTN00013 O Complete Turbine.Gewator Pedestal

}

MLSTN00014 Olnstall RPV MLSTN00015 O lssue Notice ofIntent to Operate !

MLSTN00017 O Complete ITAAC Verification . Licensee MLSTN00018 O Commission tssues ITAAC Completon Finding l MLSTN00019 O FiA Loading I MLSTN00020 O Startup Testing Begins i MLSTN00021 O Facility Turnover to Operations ;

MLSTN00022 O Start of Commercial Operation ASSUMPTIONS ACROftYMS i a 10 months of site preparation are needed before the first RPV.Reacto Pressure Vessel I concrete pour. RCCV . Reinforced Concrete Centainment Vesset ,

b The first concrete pour for the basemat starts immediately ITAAC Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria aAer the combined bcense is issued c Fuelload occurs 48 months aAer the I;rst concrete pour.

d Commercial operation starts 54 months aAer the first concrete pour. ,

e Startup testing begins immediately aAer the NRC makes its ITAAC completion finding

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

2 DRAFT The new CIP was developed in parallel with the design certification processes of two evolutionary LWR designs, the General Electric Advanced

. Boiling Water Reactor (GE ABWR) and the Combustion Engineering System 80+. The ABWR was used as a generic model for the CIP, since its draft certified design material was the more fully developed of the two at the

time CIP development began. The use of the ABWR example to provide a structure for the program and its information management system will q

have no substantive impact on CIP reactivation because the CIP will need '

to be customized for each future plant, regardless of its design. The CIP will also apply equally well to any advanced LWR designs.

Construction Future US nuclear power plants are likely to be built more rapidly than their predecessors. The basic goals assumed in developing the CIP were.

the first evolutionary LWR will be built in 54 months from the first concrete pour to commercial operation; and, there will be 18 months of site preparation work before the first concrete pour, followed by 48 months until fuel load.

This shorter time compared to previous US nuclear power plant construction projects will be achieved by the following actions:

The detailed engineering design will be essentially complete by the start of construction; Advanced construction techniques will be used to improve efficiency and shorten construction time --

o modular construction techniques will allow several different fabrication activities to be done in parallel, rather than sequentially, o modularization will permit craft work to be done away from the immediate construction site, reducing the number of people who need access to a given plant area at the same time.

o extensive use of multiplexing will reduce the overall number

- of cable raceways and cable pulls, thus simplifying plant design, cutting overall construction effort, and reducing cost.

Fabrication of plant modules and major components are expected to begin well before COL issuance. For example, the generic CIP assumes that a reactor pressure vessel (RPV) will require just under three years from start of manufacture to installation in the plant.

The CIP also assumes that RPV installation will occur about two years after COL issuance; this will result in RPV fabrication 11

DRAFT

beginning about nine months before COL issuance. Similar scenarios could occur for other major plant components and modules. The net result of these early starts of fabrication will be that hardware inspections will need to begin before the start of onsite l 1 construction. l

- Plant construction will rely heavily on detailed planning and ~

)

scheduling to integrate design, procurement and fabrication l requirements. The CIP assumes that this planning will occur in (

advance of the start of site preparation work.

i To effectively inspect such a construction project under these assumptions, the CIP should allow for the following:

The NRC will need a group of several inspectors dedicated to the project to perform the required inspections of construction activities occurring in parallel both on- and off-site, and; ,

- The core of the project inspection team will need to be established well before ground breaking to allow them to gain a detailed familiarity with the construction master plan and plant engineering design, and to develop the NRC's inspection plan for the project. i The Postulated Composite Construction and Licensing Schedule (Figure W),

which depicts major milestones in the licensing and construction of a i new nuclear power. plant, is based on the above assumptions. Some of the milestones represent the most limiting cases in terms of available planning time for the NRC. These milestones are intended to provide a conceptual planning framework for future NRC construction inspections, and should not be construed as regulatory expectations that the staff .

intends to impose on future applicants and licensees.

n 12

I DRAFT Sign-As-You-Go (SAYGO) l Because of the expected rapid pace of plant construction, and the need for the NRC to systematically inspect a wide range and depth of construction activities, the staff anticipates that extensive coordination between the licensee and the NRC will be required. This

~

coordination could be done by instituting a Sign-As-You-Go (SAYG0) process. The possibility of including SAYG0 in the CIP was first discussed in SECY 92-134, "NRC Construction Inspection Program for i Evolutionary and Advanced Reactors Under 10 CFR Part 52" (reference 3). '

For each future construction project, the mechanics of the SAYG0 program will need to be negotiated between the licensee and the NRC staff. The ;

use of a SAYG0 process would.be voluntary on the part of a licensee.

As discussed in SECY 92-134, SAYG0 is a structured method to establish that regulatory commitments have been met, to enhance the stability and predictability of the licensing process, and to identify and resolve construction problems early in the project so as not to adversely affect the licensing process. At a nuclear power plant construction site, SAYG0 would be a phased verification program in which the licensee I certifies to the NRC that certain aspects of construction have been !

completed adequately, and the NRC staff would perform direct inspection I to verify that the certification is accurate. These licensee certifi- l cations and NRC verifications would occur at review points, known as ;

SAYG0 points, that the NRC would identify in conjunction with the l licensee in the early phases of the construction project. The SAYG0 l points to be met throughout construction should be established before the first structural concrete pour occurs, and should include milestones for ITAAC verifications and significant inspection findings. It should be noted that a SAYG0 concept does not include the use of " hold points" l at various stages of construction. j SAYG0 could be implemented for plants licensed under either 10 CFR Parts l 50 or 52. For plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, the NRC and !

licensee could establish links between SAYG0 points and ITAACs. A comprehensive SAYGO program could connect various construction and verification activities and provide inspection continuity from site i preparation through start-up testing and commencement of full-power operation. The NRC's construction inspection procedures would provide

. the inspection requirements for determining if the sign-as-you-go activities are acceptable.

For a SAYGO process to work, the licensee and the NRC must agree on the following before plant construction begins:

o the mechanics of the SAYG0 implementation process; o content and timing of SAYGO points; o acceptance criteria for each SAYGO point.

13

DRAFT The staff's verifications that SAYG0 points are complete would have the stature of inspection findings, and would not be licensing decisions.

Also, there is no assurance that satisfaction of SAYGO criteria will preclude those criteria from coming under scrutiny during a licensing hearing or during the Commission's deliberations regarding the authorization to load fuel.

The CIP Information Management System (CIPIMS) structure can accommodate SAYG0~in a variety of ways:

o The NRC and the licensee could identify systems-based milestones, -

along with critical attributes and acceptance criteria. These could then be tied either to specific inspection procedures (IPs); or, temporary instructions (tis) could be developed, one for each SAYG0 point. The tis could be self-contained, their critical attributes could be linked to attributes in specific IPs, and credit could be given to both the IMC 2512 inspection and the SAYG0 process.

o Instead of a systems-based SAYG0 structure, the NRC and licensee could adopt a time-phased approach consisting of SAYG0 points at regular intervals, in which the progress made on individual systems and structures would be assessed up to that time in construction. ,

In the future, when the CIP is reactivated for inspecting a new construction project, the NRC staff should review SECY 92-134 (reference

3) for additional background on how SAYG0 would be applied for plants '

licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. NUREG-1278, "Vogtle Readiness Review,"

(reference 4) should also be reviewed for lessons learned from the implementation of SAYGO at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in the 1980's.

1 14

DRAFT !

1 i

III. CIP IMPLEMENTATION A. OVERVIEW 0F PREOPERATION INSPECTION PROGRAMS The revision of the Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2512 Construction

Inspection Program will necessitate some redistribution of inspections among the four NRC inspection programs for preoperational nuclear power plants. This section outlines the projected scope, for future nuclear power plants, of the following Inspection Manual Chapters (IMCs) of the Light Water Reactor Inspection Program:

i IMC 2511 Pre-CP Phase IMC 2512 Construction Phase IMC 2513 Preoperational Testing and Operational Preparedness Phase IMC 2514 Startup Testing Phase The tables that follow this overview list the existing inspection procedures that currently apply to each program, along with their l proposed distribution among the various programs following CIP revision. l Also listed in the table are inspection procedures that should be ,

developed to support CIP implementation. l 2511 - Pre-Construction Permit (Pre-CP) Phase For future plants, this program is expected to be similar in scope and applicability to the existing IMC 2511 program for site characterization and preparation activities. The Pre-CP inspection program's focus will be on QA progr'ams and implementation; site preparations including installation of services, support facilities, and non safety-related systems, structures, and components; and environmental protection considerations. Inspections of activities authorized by an Early Site Permit (ESP), if applicable, should be conducted under this inspection J program. The Pre-CP program should be completed at about the same time .

as a plant's combined license (COL) or CP is issued. The IMC 2511 l program is expected to run concurrently with the CIP for several months because, as discussed earlier in this report, construction inspections

. will probably start before COL or CP issuance. The results of the Pre-CP inspections will provide the initial baselines of several construction phase inspections, particularly in the quality assurance area.

IMC 2511 will need to be reviewed and revised, regardless of the method used to license a future plant, to ensure that it is compatible with the revised CIP. One item requiring significant attention will be the ESP process, especially identifying the scope of, and demarcations between, licensing reviews and inspections. Beyond identifying IMC 2511 15

l DRAFT l

l inspection procedures that could apply to the CIP, no substantial activity has been performed to update the Pre-CP inspection program I under the CIP revision project. Therefore, when the NRC staff l reactivates the preoperational inspection programs for a future plant, a j "zero-based" review of the IMC 2511 inspection program should be performed.

2512 - Construction Inspection Phase

This program applies to the construction phase and will be implemented as discussed in this report. The scope of the revised CIP has been -

established to encompass all activities that might impact ITAAC verification. The revised CIP therefore includes activities that are currently addressed in IMCs 2511 and 2513, in addition to the current IMC 2512. The revised CIP focuses on design work, ITAAC verification, QA programs and implementation, construction processes, and preoperational testing. Many inspections similar to those previously I performed for preoperational testing under IMC 2513 have been included in the revised CIP~to maintain continuity with plant systems inspections i and ITAAC verification. The CIP will end when fuel load is authorized or an operating license (0L) is issued, as applicable.

2513 - Preoperational Testing Phase This program will start during the last part of the construction phase and will continue through low power testing. Inspections will remain similar to those included in the current version of IMC 2513, with the major exception of those inspections that would verify ITAAC completion.

The operational readiness team inspections performed under this program will focus on management oversight, QA program and implementation for operations, plant procedures, operations, maintenance, plant support (radiological controls, security, EP, chemistry, training, and fire protection) and operator licensing. Aside from identifying IMC 2513 inspections that would apply to the revised CIP, the Preoperational Testing inspection program was not revised as part of the CIP revision project.

2514 - Startup Test Phase -

This program will start at fuel load authorization or OL issuance, as .

applicable, and end when the plant enters the operational phase, at which point the operaticns inspection program will be implemented at the plant. The startup testing inspection program is expected to be similar in scope and content to the existing 2514 program, although some revisions will likely be needed to accommodate evolutionary and/or advanced reactor designs.

16

DRAFT B. CIP DESCRIPTION The revised CIP consists of two major components, draft IMC 2512 and the 4

CIPIMS. These components are closely integrated, and must be used together.

}

The draft IMC 2512 included in this report details the CIP's structure, j inspection planning and scheduling requirements, and interfaces with

~

other programs. It is designed to provide a generic framework on which the NRC inspection program can be implemented at a future nuclear power plant construction site. When CIP development .is resumed, the draft IMC 2512 must be finalized. The CIPIMS is described in attachment 4 to this report. The staffing and organizational requirements of the CIP are discussed in the CIP Reactivation section of this report, Inspection Sampling The draft IMC 2512 does not contain detailed guidance for selecting inspection samples. As part of CIP reactivation, policies for inspection sampling must be developed and incl'uded in the final IMC 2512, and corresponding guidance should be incorporated into construction inspection procedures. Sampling policies and guidance should be approved for use by cognizant NRC managers.

During CIP revision, NRR staff investigated the use of statistical methods and probabilistic safety assessments in identifying areas that should be inspected. These two topics are briefly discussed in % .

following paragraphs. l

)

Statistical Methods l l

. Several approaches to' inspection sampling were considered during the development of the CIP revision. One approach that was discussed in references 1 and 2 was the development and implementation of statistical

. sampling methods with the goal of obtaining, at the end of a plant's construction phase, :a confidence statement about the quality of plant construction. This statement could potentially be applied to either the

, plant as a whole, or it could consist of a series of statements about I various aspects of plant construction (e.g., concrete pouring, pipe i welding,etc.). Because of staff resource limitations and time constraints, no detailed research along these lines was performed beyond identifying the scope of the issue, as discussed here.

The major difficulty with applying statistical sampling to a nuclear power plant construction inspection program would arise from the attempt to make confidence statements about the many non-hemogeneous processes that occur in phases at a construction site. This characteristic 17

DRAFT contrasts with continuous processes, such as factory assembly lines, in which activities occur in a standardized, repetitive manner under controlled conditions, and which result in large populations of inspectable items. A confidence statement comprised of non-homogeneous items (for example, cable routing and snubber installation) may not be statistically valid.

During development of the revised CIP, the staff did, however, identify past examples in which statistically based inspection sampling was used with success. These examples included assessing the adequacy of a large population of completed welds in safety related piping systems at one -

nuclear power plant, and assessing the adequacy of containment coatings at another plant.

In the mid-1970's, the NRC performed a series of statistically based operating phase inspections at Three Mile Island Unit 1. The evaluation of this trial inspection program was forwarded to the Commission on February 11, 1977 by reference 14. These inspections were done independently of, and in parallel with, the traditional NRC inspection process. This trial program showed that strictly statistically based sampling was, on balance, not an optimal method of' inspection planning because: the statistical method identified no significant safety concerns that the traditional method failed to identify; the traditional method successfully identified significant safety concerns that the statistical method did not identify, and; the statistically based method was comparatively more resource-intensive.

In summary, except in unique applications with fairly narrow scopes and I homogeneous sample populations, NRR managers concluded that the use of statistical sampling methods in construction inspections was of limited

utility. When' the CIP is reactivated, the application of statistically based sampling methods to specific sample populations should be l reevaluated.

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Insights In developing the revised CIP, the staff identified some methods for incorporating PRA insights into construction inspections. These methods i should be developed further when the CIP is reactivated, and should be ,

based on the PRAs that would be included in the material supporting a plant's license application. The NRC should perform sensitivity, uncertainty, and importance analyses to identify those plant SSCs whose passive failure (due to inadequate construction) would most greatly impact the plant's risk profile. In this way, the more risk significant SSCs would be identified, and construction inspection samples could be skewed toward those SSCs.

18

s 4

DRAFT

{

! C. INSPECTION FINDINGS AND INSPECTION FOLLOWUP The majority of the following discussion will focus on CIP inspection 1

i findings of various types. As used here, the term " finding" applies to a statement by NRC management regarding some aspect of plant construction; these findings will be based on the results of

~

construction inspections. The final portion of this discussion will j briefly address the identification, tracking, and closure of inspection results that require inspector followup.

The Need To Make Findings .

As has been stated elsewhere, the fundamental purpose of the CIP will be to verify that plants are built according to their designs. CIP -

i findings will:

i

o provide bases for NRC management conclusions, such as those required 1 by:

4

- 10 CFR 50.57 j -

Inspection Procedure (IP) 94300, " Status of Plant Readiness for i an Operating License" construction permits, or combined licenses (including inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAACs));

o support agency conclusions on the adequacy of generic construction activities / processes, and; i

o inform the licensee and the public of the progress of the inspection program. '

)

Types of Findings Although there are significant differences in the findings that must be

- made under 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52, respectively, the inspection activities that support these methods are essentially the same.

. 10 CFR Part 50 plants: Under 10 CFR Part 50, issuance of the construction permit resolves only questions regarding the general aspects of design and construction of the proposed facility. The details of the plant design, the nature of the tests and inspections to be performed to verify that the design and construction are completed in an acceptable fashion, and the criteria for evaluating the adequacy of the design and construction, are generally not available at the time of issuance of the construction permit. As a result, issues remain to be resolved prior to issuance of the operating license. Section 50.57 contains a range of findings that must be made with respect to these 19

DRAFT issues, and the CIP is generally structured to support management's ability to make the findings. In some cases, as specified in Section 50.57, the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation can make these pre-licensing findings.

For plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 50, CIP inspection results will be used to assess a plant's readiness to be granted an operating license.

This assessment is currently made by the cognizant regional '

administrator under IP 94300, who would provide a recommendation to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for issuing an operating license.

10 CFR Part 52 plants: For plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, the output of the CIP will be used to support a staff recommendation to the Commission regarding a licensee's readiness to load fuel. As part of issuance of a combined license (COL), the NRC will approve details of the plant design, the nature of the tests and inspections to be performed to verify construction, and the acceptance criteria for construction. Section 52.103 provides that, once construction has been completed, the finding that must be made is limited in scope to a determination that the pre-approved inspections, tests and analyses have been performed and the associated pre-approved acceptance criteria have been met. It is the licensee's responsibility to perform all required ITAACs, while the NRC staff's role is to verify satisfactory licensee completion of ITAACs. One of the functions of the CIP for plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52 is to guide NRC verification of the licensee's completion of ITAACs so that the findings specified in Sections 52.99 and 52.103 can be made.

Several policy issues related to the impact of inspection results on ITAAC verification remain under consideration. These issues, which must be resolved before the reactivated CIP is implemented, are summarized in the policy issues section of this report.

a. 10 CFR Part 52.99: 10 CFR Part 52.99 states, in part, that at

" appropriate intervals during construction, the NRC staff shall publish in the Federal Register notices of the successful completion .

of inspections, tests and analyses." These notices will document that the licensee has informed the NRC of ITAAC completion, and that the NRC staff has verified this completion. The exact protocol of ,

licensee notification to NRC of ITAAC completions, NRC staff verification of the same, and the subsequent publication of the Federal Register notice, remains to be established. The following discussion presents some concepts on this topic that should be considered in establishing these protocols.

As discussed previously in this report, some ITAAC verifications i will be relatively simple, in that they will involve comparisons of system performance measurements and observations against established 20 I

i j, DRAFT i

criteria. ITAACs of this type will normally be accomplished within a well-defined period during construction and will have well-defined l documentation of satisfactory completion. Examples of such ITAACs from the GE ABWR design certification ITAACs (reference 11) include:

verification that alarms exist or can be retrieved in the main control room for a particular system, verification that water is

]

pumped by a svstem at greater than a prescribed minimum flow rate, ;

j and verification that prescribed system valve interlocks function.

Because these ITAACs are limited in scope and will be completed over i

a short time span (mostly as part of preoperational testing), they

will require comparatively little effort for verification and subsequent notification in the Federal Register in accordance with 10 CFR Part 32.99.

In contrast, other ITAACs will be accomplished over long periods of j time. For these ITAACs, many separate inspections will be performed i over a long period of time to verify their different attributes.

i When the final construction activity associated with a particular

ITAAC is completed, the sum of the results of these inspections will j support the conclusion that the ITAAC has been met. It is envisioned that NRC verification that these ITAACs are met will rely i on a combination of inspections performed on respective systems, structures, at:d components (SSCs) and of significant inspection findings, which are discussed in detail below.

For, example, one of the 13 ITAAC acceptance criteria for the ABWR q

control building (C/B) reads as follows: "The as-built C/B has a

main control area envelope separated from the rest of the C/B by

walls, floors, doors and peneteations which have a three-hour fire j rating."

4 The construction activity associated with this ITAAC could span an i estimated three and a half years. The staff's activities to verify

- that this ITAAC is met will not wait for field activity to start; rather, part of the staff's assurance that this ITAAC is met will involve verification that engineering details will properly ;

implement the high-level design commitments pertaining to the control building. This could involve inspections that verify that the prescribed thickness of the control building wall or floor will

, result in a three-hour fire rating, or could verify that the :

purchase specifications for the control building have properly prescribed the attributes of a door that will possess a three-hour fire rating. When the results of these inspections are coupled with inspector verification of proper installation, there would be high confidence that the acceptance criteria of the inspections, tests ,

and analyses have been met. I l

NRC verification that this contrd building ITAAC has been satisfied I will also depend on~observati e of licensee activities for similar U

l 1

l DRAFT attributes elsewhere in the plant. Assuming these activities are satisfactory in terms of the processes and materials used, as well as the effectiveness of the quality assurance oversight, these observations can contribute to the conclusions regarding the fire J protection envelope in the control building. The character of these other observations, and the extent to which they would apply to this ITAAC, will need to be determined in accordance with the resolutions of policy issues during the reactivation of the CIP.

The concepts discussed above are very similar to the notion of significant inspection findings, which are discussed later in this .

section. .

b. 10 CFR Part 52.103(a): This section states: " Prior to operation of-the facility, the Commission shall find that the acceptance criteria in the combined license are met." Since IP 94300 will also apply to plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, the content of this inspection i procedure will need to be revised to accommodate the finding on the

! status of ITAAC completion.

Sign-At-You-Go (SAYGO): As discussed earlier in this report, a SAYG0 program of inspection milestones, known as SAYGO points, jointly agreed on between the NRC and a licensee could be implemented at a future nuclear power plant construction project. As the criteria for each '

i SAYG0 point are successfully met by the licensee and verified by NRC, their completion would be documented in inspection reports (irs). At the option of NRC management, these SAYG0. completions could be noticed in the Federal Register; however, the agency has not yet established a policy for this matter. SAYG0 could be applied to any future plant, regardless of its licensing method.

SAYG0 points can be viewed functionally as analogous to ITAACs, except I that they are not specifically provided for in 10 CFR Part 52. Although some SAYG0 points could be tied to ITAACs, the SAYGO process is separate from ITAAC verifications.

Significant inspection findings: The concept of significant inspection .

findings was introduced in SECY 94-294, " Construction Inspection and l

ITAAC Verification" (reference 1), as a mechanism to announce broad l staff conclusions regarding significant construction activities or processes. These findings are intended to be NRC staff actions to ,

i assist in managing the inspection program, and they should be based on '

aggregated inspection results documented in the CIPIMS. At its option, the staff may coordinate significant inspection findings with applicable ITAACs and SAYG0 points. Significant inspection findings are not required by regulations, and they should be used strictly as an NRC i program management tool and as a vehicle for public notice. The l following discussion contains many similarities to the outlines

! discussed above for ITAAC verification and SAYG0.

22 l

l

l. '

d j DRAFT l In the past, the staff's judgments about construction acceptability have ,

been based largely on the determinations.of the acceptability of generic '

, aspects of plant construction, be they processes or the as-built acceptability of hardware items found throughout the plant. The revised CIP will incorporate, and enhance, this philosophy by formalizing and l publicizing these judgments through the use of significant inspection findings. The following items.have been identified as possible candidates for significant inspection findings:

o site preparation o structures o equipment fabrication o equipment placement

.o equipment operation o geotech/ foundations o structural concrete o matonry o concrete expansion anchors o structural steel and supports o safety related piping l 0 pipe supports and restraints o mechanical components / equipment o heating, ventilation and air conditioning o electrical components o electrical cable and terminations o instrumentation and controls (I&C) components o I&C tubing and supports o penetrations i o welding o non-destructive examination '

o reinforcing bar (including couplings) I o quality assurance / quality control programs o training o personnel qualifications .

o equipment and material qualifications o records )

. o measuring and test equipment Most of these elements apply, in one way or another, across a variety of SSCs throughout a nuclear power plant. Because of the sampling nature of NRC construction inspections, it is not feasible to inspect each of these elements for each system or structure in the plant. Rather, a broad sample of each element should be inspected, and an inspection finding pertaining to each element should be made. Each of these.

findings. could then be applied throughout the plant. The above list is not intended to be all-inclusive, and items can be added, combined, or deleted as necessary during CIP reactivation.

23

3 i

DRAFT i

4 When to Make Findings 1

When the NRC project team is formed, one of its major activities will be to develop the site specific inspection plan. During this planning stage, the staff must determine the significant inspection findings that will need to be made during plant construction, what body of inspections will be used to make the significant findings, and when the findings will be made. These significant findings will also need to be tied, as -

necessary, to specific ITAACs. If a SAYG0 process is used, the j

interface of the findings with SAVG0 points must be clearly identified.

l These plannino activities should be completed before the COL or CP is ,

1 issued to ensure that the regulatory plan of action is as clear as i possible by the time construction begins.

Significant inspection findings: Significant inspection findings should

be made early in the chronological process of installing a particular ,

type of component or commodity. For example, a finding on reinforcing

. bar installation could be made when 25% of all reinforcing bars have I

! been installed. This finding would remain effective for the l construction period, and its validity would be periodically verified by l

, NRC inspections. l I The initial inspections that support significant inspection findings j j will need to use fairly comprehensive and extensive IPs that are structured to validate given activities or processes. Once the significant findings are made, subsequent inspections to periodically

! revalidate the findings will use the same IPs, but with their scope 4 reduced. It must be emphasized that c finding made at the 25% point i could not be considered the NRC's final conclusion on a particular 1 activity, since the inspected activity will continue.

i

! Management of Findings: Inspection activities that impact a significant i inspection finding will be tracked using the CIPIMS. This can be done by determining which IP occurrences will apply to a given significant finding, ITAAC verification, or SAYG0 point.

a. Sianificant Insoection Findinas: Consider the installation of structural concrete at an ABWR as an example of how to set up the inspection plan to make a significant finding. As can be seen in

the hypothetical extract of a plant construction and inspection schedule shown in Figure X, there are three inspection procedures pertaining to this activity: IP 46051, " Structural Concrete Procedure Review;" IP 46053, " Structural Concrete Work Observation;"

ud IP 46055, " Structural Concrete Record Review." To allow for early inspection of concrete installation activities (if needed),

the first occurrence of each procedure is shown on the schedule as occurrir.g before COL issuance. For the purposes of this example, the first opportunity for performance of all three inspection 24

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

STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SIGNIFICANT FINDING' Description 19 2000 2001 2002 2003 D JAF N % N DUpu% $ p N D JAF M % N DU U% $ ND JAF M % N DUPUW $ p N D JAjF N % N D UQUlA $ p N 01 - MAJOR MILESTONES 1010 Concrete Installation d OConcrete Installation i 1

tssue Combined License : ; Bissue Combined License : ; ; ; : : : : : : !

1020 . . . . . . .

1030 Start Reactor Bida Basemat : : : EStart Reactor Bldg Basemat l . : : : . : : .

1040 Start RCCV Fabrication : : : : E Start RCCV Fabrication : : . : : : l : : : .

1050 instalt Reactor Pressura Vessel : : : .

l .l : : : : 8tnsta'l Reactor Pressure Vesset :

02 - SYSTEM MILESTONES 2010 Control Bida Concrete Complete _

. . . . . . . . ! !EControl Bldg Concrete Completel : .

2020 RadWaste Bidg Concrete complete : . . . . . . . .. . : . . . . . 8 RadWaste Bldg Concrete Complete :

2030 Turbine Bidg Concrete Complete . . . . : : : . :

l . . !ETurbine Bidg Conerete complete :

2040 Service B!da Concrete Completa

: E Service Bido Concrete Complete : _

2050 Reactor Bido Concrete Complete .

UReactor Bldg Concrete Complete 03 -INSPECTION ACTIVITIES 03.01 -Concrete Procedures Review (iP 46601)

L .v . ._._. 1 u.-

g 3 .

7:gs:t I

'---T In_spection i : : I m .- .

- ~- .

3011 ist inspection (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) f7 (4hcurs) :

3012 2nd inspection (40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months ) _

D2nd inspection (40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months ) : * . -

3013 3rd Inspecticn (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) I -

M3rd Inspectiori(4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) . . . 4. * . .

_y_

. T

' ' ' * ^ '

D14 4th inspection (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) . . .

z,W4thinspection (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) . . . . .

3015 5th inspection (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months ) _l : .

ll '

.l l l l l l l . Q75th inspection (4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months )* : :

03.02 - Concrete Work Observation (IP 46503) -

_a _, .

__. a . . .

l '

T l B- . i . . I , I :

1st inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months .) ;

3021

..-r-- l' 1 st inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ): l : : - . ; .

. , , T-

!h...--.

3022 2nd inspection .{80 hours) -

_ 2nd inspection (80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months ) : { u, y_y_. ; ;_ . . . .

.. i 3023 3rd Inspection (8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months sL____ _ '_

' ., Z 3rd Insq j8 hoursj ik 3024 4th inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ) ! . !

_3 4th inspection (8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months sy . . . : . .

i

_:_f 3025 5thinspecthn (8_ hours) .. . . .

_ _ . l l l l y . Sth inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months )'

03.03 - Concrete Record Review (IP 46055) T

_n

%a ' u _- _s--- .

-- - j - - ] g. .

= = = = - Bl - l . . - .

l l :

{2 -Q 1st inspection _(8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months )J

J:-

3031 1st inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ) - - . - - - . - - . - .

3032 2nd in_spection {40 hours) _ _

^ Elm 72nd inspection (40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months ) ! : - ! . -

J3rd Inspection 18_ hours)Q ,

3033 3rd inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ) _ _ 1 ._ _ _ n .

2 .

3034 4th inspection,{8 hours}_ . . .. .. . . 4th inspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ) l 3035 5th tr:spectiorL{3 hours)

. . .f,7 I: : l l R 5thinspection (8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months ):

04 - SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS __

L ll

~

l4010 l Structural Concrete Significant Finding ] : lL l N i$ structural Concrete Sign:fic'ant Finding l .

l '*l

l l .

l : : l :

DRAFT FIGURE X

l 4

DRAFT l procedures is assumed to occur immediately before and after the COL is issued, which would equate to the second occurrence of each IP.

F The second occurrences of IPs 46051, 46053, and 46055 are planned to i require 40, 80, and 40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months of inspection, respectively, and will l be completed about three months after COL issuance.

Cognizant NRC management will review the inspection results to

!~ determine if a significant finding can be made. Assuming the i inspection results demonstrate that the licensee's process for installing structural concrete is acceptable, a significant '

inspection finding to this effect will be made by the end of the fourth month after COL issuance, as shown in Figure X.

The remaining occurrences of these inspection procedures would be

- used to monttor licensee performance in this area to verify the continued validity of the conclusions stated in the significant

, inspection findi.ng. Note that the subsequent inspections are planned to require much less effort than the inspections performed a

before the sign'ificant finding is made. The lead inspectors for

each discipline will select which portions of each procedure to .

] perform during the monitoring phase, as opposed to fully performing I the procedures as in the period preceding the significant finding.

The staff hours shown for each of these inspections is a baseline estimate; the actual staff hours should be based on the amount of inspection effort required to verify the continued adequacy of l structural concrete activities. l i

1 This significant inspection finding could contribute to the basis of

verification that the following ABWR design certification ITAACs !

have been met:

l 2.14.1.1 Primary Containment System-Basic Configuration (including basemat, vertical portions of the reinforced concrete containment vessel (RCCV), RPV pedestal, RCCV diaphragm floor, and top of RCCV) 2.15.10.1 Reactor Building Basic Configuration (including exterior walls, basemat, inter-divisional walls and floors, and h/B roof) 2.15.12.1 Control Building Basic Configuration (including exterior walls, basemat, interdivisional and steam tunnel walls and floors, and the main control area envelope) <

l 25

~ ,

QRAFT 2.15.13.1 Radwaste Building Basic Configuration (including basemat and below grade external walls) 4 Additionally, this finding could apply to any applicable COL ITAACs, SAYG0 points, or other regulatory requirements or license conditions. -

4 In the CIPIMS, the significant finding milestone should be scheduled, the inspection procedure cycles that will support the -

significant finding should be linked in the data base module, then the significant finding should be linked with the appropriate ITAACs and SAYG0 points to which it pertains.

In practice, the process outlined above will be structured by the NRC project team, who will judge when inspections will be performed and findings made on the basis of a plant's design and construction schedule.

Experience has shown that NRC inspections often have items requiring followup, and such may be the case with significant inspection findings. The existence of inspection followup items may not necessarily prevent the issuance of a significant inspection finding, if those items are limited in scope and are not of a nature that they would invalidate the overall conclusion being made. In such a case, the outstanding items would be treated like any other followup issue arising from an inspection, as discussed later in this chapter.

b. ITAAC Verification and SAYG0 Points: Planning for ITAAC verifications and for SAYG0 points will require more detailed input from the licensee's construction schedule than will be the case for significant findings. Beyond this difference, however, the

inspection schedule and data base can be set up to accommodate these findings using a similar process as used for significant findings.

Public Noticc

~

To help maintain the openness of the construction inspections at a future nuclear power plant, the following methods of providing public i notice of inspection activities could be considered for implementation when the CIP is reactivated.

Significant Findings: Significant findings will be issued by the resident inspection staff either as part of routine inspection reports or by special inspection rerorts. The NRR staff should periodically 26

f DRAFT

publish Federal Register notices that identify recently issued

, inspection reports containing significant findings. One advantage to publicizing the issuance of significant findings in the Federal Register

would be to provide the public and industry with an early cpportunity to

! review and comment on the progress of construction inspection.

l

~

SAYGO Points and ITAAC' Verifications: For SAYG0 points and ITAAC verifications, the resident inspection staff will make recommendations

- to the cognizant NRR project director, who will ensure tnat each finding i satisfies appropriate license conditions and regulatory requirements, i

SAYG0 notifications and 10 CFR 52.99 Federal Register notices will be issued by the cognizant NRR division director.

10 CFR Part 50.57 and Part 52.103(g): The issuance of these findings i will be done in accordance with the regulations and NRC policies

] existing at the time the findings need to be made. In general, the cognizant division director, with inputs from the resident inspection staff and the project director, will make the recommendations for these findings to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

j Start of Construction Inspection: The staff is considering publishing Federal Register notices to state when inspection activities at a construction site begin. Although these notices are not required by Part 52 or the Atomic Energy Act, they will improve public knowledge and allow for timely public participation.

Inspection Followup I 1

Outstanding items arising from construction inspections, including l enforcement items, will be recorded in the CIPIMS in accordance with the l instructions c'ontained in draft IMC 2512 (reference 10). They will be )

disposed of as directed by the NRC policies that exist when the plant is under construction. Inspection results requiring further inspector action are currently managed through the Inspection Followup System !

(IFS), which tracks violations (VIos), unresolved items (URIs), and I inspection followup items (IFIs). 'dhon identified, these items are entered into the IFS data base, and tneir entries could be periodically updated until they were closed in an inspection report. The CIPIMS is structured to perform this inspection followup function, and it

. therefore is intended to replace IFS (or its successor) for new construction plants.

I Followup: The CIPIMS should be used to schedule the followup and closure of each violation, unresolved item, or inspection followup item. I Each item can be assigned to an already scheduled inspection cycle, or, 1 if there is no planned inspection available, an additional cycle of the I procedure that was used to identify the item (or another procedure j cycle, as appropriate) should be scheduled. When planning and scheduling inspection followup and closeout, it is essential to review 27

DRAFT each item, identify the critical attributes that require reinspection, and clearly indicate these in the inspection planning section of the CIPIMS.

Linkage to ITAACs: The CIPIMS allows inspection staff to tie individual violations, unresolved items, and inspection followup items to specific ITAACs. Each one of these must be assessed to determine if it materially applies to an ITAAC, and, if so, the extent to which it impacts the NRC's ability to verify that the licensee has successfully completed the requirements pertaining to the ITAAC. This determination is additional to the requirements of the IFS, and the ultimate closure -

of the item must also account for the ITAAC impact. The general definition of what types of things pertain to ITAAC are still being explored as a policy issue. Therefore, it is not possible to go into further detail on this matter, and instead leave it as a process whose mechanics will need to be defined when the CIP is reactivated.

D. NRC ORGANIZATION The ' Postulated Licensing and Construction Schedule" depicted as Figure W in the " Expected Licensing and Construction Environment" section of this report is intended to present a scenario that would be very demanding on the NRC so that it can be used as a planning tool for future personnel, resource, and program needs. The NRC does not expect that a utility must meet this schedule as a condition for licensing.

Under this scenario, a utility would have begun material procurement and fabrication of major components and modules by the time it applies for a C0! or a construction permit.

It follows, then, that early establishment of the NRC project team will be necessary for the agency to gain a detailed understanding of an applicant's design, plans, and schedule for constructing a plant, which will be used to develop and implement NRC inspection plans. Further, to carry out the construction inspection program for a future nuclear power plant, the NRC will need to establish its inspection teams well before onsite construction actually begins (this need was identified on the . 1 basis of past and present nuclear power plant construction experiences).

Organization: The project team will consist of three groups: a , ,

resident inspection office; the cognizant regional office, and; a I project directorate in headquarters. The following organizational I descriptions are based on projections of the necessary functions and I personnel to reactivate and implement the CIP. When the CIP is i reactivated, these functions, and the inter-organizational relationships l and reporting structures, should be evaluated in the context of the l contemporary NRC organization to ensure that the CIP will be efficiently '

implemented. l 28

DRAFT o A resident inspection office established at the start of construction will implement the CIP for the plant. For the purposes

! of this discussion, start of construction is defined as the time when plant component fabrication (for example, a reactor pressure m vessel or a prefabricated module) begins in a factory, or at the a commencement of any other licensee activities that require i inspection. In the earliest phases of plant construction (e.g.,

l' site preparation), the resident inspection office would operate from

, either the cognizant regional office or NRC headquarters, and would shift to the site when the pace of activities requires significant inspection coverage. The office will consist of 6 to 12 technical .

j staff, plus administrative support, who would rotate on and off site

. according to the needs for different types of expertise to verify

( satisfactory completion of various phases of plant construction. .

The following personnel, whose duties and responsibilities are defined in draft IMC 2512, would provide the core of the resident j inspection office staff, and would be augmented by specialist

inspectors.

Senior Construction Site Representative Site Chief Structural Inspector Site Chief Mechanical Inspector Site Chief Electrical and Instrumentation Inspector Construction Site Scheduler o The cognizant regional office would oversee the implementation of the onsite inspection program and would provide inspection resources and other technical support as necessary. The' regional office organization for construction could, for example, be a task force made up of a manager supported by a technical staff of project engineers, reactor engineers, and inspectors of varying disciplines.

o A group in NRC headquarters would oversee licensing aspects of plant construction. The staff would consist of a Senior Executive Service manager and an appropriate combination of project managers, project engineers, and support staff. This staff would also be responsible

- for issuing Federal Register notifications of successful ITAAC completion for plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. The headquarters organization envisioned for the next nuclear power

, plant built in the US would consist of:

project director project managers for licensing and policy issues project engineers for technical issues prospective resident inspection staff for developing the site-specific construction inspection program licensing assistant (s) (as needed) clerical support (as needed) 29

DRAFT The project directorate's involvement with CIP details will include reactivating the CIP (discussed below), and overseeing the programmatic aspects of CIP implementation. This organization may be streamlined as issues are resolved and the inspection and licensing process enters a routine mode. The organization may also be adjusted as lessons learned from the lead plant are incorporated into planning.

Establishing the Project Team: The headquarters project directorate should be the first organization created, and should be established at the first credible indication that a reactor will be ordered, and .

license application made. Initially, this staff will coordinate license reviews, and be responsible for making recommendations regarding the approval of a COL or CP, as appropriate, in response to a license application. This staff will also take the lead in reactivating the CIP, and some of its members would be the cadre around which the resident inspection office would be formed.

CIP-related items to be developed during application review will include: defining the inspection program to be implemented at the site; establishing the plant-specific COL ITAAC (if the plant is licensed under 10 CFR Part 52), and; establishing SAYG0 points (if so desired by the applicant). Close coordination with other NRC organizations will be necessary for many aspects of CIP reactivation, such as updating the CIPIMS to the current state of the art and developing inspection procedures. The minimum estimated level of effort that will be needed to reactivate the CIP is 8 FTE (4 staff for two years).

Obtaining Expertise: Another area to be addressed in conjunction with CIP reactivation will be the identification of the types of expertise needed to carry out construction inspections. The staff will have to determine if sufficient technical expertise is available within the NRC to perform the inspec~tions. Arrangements must be made for the training and qualification of sufficient staff, and these arrangements will need to be made early enough to avoid impacting the inspection schedule.

Similarly, if it is determined that obtaining contract expertise is .

required, NRC management will need to consider the long lead times associated with establishing technical assistance contracts.

E. ACTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH FUTURE CIP REACTIVATION The following list is a general series of NRC actions that should be taken to reactivate the CIP when it becomes apparent that a nuclear power plant will be ordered. This list is only intended to be a

starting point for reactivating the program, and it should be reviewed and understood within the context cf this draft report.

30

I a

~

DRAFT I

i

1. Form NRC Project Team.

4

2. Review draft CIP report and other program documentation:

o develop plan to resolve policy issues; i

l* o information and computer software related to Construction Inspection Program Information Management System (CIPIMS);

j o update CIPIMS software to contemporary standards --

e i- -

to the degree possible, the CIFIMS has used commercial

! off- the-shelf-software, so the basic system

architecture should be easily transferred and updated; 4

o determine exactly how the CIPIMS data base needs to be I

structured to allow the public to have electronic access to ,

inspection information; I 1

i o identify computer hardware needs; !

i o identify NRC staff computer training needs. i l I

3. Obtain information from applicant and from other NRC organizations: I l

o contents of combined license (COL);

o ITAACs; j .o detailed engineering design; 3

o construction schedule; i o SAYG0 proposal.

j

4. Investigate construction methods to be used; identify locations at j . which fabrication, and therefore construction inspections, will j occur. Pertinent issues include

. l

o engineering design for modular construction; l F

j o transportation arrangements for modules; l l !

o engineering design details; ,

i

[: o equipment procurement schedules. '

i 31 l

1 i _ - _ . _ . ._ ._ . . _ . . . , . _ . . . . _ -_. _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ - . ,

l DRAFT

5. Identify the endpoint of the construction inspection program to be implemented at the construction site:

l l o establish program goals and assumptions --

if the plant is to be licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, L

identify contents of the section 52.1039 finding if plant is licensed under Part 50, identify contents -

of the section 50.57 findings; o establish program timing and content -- - - -

- finalize IMC 2511 -- determine scope and endpoint of l the early site permit / site preparation inspections to - ;

be done under this pre-construction inspection program l

- finalize IMC 2512 -- will include IMC 2513 Appendix A inspection procedures (IPs), and all 2513 Appendix B iPs that are covered by ITAACs

- review and revise IP 94300, " Status of Plant Readiness for an Operating License," to support program objectives )

begin revising IMCs 2513 and 2514.

6. Identify significant findings to be made during plant construction:

o using the list of possible significant inspection findings provided in this report, develop a final list of findings, and determine for each one --

contents / basis 1 timing for making the finding 1

- cross reference which inspections will be used to '

support tho issuance of significant-inspection findings; o integrate findings with ITAAC verifications and SAYG0 points .

(significant findings, ITAACs, and SAYG0 points should be determined in conjunction with each other);

o superimpose the significant inspection finding milestones on the NRC construction inspection schedule.

l

7. Outline the inspection' procedures needed to support significant )

findings, ITAACs, and SAYG0 points:

o define scope of each inspection; o develop inspection sampling criteria. j t

32 l

. , _ . --. , ___ _ m _ _ ~

DRAFT i

8. Staffing:

o identify staffing needs; o identify knowledge and expertise requirements for inspectors; o identify inspector training needs;

~

o procure training for inspectors.

9. Generate resource estimates of inspectors for entire CIP:

o resident inspectors; o specialist inspectors; l 0 contractors; o inspection teams.

10. Develop new inspection procedures (IPs):

o prioritize procedure development based on need date --

1 it will not be necessary to'have all of them done l right away (therefore, IP development can be " level loaded" in conformance with available resources; this will also allow for improvement of later IPs based on experience gained from in-office and field use of the IPs that are developed first-).

o ensure that imoroved procedures are developed for inspecting welding and non-destructive examination activities (commitment made in SECY 92-436)

11. Interfaces with Other NRC Activities:

o update Management' Directive 8.6 to include guidance on performing Systematic Assessments of Licensee Performance (SALP) for nuclear power plants under construction; o update the Vendor Inspection Program as necessary to conform to construction inspection requirements, and identify interfaces with the CIP.

33

- .. - - . . . . . - _ . . - - - . - . . - - . _ - . . - . - . . - - - _ . - - . - . - . . - . . - . - ~ _ . = _ . .

DRAFT

12. Begin' inspections:

2 o early inspections to be performed in conjunction with application reviews.

13. Fully staff resident' inspector office: -

o consider permanently relocating the office to the

, conatruction site during the later phases of site -

preparation.

14. NRC issues COL or construction permit.

15. : Implement CIP in accordance with revised IMC 2512.

16i. Finalize IMCs 2513 and 2514; begin preoperational testing inspections under IMC 2513 late in plant construction:

o make a plan to transition from construction phase to operations phase inspections under IMCs 2514 and-2515.

17. Issue findings as needed to support NRC licensing decisions, as appropriate for the method used to license the plant.

18. Complete IMC 2512 for the construction project.

F. DUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES Several policy issues relevant to construction inspection and ITAAC -

verification remain under consideration. Many of these issues were discussed in the following references:

SECY 94-294, " Construction Inspection and ITAAC Verification" 4

(reference 1)

- SECY 92-436, " Status of Development of the NRC's New Construction Inspection Program" (reference 2)

SECY 92-134, "NRC Construction Inspection Program for Evolutionary and Advanced Reactors under 10 CFR Part 52" .(reference 3) 34 a,

4 DRAFT Memorandum to the Commission from J. M. Taylor, EDO, forwarding the draft Commission Paper, "10 CFR Part 52 Combined License (COL)

Review Process and COL Form and Content" (reference 5)

Memorandum to the Commission from J. M. Taylor, EDO, forwarding the draft Commission Paper, "ITAAC Verification and Construction Inspection Under 10 CFR Part 52" (reference 15)

The following list briefly summarizes unresolved policy questions pertaining to construction inspection at future nuclear power plants.

In addition to issues discussed in the above references, the list includes several items that were identified during the writing of this draft report. As mentioned earlier, in the report section discussing the required actions associated with CIP reactivation, a plan to review l and resolve these issues should be prepared developed soon after the resumption of CIP development. The policy questions are presented without elaboration, since background information on them can be found elsewhere in either this draft report or its references. The structure ,

of the revised CIP is flexible enough to accommodate the resolutions of '

these issues when the CIP is reactivated in the future.

Agency Level Policy Issues The following issues pertain to the nature of the findings to be made under 10 CFR Part 52.

1. What will be the Commission's expectations of staff information to I support the section 52.103(g) findings?

2. Is it possible for the Commission to delegate the section 52.103(g) finding authority to the E00? If so, would the Commission delegate it?

3. Once an ITAAC has been announced in the Federal Register as being l complete (per the requirements of section 52.99), what swould be its '

legal standing? Would it have the same weight as a finding made

. under 10 CFR Part 52.103(g)?

4. What would constitute prima facie evidence that a particular ITAAC ]

. might not have been met? '

5. What types of activities could impact an ITAAC? What specific attributes would be included as part of an ITAAC7 What activities, I although closely related to an ITAAC, would be treated as a 10 CFR Part 50 problem that would not necessarily preclude NRC verification that an ITAAC has been met?

How would deficiencies in a quality assurance process impact ITAAC 6.

findings?

35

)

i

[

Programmatic Policy Issues 1.- Determine the best method of publicizing significant findings,

including whether to publish them in the Federal Register. I

2. Determine if significant findings should be issued by routine or special inspeetton reports.

. 3. Refine the guidance on how the different types of inspection findings s'iall be made and who should make them.

l 4. Clarify tie organizational structure and responsibilities for developing and implementing the CIP, including the roles of regional offices. -

5. Define the extent of design engineering evaluations to be done as part of license application review, and the extent to which design i i engineering will be inspected under the CIP. It will be necessary !

4 to validate "first-of-a-kind engineering," . and the design I engineering and design change processes, to ensure fidelity of i

construction drawings to approved design.

4

6. Define the protocol of licensee notification to NRC of ITAAC completions, NRC staff verification of the same, and the subsequent publication of Federal Register notices.

7. Review and revise inspection procedure 94300, " Status of Plant l Readiness for an Operating License," to be consistent with 10 CFR l Part 52 and CIP requirements.

8. Develop a policy to implement a Sign-As-You-Go (SAYG0) process for future nuclear power plant construction projects.

9. Establish policy for publicizing / docketing construction inspection reports (including the particulars of inspection report formats, and the format that should be used to make reports available electronically to the public). .

j

10. Establish the significance of NRC management's certification that a ;

construction inspection procedure has been satisfactorily completed, . i particularly with respect to ITAAC verifications, significant findings, and SAYG0 points.

~

11. Develop policies for inspection sampling.

36

~ _ _

! l

- a j l

, 1

IV. ACRONYMS j Advanced Boiling Water Reactor

.ABWR l

i

! CAD Computer Aided Design !

! CAE Computer Aided Engineering i

! CDR Construction Deficiency Report !

! CE Combustion Engineering l 1 CIP Construction Inspection Program

CIPIMS CIP Information Management System

l COL Combined License 2

CP . Construction Permit j CSS Construction Site Scheduler j j DBMS Data Base Management System 1

\

i ESP Early Site Permit '

l l .

FTE Full Time Equivalent

]

GE General Electric l HPCF- High Pressure Core Flooder system

~

IMC Inspection Manual Chapter IP Inspection Procedure ,

IR Inspection Report ;

ITAAC Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria ;

LWR. Light Water Reactor l PRA Probabilistic Risk A:,sessment

)

QA Quality Assurance QC Quality Control RCCV Reinforced Concrete Containment Vessel RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel SAYG0 Sign As You Go SCEI Site Chief Electrical and Instrumentation Inspector SCMI Site Chief Mechanical Inspector

. SCSI Site Chief Structural Inspector SCSR Senior Construction Site Representative SSC Structure, System, or Component lI Temporary Instruction UNR Unresolved item VIO Violation 37

i l

V. REFERENCES

1. SECY 94-294, " Construction Inspection and ITAAC Verification" I (December 5, 1994)

2. SECY 92-436, " Status of Development of the NRC's New Construction Inspection Program" (December 31, 1992)

3. SECY 92-134, "NRC Construction Inspection Program for Evolutionary and Advanced Reactors under 10 CFR Part 52" (April 15, 1992) l

4. NUREG-1278, "Vogtle Unit 1 Readiness P.eview".(September 1987)

5. Memorandu : to the Commission from J. M. Taylor, EDO, forwarding the draft Commission Paper, "10 CFR Part 52 Combined License (COL) Review l Process and COL Form and Content" (April 1, 1993) ;

6. Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2511, " Light llater Reactor Inspection l Program - Pre-CP Phase" (April 1, 1978)

7. IMC 2512, " Light Water Reactor Inspection Program - Construction Phase" !

(December 17, 1986) l

8. IMC 2513, " Light Water Reactor Inspection Program - Preoperational Testing and Operational Preparedness Phase" (January 1, 1984)

9. IMC 2514, " Light Water Reactor Inspection Program - Startup Testing Phase" (August 21, 1989)

10. Draft IMC 2512 (attachment I to this report)

11. General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor ITAACs (versions dated April - June, 1993) .

l

12. SRM COMIS91-015 (November 21, 1991) l

13. Memorandum to the Commission from J. M. Taylor, EDO: "Seabrook - The i Staff's Review of the Office of the Inspector General (0IG) Report 90- l 31H ' Review of the NRC Staff's Responses to Congressional Inquiries .

Regarding Joseph Wampler and the Welding Program at Seabrook Nuclear i Station'" (February 12, 1992) l

~

14. Memorandum to the Commission from E. Volgenau, Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement: " Inspection Program Utilizing Statistical Sampling Inspection Techniques" (February 11, 1977) l

15. Memorandum to the Commission from J. M. Taylor, EDO, forwarding the !

draft Commission Paper, "ITAAC Verification and Construction Inspection Under 10 CFR Part 52" (January 28, 1994) 38

-2a.=s .w.e_.. =-=-,-.-n. -m. 4-.m a. = e= -a wm.-s,aa-- . s--u =am m m.m m _a m-- .e a . w a a -# .a m-. sus-._ua e. u a s % e s. ms4&A.s. a- s e a w m e A a . "4.-=

e A_w- w i

i l-1 j Dun f

4

)

i l'

i .

i.

! ATTACHMENT 1 i

i i

r DRAFT INSPECTION MANUAL CHAPTER 2512 LIGHT WATER REACTOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM

\

e 4

1

- . _ _ ,,_.r-. - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

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

- m,eg -. -. -- . . -----.

- . - ,m, .. ., . -- -.-. - .-- . . - . m y,- # -4,.m ,mq l

J.

4 i

i k

p s

4 1

4 d

f

l l

4-

)

i i

d t

i 1

1 4

.s t

d i

4 t

)-.

a 9

Jl k

l f

i 1 .

l 5

l a

t i

'N

.a f.

N a

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

ONdPT 4

NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB !

i MANUAL CHAPTER 2512 i

LIGHT WATER REACTOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM 1

CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1

] 2512 PURPOSE To provide guidance for implementation of the inspection program during construction of light water nuclear power reactors licensed either under 10 CFR

Parts 50 or 52. This program provides guidance for inspection of nuclear power j plant construction including: onsite excavation; fabrication of systems, i

' structures, and components both onsite and offsite, and before, during, and after basemat excavation; and ending with the fuel load preparation. Inspection of i

activities conducted under an early site permit or limited work authorization, or during site characterization, will be performed under inspection manual

chapter (IMC) 2511, " Light Water Reactor Construction Inspection Program - Pre-CP Phase."

i i

2512-02 OBJECTIVES l

i The primary objective of the construction inspection program (CIP) is to ensure j public health and safety during future nuclear plant operations through an evaluation of the effectiveness of licensee performance in implementing 3 technical, quality, and administrative requirements and activities during nuclear

! power plant design, procurement, and construction. This is accomplished through i a sampling inspection process where the NRC evaluates the licensee's self-assessment capabilities and their ability to monitor, document, and verify j satisfactory completion of construction related activities. The NRC's process involves direct observation of construction activities; physical examination of

. components, systems, and structures important to safety; review of licensee record:; and evaluation of licensee data. A significant portion of the NRC's efforts to evaluate licensee performance during the construction phase will be direct observation of construction related activities. The NRC's evaluation will use the inspection procedures prepared for the inspection of construction activities as outlined in Appendix A to this manual chapter.

. I NRC's assessments based on performance of the CIP inspection procedures, combined .

I with the licensee's verification of satisfactory completion of license conditions, construction activities, and the NRC's evaluation of the licensee's ,

quality assurance (QA) organization will provide the basis for making findings !

supporting fuel load and startup testing. For facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, this includes the finding required before the start of operation by 10 ;

- CFR 52.103 regarding satisfactory completion of the acceptance criteria contained )

in the inspections, tests, analysis, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) provided in '

the certified design and combined license. I Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 DRAFT

1 2512-03 BACKGROUND DRA*MT l l

The NRC staff developed a revised construction inspection program (CIP) for 1 future nuclear power plants to incorporate lessons learned from the l implementation of the inspection program at past nuclear power plant construction !

projects, accommodate features of the 10 CFR Part 52 licensing process, and to take advantage of improvements in computer hardware and software technology. The need for better documentation and retreivability of NRC inspection information, continuity of inspectors, and the to effectively ar.d efficiently transfer NRC institutional knowledge regarding construction activities gained during plant construction were significant lessons learned. Advances in computer hardware and software have made it possible to quickly, inexpensively, and accurately store ~ l and retrieve inspection information. I This manual chapter and its appendices contain the requirements for establishing a framework for implementation of the construction inspection program at future -

I nuclear power plant construction sites. Significant changes have been made in the organizational structure necessary to successfully implement this

)

construction inspection program. Greater reliance has been placed on effecient scheduling of inspector resources. A full time NRC inspection scheduler will be assigned at each construction site. The CIP information management system (CIPIMS) has been developed to provide the tools necessary for accurate and timely inspection planning.

Coordination of inspection planning with the licensee is essential to ensure the required inspections are performed with a minimum impact on licensee activities.

As in the past, site specific inspection plans will be developed. However, under the guidance in this manual chapter the site specific inspection plan will be developed in parallel with a plant's application review, and will consider the licensee's construction schedule and the impact of changes to the regulatory environment (specifically 10 CFR Part 52). When development is completed, the site specific inspection plan should be made public in order to show how the NRC will verify the facility is constructed to ensure public health and safety, and to provide regulatory predictability and stability. '

The CIPIMS was created to improve the availability, retreivability, and documentation of inspection results, and enhancements were made to inspection procedure format. The CIPIMS allows storing inspection related information in a computerized system that provides easy access to and querying of the information. The inspection procedures provide clear requirements with insights on how those requirements can be satisfied. It is incumbent upon all NRC staff involved with the implementation of the, construction inspection program to -

thoroughly document the inspections performed at nuclear power plant construction sites.

2512-04 DEFINITIONS 04-01 Aeolicant. Any individual, corporation, or association that submits, for NRC review, an application to conduct activities under a license, early site permit, or combined license.

04-02 Attribute Guidance. Guidance provided in inspection procedures related to a specific inspection procedure critical attribute that outlines the types of activities the inspector should review or observe during performance of the critical attribute.

2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ ._ _ _._. _ _ _ ~. _ _._

i DRAFT .

l 04-03 . Audit. Activities to determine through investigation the adequacy of, and adherence to, established procedures, instructions, specifications, codes, and other applicable contractual and licensing requirements, and the effectiveness j of implementation.

l 04-04 Certified Desian. A reactor design that has been incorporated into NRC 4 i regulations as an appendix to 10 CFR Part 52 pursuant to the requirements of 10

CFR Part 52 Subpart B.

! 04-05 Combined License. A combined construction permit and operating license i with conditions for a nuclear power facility issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part 52 subpart C.

a 1

04-06 Construction Activities. Any activity associated with the construction, l fabrication, or testing of structures, components, subcomponents, subsystems, or

- systems either at the construction site or at remote fabrication or testing -

! facilities that occurs during the construction phase of the inspection program. .

Construction activities also include the design and engineering of the-

{ structures,-systems, and components of the facility. -

4 i 04-07 Construction Inspection Proaram Information Manaaement System (CIPIMS).

l The personal computer based system that provides the ability to scheduie, plan, document, and report the results of inspection activities. Appendix E provides detailed guidance on the content and use of the CIPIMS. The CIPIMS will contain a predecisional portion that contains unreviewed inspection information that represents an individual inspector's position or views on an inspection activity and an NRC management reviewed portion that has received NRC management's review and represents the final NRC position on a specific inspection activity.

04-08 Construction Milestones. Preselected construction events that are used to determine construction status and to aid in establishing inspection points in the construction inspection program. -

i 04-09 Construction Permit. Authorization from the NRC to begin construction of a facility pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.10.

04-10 Construction Verification Tests. Tests performed under the direction of construction management personnel before system or component turnover to the operating group or as part of the ITAAC verification process. They may also include tests such as containment integrity and hydrostatic testing of piping systems necessary to demonstrate component, system, or structure design and construction satisfy license conditions and regulatory requirements. These tests may also include activities such as chemical cleaning, flushing, continuity testing, and initial calibration of instrumentation necessary to prepare a system

. for operation. j 04-11 Contractor. Any organization under contract for furnishing items or services to an organization operating under the requirements of Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50 or the commitments made in a combined license application under 10 CFR Part -52. The term includes consultant, vendor, supplier, fabricator, constructor, and subtier levels of these, where appropriate.

04-12 Critical Attribute. A characteristic or quality of a material, object, action, or process that is vital to demonstrating that design requirements have been met or that the activity being observed was performed successfully.

Critical attributes will be provided in each inspection procedure for the Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 DRAFT

DRAFT processes or activities being inspected. Critical attributes provide inspectors with NRC management expectations for what activities they are required to complete during performance of the associated inspection procedure.

04-13 Early Site Permit. NRC approval, issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part 52 Subpart A, for a site or sites on which one or more nuclear power facilities may be constructed and operated.

04-14 Exception. Findings or observations made during inspection that require additional NRC followup. Each exception will be related to a specific inspection sample and a specific critical attribute and occurrence of an inspection procedure. For each inspection report, related exceptions will be combined into a single open item (unresolved item, inspector followup item, or violation as ~

appropriate).

04-15 Insoection Procedure Occurrence. An inspection procedure occurrence is the complete performance of an inspection procedure's critical attributes that -

are scheduled for performance at a given time. Inspection procedure occurrence is also referred to as an inspection procedure cycle. During the construction period, inspection procedures may be performed a number of times and each time the inspection procedure is performed is another occurrence. To complete an occurrence of an inspection procedure, all of the critical attributes scheduled for performance shall have been inspected, with either sathiactory results or with additional followup required.

04-16 Insoection Sample. An inspection sample is an item that is selected for ,

inspection of one or more critical attributes. For example, an inspection sample may be a single record for review of welding records, while an entire system would comprise the inspection sample during a system walkdown inspection. The composition of an inspection sample will be defined in each inspection procedure under the sampling criteria. When practical, the inspection sample should be identified with the licensee's unique identification number.

04-17 Inspection Schedule. Inspection schedules will be based on the licensee's construction schedule and the site specific inspection plan. Inspection schedules will include an overall construction inspection schedule, and rolling twelve month, quarterly, monthly schedules, and weekly schedules. [ Note: the CIPIMS description (attachment 4 to the draft CIP report) provides a detailed discussion on the use of the inspection planning and scheduling application of

.the CIPIMS.]

04-18 Inspections. Tests. Analysis, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC). A body of requirements contained in a combined license (or certified design), which if met -

will provide reasonable assurance that the plant was built and will be operated in accordance with its certified design and combined license for facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. .

04-19 License Condition. Legally binding requirements specified in the license that have the same regulatory standing as NRC requirements and regulations.

License conditions are required to be satisfied by the license holder as a condition for use of the license.

DRAFT 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX

DRAFT 04-20 Licensee. Any individual, corporation, or association that is authorized

, to conduct activities under a license, construction permit, combined license, or early site permit issued by the NRC.

04-21 Licensee Commitment. Written statemer.ts made by s licensee providing information on how NRC requirements or license conditic.- Will be met relative to facility design and construction. Most of the commitments are contained in the safety analysis report (SAR), or the certified design and combined licensee application for facilities licensed pursuant to 10 CFR Part 52, but may be

, elsewhere, such as in responses to Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) proceedings.

l

~

04-22 Limited Work Authorization (LWA). Authorization from the NRC to an applicant to conduct certain construction activities pursuant to 10 CFR 50.10(e)(1) or 10 CFR 50.10(e)(3)(i).

,- 04-23 NRC Reauirements. NRC requirements include provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, NRC rules and regulations, conditions of a construction permit or combined license, and Commission orders. These include the ITAAC committed to by the applicant in the certified design and/or the combined license application for facilities to be licensed for construction under 10 CFR Part 52 Subpart C.

04-24 Open Item. An open item (or finding) is any inspection finding requiring additional followup by the NRC. This includes unresolved items, inspector followup items, violations, construction deficiency reports, and licensee 4

identified items. Open items will contain the all of the related exceptions found during an inspection period. For example, if during an inspection period multiple exceptions related to procedure adherence were identified during

performance of different inspection procedures, all of the exceptions would be combined into a single open item requiring NRC followup of licensee corrective actions on improving procedure adherence.

04-25 Preonerational Tests. Tests performed to demonstrate the proper 2 functioning and conformance to design requirements of plant components, systems, and structures. Preoperational testing will generally provide the final verification that components, systems, and structures have satisfied the acceptance criteria 'specified in the combined license for facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52.

04-26 Ouality Assurance (0A). Quality assurance comprises all those planned and

systematic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that a structure, system, or component will perform satisfactorily in service. Quality assurance includes quality control (QC), which comprises those quality assurance actions related to the physical characteristics of a material, structure, component, or system which provides a means to control the quality of material, structure,

. component, or system to predetermined requirements.

04-27 Ouality Assurance Manuai (OA Manual). Quality assurance manual refers to the aggregate collection of internal instructions and procedures established by each organization that has been delegated QA program responsibilities and whose objective is to ensure acceptable implementation of the QA program.

04-28 Review. A deliberate, critical examination.

DRAFT Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512

DRAFT 04-29 Sianificent Inscection Findina. A compilation of individual inspection findings that trovides the NRC staff conclusions regarding the licensee's procedures, cent rels, and practices associated with a specific construction activity. Significant inspection findings will be made early in the construction of the facility with periodic validation inspections performed throughout construction to verify continued acceptable implementation of the procedures, controls, and practices. The scope of inspections necessar.y to make a significant inspection finding will be defined in the site specific inspection p1an.

04-30 Sian-As-You-Go (SAVGO) . A program of inspection milestones known as SAYG0 points that can be implemented at a licensees request. Each SAYG0 point will provide licensee verification that its associated activities have been completed

appropriately and provide NRC confirmation that the activities inspected up to that point have been accomplished in accordance with the applicable industry codes and standards, and regulations and regulatory guidance.

04-31 Site Snecific Inspection Plan. The site specific inspection plan is the plan to be developed by the NRC based on the licensee's construction schedule that incorporates the inspection requirements of Appendix A of this manual chapter. The site specific inspection plan will provide references to inspection procedures; temporary instructions; number of occurrences of each inspection procedure and temporary instruction; ITAAC; and SAYG0 points. The site specific inspection plan will be developed during application review.

2512-05 ORGANIZATION, RESPONSIBILITIES AND AllTHORITIES 05-01 Responsibilities and Authorities.

A. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1ThTs7disdBTii;6iUFifliRfiithsINRifi6Fjiipiifiliidil?ifHidtsf33h'it7siipii$iffi6f[Af WillMuesthibsWe:di/alusted Minsre'stai ti ngYde%)sinnsntT6fithefdd{nstfdst idh!

}nspecti 66%F6gr@duhj ngithblthQ icehle]apMjpatj onksjisRfo@c6sst@$ti6d 9i!NPROEkfeactgy f

1. Director. Office of Nuclear Reactor Reaulation. The Director has the responsibility and authority for:

a. Overall direction of the program.

2. Director. Division of Insoection and Sucoort Proarams. The Director has responsibility and authority for:

~

a. Administration and control of inspection program development and ,

revision. I 1

l l

DRAFT ,

2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX

DRAFT

3. Director. Acoropriate Pro.iect Directorate. The Director has responsibility and authority for:

a. Making determinations regarding the acceptability of the quality assurance program as described in the SAR/ combined license application.

4 b. Overseeing an appeals process to resolve disputes between the licensee and NRC staff over inspection results and their impact on construction permit or combined license requirements.

c. Making determinations regarding the status of construction, implementation of the quality assurance program, the assessment of licensee performance, and reviewing the site specific inspection plan developed during application review.

d. Coordination of periodic Federal Register notices for the completion of inspections, tests, and analysis (ITA) (10 CFR Part 52.99 notifications), Federal Register notices for satisfactory completion of acceptance criteria (10 CFR Part 52.103 notifications) and other periodic notification of significant inspection findings that may be issued in the Federal Register.

j e. Obtaining contractor inspector support for their assigned l construction site as requested by the Senior Construction Site Representative.

4. Chief. Insoection Proaram Branch. The Branch Chief has the d

responsibility and authority for:

a. Reviewing the recommendations from the inspection staff regarding improvements to inspection procedures related to critical attributes and attribute guidance. Updating the inspection procedures as appropriate based on these recommendations.

t 4

b. Performing the assessment of the implementation of the construction inspection program.

c. Coordinating and overseeing the revision of existing inspection procedures and the development of new inspection procedures for the ;

construction inspection program. 1 B. REGIONAL OFFICE

% @ lens shod)JB Eliti$ementht L ~ " il6 % @NKl$ was? pre g

, wassunQMKgaK@H%

e ons pecfions ramfo J A$ $reinf o anthdonahi s#1 tructu$thV@ hag [toTesre9evalYLMu14 tift %W pisigsifE{MQhy%1ngifs res (.sh_en,iresidiF pse t sa s s lis M M

[.,

r itQshs[@tr$n$nss(nongpdf@Jt@grj n$ uction?bgajpogMc o

1. Reaional Administrator. The Regional Administrator has responsibility and authority for:

a. Implementing the startup test phase of the inspection program ;

following fuel loading in accordance with the requirements of manual Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 DRAFT

DRAFT chapter 2514, " Light-Water Reactor Inspecticn Program - Startup Testing Phase." This includes taking the lead in transitioning from the construction- inspection program implemented by NRR to the startup and operational phases of the inspection program.

b. Providing inspector resources to support and augment NRR inspector resources assigned to inspect construction projects in their region.

c. Providing support for enforcement and allegation activities for construction projects in their region.

2. Construction Branch Chief. The Construction Branch Chief has responsibility and authority for: *

a. Assigning regional inspector resources to construction projects in their region in coordination with the regional Division Directors -

and the SCSR.

b. Interfacing with other Regional Offices to identify inspector resources that are available to support construction projects in their region.

c. Notifying the SCSR or CSS of any changes in the availability of inspector resources that has an impact on construction inspections associated with the facility.

C. RESIDENT OFFICE .

1. Senior Construction Site Representative (SCSR). Initially the SCS., will be assigned to the NRR office during the early phase of application review. However, when the NRC site office is established the SCSR will be reassigned to the site office. The SCSR has the responsibility and authority for:

a. Administration and control of the implementation of the construction inspecti'on program at the facility. The SCSR will be assigned when an application is submitted and will be involved = in the review of the application. The SCSR will request inspector resources from NRR and the Regional Offices as necessary to effectively implement the construction program at their assigned construction site.

b. Determining and ensuring that the applicant / licensee has established -

and em:uted the QA program as described in the SAR or combined license application. Making recommendations to the appropriate NRR Director, Reactor Projects if the QA program is considered deficient ,

with respect to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.

)

c. After the resident office is established at the construction site, the SCSR will be the licensee's primary NRC contact for inspection program, policy, administrative, and technical issues.

d. The SCSR will be responsible for integrating all of the inspection findings to develop an overall assessment of licensee performance.

This assessment will provide one of the bases for development of the systematic assessment of licensee performance (SALP) report for the construction project.

2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ORAFT l

i CaESTm 2 '

e. Providing NRC management review of the predecisional portion of the

, CIPIMS and authorizing the transfer of data between the l' predecisional portion and the NRC management reviewed portion of the CIPIMS.

f. Issuing inspection reports.

g. For facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, the SCSR will make recommendations and provide supporting information to NRR management regarding completion of the inspection, tests, and analysis as required by 10 CFR 52.99 and verification of acceptance criteria to

,, support the findings required by 10 CFR 52.103.

h. Coordinate development of the site specific inspection plan during construction permit or combined license application review.

i. Assisting the cognizant Regional Administrator in transitioning from the construction inspection program to the startup and operating phase inspection programs.

2. Construction Site Scheduler (CSS). Initially the CSS will be assigned to the NRR office during the early phases of application review. After the NRC site office has been established the CSS will be reassigned to the

, site office. The CSS has the responsibility and authority for:

a. Preparing the site specific inspection plan using the inspection requirements of Appendix A and the licensee's construction schedule.

b. Preparing inspection schedules based on the site specific inspection plan, licensee construction schedules, and as directed by this manual chapter. During development of inspection schedules, the CSS will identify future inspector needs to the SCSR.

c. The CSS will be the CIPIMS system manager for the assigned construction site. This includes coordinating the input of data into the' CIPIMS and retrieval of data from the CIPIMS.

d. Assisting the cognizant Regional Administrator in transitioning from the construction inspection program to the startup and operating phase inspection programs.

3. Site Chief Civil / Structural Insoector (SCSI). Site Chief Mechanical Insoector (SCMI). and Site Chief Electrical /I&C ' Inspector (SCEI). The SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI have responsibility and authority for:

a. The SCSI will coordinate the performance of and participate in inspections related to geotechnical, civil, and structural activities including site preparation, excavation, fabrication, manufacture, installation, and testing of structures. The SCHI will i coordinate the performance of and participate in inspections related i to the fabrication, manufacture, installation, and testing of ,

mechanical systems and comenents. The SCEI will coordinate the !

performance of and participate in inspections related to the fabrication, manufacture, installation, and testing of electrical and instrumentation / control systems and components.

Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 l DRAFT l 1

DRAFT

b. Performing all inspections related to the review of QA Program i procedures, policies, and practices, and implementation of the QA/QC Programs in their areas of responsibility.

4

c. Assisting the CSS in scheduling inspections and identifying inspector resources required for future inspections in their areas of responsibility.

Assisting the cognizant Regional Administrator in transitioning from d.

the construction inspection program to the startup and operating

), phase inspection programs.

l e. Providing the point of contact and peer review for specialist "

)

inspectors assigned to the construction site' in their areas of

responsibility. This includes review of all specialist ir.spector l generated inspection information before the information is input -

into the predecisional portion of the CIPIMS. j

f. Preparing inspection report input using the inspection generated information provided by the NRC management reviewed portion of the CIPIMS for their areas of responsibility. I 1

l g. Updating testing and other inspection procedures as necessary and l

directed within specific inspection procedures to recognize plant l specific design features and testing requirements. ]

i 2512-06 PROGRAM POLICY 06-01 Jnsoection Plannino. The licensee is ultimately responsibly for the safety of the nuclear facility. The NRC ensures, through a sampling inspection l program, that this responsibility is carried out in an effective manner during plant construction. The construction inspection program described in this chapter provides the batic inspection requirements to be incorporated into the 3

site specific inspection plan developed during application review. Appendix A to this manual chapter references construction inspection procedures, which contain the inspection requirements, for various processes and activities performed during construction.

For plants lic.ensed under 10 CFR Part 52, this manual chapter provides the framework for inspection activities necessary to verify satisfactory completion of the ITAAC specified in the certified design and combined license application. .

The scope of inspection activities performed for verification of the acceptance criteria will be determined during combined license application review and will be . incorporated into the site specific inspection plan. Verification of the .

acceptance criteria will provide input to NRC management necessary to make a i

recommendation to the Commission that the acceptance criteria have been met before operation of the facility is authorized as required by 10 CFR 52.103.

06-02 Inspection Performance. It is expected that most inspection activity will involve the direct observation of ongoing construction activities. Inspection c performance will be directed by the requirements of the inspection procedures assigned to an individual inspector. Inspection procedures will provide requirements on what the inspector shall inspect (critical attributes), and will provide the inspector with guidance on how to perform the inspection and what acceptance criteria to use in assessing licensee performance (attribute 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT

DRAFT guidance). Inspection procedures should generally be narrowly focused and of short duration. By using a narrowly focused, regimented approach in directing inspection performance, accurate and highly detailed information should be obtained by the inspector. After the inspection generated information is recorded in the construction inspection program data base, it provides discrete, manageable blocks of information that can be readily sorted and grouped _using the CIPIMS for assessment by NRC management.

06-03 Use of Sianificant Insoection Findinas. Significant findings will be used to announce NRC staff conclusions regarding significant construction activities or processes. These findings are intended to be NRC staff actions to assist in managing the construction inspection program, and will be based on aggregated inspection results contained in the CIPIMS. Notification of significant inspection findings will generally be in the monthly resident inspection reports, and the NRR staff may issue federal Register notices documenting in which inspection reports significant inspection findings were made. ,

1 The specific inspection procedure occurrences associated with significant l inspection findings will be identified during application review and will be incorporated into the site specific inspection plan. - The significant inspection findings may be coordindi.ed with or relai.ed to ITAAC and SAYGO points as {

appropriate. The issuance of these findings are not required by regulations and i will not be coordinated with the licensee. Significant inspection findings will '

provide for:aalized publication of NRC staff judgements on construction acceptability for a broad range of licensee processes and/or as-built systems, structures, an

report or Federa7 Register notice) and will reference the original notice and the basis for the retradion. The licensee should be given approximately 30 days to address the retraction before it is issued. Should the licensee identify new information that demonstrates that the significant finding remains valid, the -

SCSR, in consultation witF NRR and Regional Management, may delay issuance of the retraction to allow NRC -ollowup and confinnation of the information or may terminate issuance of tne retraction at the SCSR's discretion. .

06-04 Periodic Notifications of Ins.oection Results. Routine inspection results M11 be included in periodic resident inspection reports issued by the SCSR.

These inspection reports will describe all of the completed inspection activities performed during the period based on the completion of inspection procedure critical attributes. Inspection activities (critical attributes) ongoing at the end .,f the period shall not be documented in the subject periodic inspection report. Inspection reports shall only document completed inspection activities.

Completed inspection activities include those critical attributes that require additional NRC followup for which an open item was identified, but adequate information was available to complete the critical attribute. For example, 2512 - Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT

_ - . . - - . . .. . - - ..-.- - - . .-, - . - . _ -=

2

DRAFT

i during review of a critical attribute the inspector may identify that workers I
failed to follow the specific steps in a procedure, however . the inspector determined that this action had no direct adverse impact on the quality of the work being performed. The inspector would identify an exception indicating the i failure to follow procedure, but would complete the critical attribute noting '
j. that the activity being observed was performed satisfactorily with a minor
exception. The exception would then be followed up as described in Section 07.03 of this manual chapter.
i In addition to routine inspection reports, special inspection reports may be issued when required or as directed by NRC management or other inspection ranual chapter requirements. Resident inspection reports will be issued in accordance with the directions provided in Appendix C of this manual chapter using the
inspection information contained in the NRC management reviewed CIPIMS.
Other periodic notifications of inspection results include the Notification of
!. Significant Inspection Findings as discussed in Section 06.03 above and the j Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance-(SALP) reports as discussed in NRC
, Management Directive 8.6.
06-05 Sian-As-You-Go Processes (SAYGO). The term SAYG0 refers to a program of f inspection milestones, known as SAYG0 points, jointly agreed on between the NRC j and a licensee. As the criteria for each SAYGO poir,t are successfully met by the i licensee and verified by the NRC, their completion should be documented in l inspection reports (irs), including the appropriate supporting data from the l CIPIMS. these SAYGO com At the ootion of NRC mana. . ement, .j DfiSj$y1dE$pletions could begg$g -
poticed in the Fede;raMeg@ist j' d3ff)M00Makeh gggs i Ei .. sys3f.
! At the licensee's request, a SAYGO process could be incorporated into the i constructinn inspection program. During the development of the site specific i inspection plan, the NRC and the licensee would reach consensus regarding when !
i each SAYG0 poir.t should occur, what the licensee requirements are for satisfying ,
i the SAYG0 point, .what NRC actions would be required to verify satisfactory
! completion cf the SAYGO point, and how completion of the SAYGO point should be 1
! related to future llWnsee and NRC activities. For facilities licensed under 10 )
CFR Part 52, SAYGO points may be used in the verification of satisfactory 9AAC
l. completion.
\
j rd-06 Periodic Notification of Insoection. Test. and Analysis. and Acceptance j i m yia (ITAAC) Comoletion. Periodic notifications of ITAAC completion are l- w r ?d of the NRC staff by 10 CFR Part 52.99. The SCSR will make
! r a.sadations to the cognizant NRR management regarding the issuance of j n. :iications of ITAAC Completion. The SCSR's recommendation will certify that
^
. the NRC's inspection activities related to the specified ITAAC hava been j completed. The Notification of ITAAC Completion will F oublished in the Federal J Register.
] 06-07 OA Proavam Imolementation. The NRC policy for inspection of QA manual and QA program implementation and documentation of findings is as follows:
. a. Defore conducting i.he program implementation inspection at the office of
the applicable organization, inspection of the QA manual shall be i performed by the SCSR. The QA manual inspection should occur as early as i possible during the license application review process. Findings j regarding the QA manual inspection shall not be formally documented in an Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 j
DRAFT l 1
DRAFT .
inspection report until the QA program implementation inspection at the !
applicant's or contractor's office, and the site, as appropriate, have '
I been completed. The initial inspection of the apolicant's QA program l implementation shall be comaleted shortly after tne start of significant .
! activities related to the construction or fabrication of systems, I structures, or components covered or to be covered by the requirements of l the QA manual.
b. Significant inspection findings related to the QA manual inspection shall be forwarded to the cognizant NRR manager for review and resolution at any time during the performance of the inspection.
l 06-08 Other Proaram Interfaces 2 The construction inspection program may be , l l supplemented by other related programs such as the Vendor Inspection Program (MC 1 2700), the Construction Appraisal Team Inspection Program (MC 2920), the Light i Water Reactor Construction Inspection Program - Pre-CP Phase (MC 2511), and the Operator Licensag program. These programs can be usad to meet the construction -
inspection program objectives.
2512-07 PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS 07.01 Insoection Reauirements. The inspection procedures (IP) applicable duri '
construction are provided in Appendix A to this chapter,'[All o? the curre,ng nt cbnstruction" ins'pehtion ' pfocedures" 'and ?teinposafy finst' ructions Mill require revision to incorporate the: content and$ format channes to make,fnem compatible l with ti.is program).' Eich"of ~the' IPs ~will contain ' c'ritical attributes 'that iiis~p'sctors'shall verify (in accordance with the inspection schedules) during performance of each inspection procedure occurrence.
Within each critical attribute is guidance intended to provide NRC management insights to the inspector regarding the types of items to inspect to satisfactorily complete verification of the critical attribute. This attribute guidance is based on the expected significant aspects of each critical attribute.
However, they do not represent every significant aspect that could be inspected and, therefore, the inspector may inspect other aspects of the critical attribute
! provided the followi'ng criteria are met:
1) The inspector determines that the aspect is safety significant, based on sound technical judgement.
L
! 2) The inspector obtains approval from the Senior Construction Site l Representative regarding the change as soon as possible and at least -
l before departing the inspection site (onsite or offsite).
3) The activities performed to inspect the critical attribute and the .
results of the inspection are clearly recorded in the inspector's input i to the CIPIMS and the inspection report.
l l
DRAFT l 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX l
DRAFT .
In having detailed requirements in the inspection procedures by using critical attributes, and the guidance inspectors should follow to verify completion of the <
critical attributes, NRC management has provided the inspection staff with clear I expectations regarding their performance during inspection of construction related activities.
1 07.02 Level of Effort. The level of inspection effort required to ensure the I same degree of confidence that construction 1.; adequate will vary from site to l site. Similarly, different types of construction activities at the same site or <
at locations away from the construction site may require various levels of effort !
to provide the same degree of assurance of quality work. As a minimum,
' inspection effort will be driven by the requirements of the site specific inspection plan and associated inspection procedures, and shall be sufficient to avoid unnecessary delays in the construction of the facility related to NRC inspection activities. Significantly increasing the scope of inspection effort beyond those stated by the site specific inspection plan will generally be the -
result of declining licensee performance as noted during periodic assessment of i licensee performance. Increases in inspection effort following the issuance of '
a significant inspection finding will be made in the event the significant-inspection finding is retracted for cause and as directed by the SCSR and the site specific inspection plan will be adjusted accordingly.
i For multi-unit facilities, the construction inspection effort applied to the QA/QC Program may be reduced for subsequent units when no substantive changes
, have been made to the QA/QC Program for the subsequent units. Significant QA/QC procedure revisions should be examined for all units. How?ver, completion of 1 construction inspection requirements related to the implementation of the QA/QC Program (i.e., work observation and review of quality records) is required for each unit under construction. The Construction Site Scheduler (CSS) should consider this reduction in inspection effort when developing the site specific
inspection plan and inspection schedules.
Additional inspection effort may be required to perform followup inspections of
! NRC findings or allegations. This additional inspection effort will be coordinated as described in Section 07.03 for both NRC findings followup and allegation review.
07.03 Inspection Findina FollowuD. Inspection findings consist of compilations of related exceptions identified during an inspection report period, and are documented and tracked as an open item. Open items shall be followed up by scheduling an inspection procedure (s) related to the open item. The inspection procedure (s) scheduled can be of limited scope by specifying only those critical attributes required to be performed as followup. The CSS shall review each opea item and assign followup responsibility to the associated chief construction
. inspector (SCSI, SCEI, SCMI). The assigned chief construction inspector shall review the open item, identify which inspection procedure (c) and associated critical attributes are applicable for followup, and determine the timeframe in which the licensee should have completed actions to resolve the. open itcm.
The CSS will use this information to schedule performance of the followup inspection based on currently scheduled inspection effort, and if necessary will schedule additional inspection effort. The CSS will electronically attach a note in the schedules documenting which open itens and associated exceptions will be followed up during specific future inspections. !
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 DRAFT
QeRAFT inspector (s) assigned to perform the followup inspection shall rev open item (including the inspection information for each of the exceptions related to the open item), review the inspection procedure (s) and critical attributes selected by the senior construction inspector, and perform inspections as outlined in the inspection procedure (s) and critical attributes. Followup inspection results will be documented in the same manner as routine inspection results. l 07.04 Use of Insoectors. In accordance with the objectives of this program, the majority of the assigned inspectors' time should De focused on assessing the results of licensee construction activities. Inspection assignments should j emphasize the early identification of problem areas. .
~
Successful completion of the site specific inspection plan may require l significant inspection effort outside of normal working hours, on backshifts and weekends. Backshift and weekend work will be scheduled based on the licensee's '
construction schedule. The amount of backshift and weekend work scheduled should -
be consistent with the amount and types of construction activities the licensee performs during these periods. The SCSR will determine when backshift coverage ,
is required and the scope of the backshift coverage.
l The permanent resident inspection staff vill be headed by the SCSR, with the SCMI, SCEI, SCSI, and CSS coordinating inspection activities. The SCSR and ,
Regional management will coordinate the assignment of inspection requirements to l the resident, regional, or NRR inspectors consistent with the qualifications and !
availability of individual inspectors.
Inspectt. of routine construction activities will generally be performed by the residert c ?f. The SCHI's, SCSI's, and SCEI's primary focus will be on the perforn n of all QA Program and QA/QC procedure review and implementation inspections. This is to be accomplished through program and procedure reviews, and direct observation of the implementation and use of QA/QC controls during construction activities. Detailed technical reviews and inspections, and much of the direct observation of construction activities, for technical aspects of construction, will be performed by specialist inspectes assigned to the site.
The purpose of dividing responsibilities in this manner is to provide two methods of inspection that' can be used to cross-check NRC inspection results and activities to give a more comprehensive picture of licensee performance. Issues identified during review of the QA Program and procedures can identify technical
. areas for specialist inspectors to follow, and can be used to check the effectiveness of NRC specialist inspector efforts in reviewing licensee activities. Specialist inspector findings can be used to check the effectiveness of the licensee's QA organization and identify directions for future NRC -
inspection of the licensee's QA Program, procedures, and implementation.
Transition to the startup phase of the inspection program will be coordinated ,
with the Regional Office. It is expected that the Regional Offices will assign operatwns resident staff during pre-operational testing. The SCSR, SCMI, SCSI, SCEs, and CSS will support transition to the startup phase of the inspection program and will remain onsite for at least 6 months after start of commercial operation of the facility. Some construction inspection staff may stay onsite longer to ensure that all issues that arose during construction, especially open items, are resolved. This practice will ensure that the operations resident DRAFT 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX
_ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ ._ _.__ __ _ _ ..~. _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ . _ -_ _
l DRAFT l
[ inspectors can focus on plant operations during the early phase of commercial 1 operation. The resident office composition during the startup and early operation phases of the inspection program will be determined by the cognizant
Regional Administrator and SCSR.
I 2512-08 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
08.01 Imolementation. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) is i responsible for the implementation of the inspection program described in this
chapter and related appendices with the exceptions noted within. The Regional s
,, Offices are responsible for providing inspection resources and to support and
[ supplement the inspection resources provided by NRR. ,
I
The inspection program is intended to provide the framework for managing the
!- inspection effort. The number of inspection samples to obtain for completion of
. each tion procedure will be provided in the inspection proceduresRBff
j. Be[ gins , however, the number of samples to obtain during each occurrence of $
the nspection procedure can be adjusted when the site specific inspection plan is developed or as inspection schedules are prepared. How often each inspection
! procedure should be performed during the construction period, and when each i inspection procedure occurrence should be performed, will be determined during l development of the site specific inspection plan and inspection schedules. !
j. I
{ Inspectors are encouraged to independently pursue any safety significant concern.
i However, inspector must identify which inspection procedure (s) and/or specific
? critical attributes are to be used to perform independent inspection activities )
j' and to accurately record this information and the inspection results so they can '
{ be incorporated into the CIPIMS. Individual inspectors are expected to apply L professional judgement regarding the need to complete all of the attribute i
! guidence of the critical attributes of an inspection procedure. Inspectors are I also encouraged to identify areas in the inspection procedures that require either additional critical attributes or better attribute guidance or where critical attributes or guidance are inappropriate for the activities being i inspected. This information should be provided to the SCSR who will forward it to the NRR's Inspect' ion Program Branch for action.
Specialist inspectors are expected to discuss their planned inspection activities
! with the SCMI, SCSI, or SCEI as appropriate. Inspection findings will be 4
discussed with the SCMI, SCSI, or SCEI before the specialist inspector exits with the licensee. The SCMI, SCSI, and SCEI will attend the exit meetings between the licensee and special tr.spectors for all inspections that they coordinate or
[ participate in.
. Although the site specific inspection plan will contain the minimum inspection
requirements for a specific facility under construction, situations may arise
where parts of the plan cannot be completed or otherwise satisfied by related programs referenced in this chapter. However, in all cases sufficient i information shall be collected to provide adequate confidence that all design and i license commitments (and acceptance criteria of facilities licensed under 10 CFR i Part 5'2) have been satisfied. Authorization for modifications to the site i specific nspection plan that reduce the level of inspection effort shall be made
by the SCSR after review by NRR and Regional management. Documentation of the i basis for the changes and approval of the reduction in inspection effort shall 1 be forwarded to the CSS, who will make the changes to the site specific j inspection plan and related inspection schedules. Each inspection procedure that i Issue Date

XX/XX/XX 2512 ,
DRAFT
DRAFT . 1 l was planned to be performed but subsequently was either not performed or only i -partially completed shall be closed in the CIPIMS by attaching a note indicating the reason, basis, and/or references for closure.
08.02 Insoection Results. As stated in Title 10 CFR and in MC 2500, NRC inspectors perform a basic minion in determining whether a licensee meets
, current regulatory requirements and comitments. Identifying specific instances l where a licensee fails to meet such requirements and comitments, although
! important, can result in correction of symptoms rather than correction of the ;
l underlying causes of licensee problems. Inspection results and findings should '
provide early identification and resolution of problems, their root causes, and generic implications. Documentation of inspection results, findings, and
l observations should contain sufficient detail to allow an independent reviewer to determine what was observed, reviewed, monitored, and/or analyzed during the ,
inspection (by specific reference); when and where the inspection activities were conducted; what the bases for performing the inspection were; what criteria were - -
used to assess licensee performance; and the inspectors conclusions regarding the .
activities observed.
Inspection results shall be documented in the CIPIMS in accordance with.the guidance provided in Appendix D to this manual chapter. Inspectors 'are encouraged to record their input to the CIPIMS in sufficient detail to accurately portray their inspection efforts. Inspection reports will be developed using the information provided by the inspectors that is cor.tained in the NRC management reviewed portion of the CIPIMS in accordance with the requirements of Appendix C to this manual chapter.
Because of limited inspector resources and the minimal baseline aspects of the program., the inspection procedures cover only a small sample of licensee activities. Thus, it is important that an inspector such as the SCMI, SCSI, and SCEI evaluate whether a noncompliance or deficiency represents an isolated case or may be symptomatic of a broader, more serious problem in that area. To provide the perspective to perform this evaluation, the inspector (SCMI, SCEI, and SCSI) should:
a. Keep currently informed of deficiencies, audit findings, and plant problems identified by the licensee's own organization or by the licensee's contractor organization.
b. Ascertain whether additional NRC inspection effort is merited in the area under cor. sideration. The recomendation for additional NRC inspection effort shall be made to the CSS who will review the recomendation -
considering existing inspection plans. The CSS will then recomend whether to modify the site specific inspection plan to the SCSR.
Where the evidence indicates a symptomatic problem, NRR and Regional management should be consulted. Enforcement action, if warranted, should be in accordance with NRC enforcement guidelines. The SCSR will discuss and coordinate enforcement actions with NRR and Regional management before initiating actions against the licensee.
08.03 Inspection Plannina2 Appendix A provides the basic inspection procedures to be incorporated into the site specific inspection plan. The CSS shall develop a site specific inspection plan as soon as practical, preferably during license application review, incorporating the inspection procedures and the licensee's site specific construction schedule. The site specific inspection plan shall 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
DRAFT provide the level of detail necessary to determine: 1) the minimum number of times each inspection procedure shall be performed; 2) the relation between the inspection procedures and ITAAC (for facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52 Subpart C); 3) the relation to the issuance of significant inspection findings;
4) the relation to SAYG0 points, if used; and 5) the general timeframe in which each occurrence of an inspection procedure is to take place.
Completion of the site specific inspection plan will provide the foundation for the development of the construction inspection schedules. The CIPIMS provides the flexibility for the CSS to schedule inspection activities at the critical attribute level of each inspection procedure. When practical the CSS should take advantage of this capability to schedule inspection activities in detail.
Appendix E of this manual chap [@ter if6EdiVildpsdiff6iiEthelCIFlMSfdssERii lattEiGidhM4itsithQsfBIg @rt)T^pF6Vidsi ihstMEfiB^nTfEFthT6srof"ths CIPIMS.
After the site specific inspection plan is completed, the CSS will develop inspection schedules as outlined below:
. Overall Construction Inspection Schedule
. 12 Month Rolling Inspection Schedule
. Quarterly Rolling Inspection Schedule
. Monthly Rolling Inspection Schedule
. Weekly Inspection Schedule The overall schedule will incorporate all of the planned inspection activities for the entire planned period of construction (the maximum duration the licensee has planned). The CSS should review this schedule periodically (at least quarterly) to adjust it for changes to the licensee's long range construction schedule. The Overall Construction Inspection Schedule will be used for long range planning of inspection resources (i.e., ensuring the required inspection skills or engineering disciplines are available when required). Therefore it is imperative that the overall schedule be completed as soon as possible during application review.
The 12 month schedule provides the first level of resource planning. This ,
schedule is a rollin'g schedule that looks 12 months ahead. During development l of this schedule the CSS shall identify the types of inspection skills and l engineering disciplines that will be needed for specific periods of construction j activity during the next 12 months. The CSS shall update this schedule at the i end of each month for the next 12 month period and incorporate any changes in the licensee's construction schedule for the period that affect the inspection schedule.
The quarterly schedule provides the second level of resource planning. This
- schedule is a rolling schedule that looks 3 months ahead. During development of this schedule the CSS should identify individual inspectors (by name) with the required inspection and engineering skills to perform specific inspection procedures. As a minimum, this s'chedule shall be updated monthly for the subsequent 3 month period. The CSS should also review this schedule on a weekly basis and update it as necessary to accommodate changes to the licensee's construction schedule and changes to available inspection resources.
DRAFT Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 J
DRAFT The monthly schedule provides the final level of resource planning. This schedule is a rolling schedule that looks 1 month ahead. During development of this schedule the CSS shall identify the inspectors (by name) performing specific inspection procedures at specific periods during the month (i.e., days the inspector will be onsite or at an offsite location performing their inspection).
L'ittle or no changes should be made to this schedule after issuance.
l The weekly schedule provides an inspection planning tool for the inspectors performing specific inspection procedures. This is a I week rolling schedule. i During development of this schedule, the CSS shall identify the specific j inspectors (by name) performing specific inspection procedures, and shall identify licensee. activities available for inspection related to those inspection '
procedures based on the licensee's construction schedule (i.e., what construction ,
activities will be conducted during the next week that the inspector can observe t during performance of a specific inspection procedure?). The weekly schedule i will provide the inspector with the universe of possible inspection samples from '
which they will select a representative sample for inspection. The CSS shall also include in the weekly schedule the expected number of inspection samples the l inspector should obtain during performance of each inspection procedure. !
2512-09 INTERFACE WITH RELATED PROGRAMS I 09.01 Construction Aooraisal Team (CAT) Inspection Proaram. The CAT program uses integrated, multidisciplined inspections to determine if a facility is being constructed in accordance with regulatory requirements and if the applicant's management and quality control programs are effective. The inspections are focused primarily on hardware installation and construction quality. CAT
, inspections will be coordinated with the CSS when identified for performance at a specific site and will be incorporated into the site specific inspection plan.
, Altho e is m._l33hMEsyg[;Qg{, the NRR/ Region inteic responsibilities aces are summar are provided
a. NRR will solicit the region to provide inspectors who will participate as 4
active team members. A member of the permanent resident inspection ,
staff, although not assigned as a team member, should attend the daily l CAT briefing meetings and the exit meeting with the licensee.
b. The SCSR has the responsibility for followup action on potential i enforcement actions described in the CAT inspection reports.
c. The SCSR will be sent recommendations on the extent to which the CAT 4
effort satisfied the inspection program requirements of this manual chapter. The SCSR will determine how the CAT results will be input and .
used by the CIPIMS.
l
d. The CAT inspection results will be used in the assessment of NRR and 1 regional performance of the construction inspection program described in this manual chapter.
09.02 Licensee Contractor and Vendor Insoection Proaram (LCVIP). General policies for Vendor Program / Region interfaces are described in MC 2700. Changes, as they occur, will be addressed in a revision of MC 2700. Vendor inspections may be necessary to verify satisfactory completion of design and license commitments (or acceptance criteria for facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52) 2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 1
DRAFT
1 l DRAFT
' for specific components manufactured for the facility, or for modular construction activities away from the construction site. The - site specific
inspection plan will provide recommended inspection activities for the Vendor Inspection Program. The SCSR will ensure that those inspection activities not '
i performed by the Vendor Inspection Program required to verify satisfactory completion of design and license commitments are conducted under the CIP.
09.03 Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) Proaram. The SALP
program (NRC Management Directive 8.6) is a comprehensive, periodic appraisal by
} the NRC staff of power reactor licensees. It is designed to improve licensee
, performance, improve the NRC regulatory performance by determining which areas i, need increased inspection emphasis, and to provide a basis for management
allocation of resources. The SCSR has the responsibility and authority to adjust i
the expenditure of inspection resources based on the performance of the licensee. ,
\ -
t The permanent resident inspection staff (SCSR, SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI) plays a
! vital role in the development of the assessment of licensee performance. Each ,
l of the chief inspectors is required to review all of the inspector findings and l
assessments in their areas of responsibility to create an integrated assessment ,
1 of licensee performance for their responsible functional areas. The SCSR will i j review each of the individual assessments and supporting inspection generated l'
! information provided by the chief inspectors, and will develop an overall l assessment of licensee performance. The assessments and supporting inspection i
generated information will provide the foundation for the development of the SALP report in accordance with the requirements of NRC Management Directive 8.6.
4 i Refer to NRC Management Directive 8.6 for the SALP functional areas reltted to
! the assessment of licensee performance at nuclear power plants under 1 l construction. The SCSR will assign functional area responsibilities to the SCSI, l SCMI, and SCEI consistent with their areas of inspection coordination.
1 l 09.04 Security and Safeauards Insoections.__ The security and safeguards inspection activities, as judged appropriate by the SCSR and Regional management, i will be conducted as an early effort of the program to ensure adequate safeguards I
are in place for receipt of new fuel at the facility under construction. For
facilities licensed'under 10 CFR Part 52, the combined license application may i contain additional ITAAC that address security and safeguards issues. In this j case, security and safeguards inspections will be performed to verify l i satisfactory completion of the acceptance criteria in this area. Conduct of ;
security and safeguards inspections will be coordinated with the CSS and will be j
incorporated into the site specific inspection plan and inspection schedules.
!- Selected portions of preoperational safeguards inspection activities, such as
barriers for alarm stations and vital areas, should be' conducted as early as 4 practical during construction and installation of security features. Such early i . onsite inspection is intended to preclude the late identification of problems.
j Some of these early reviews may be possible during onsite accompaniment of licensing reviewers.
! 09.05 Early Site Permit and Site Characterization Phasa Insoection Proaram (IMC 2511). Inspection activities performed during this phase of the inspection program may be used to verify completion of some design or license commitments (including ITAAC) applicable to site characterization and preparation. The CSS will incorporate the inspections cenducted under MC 2511 into the site specific inspection plan, noting when these activities were performed. If the inspection Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 2512 DRAFT
activities of MC 2511 have not been completed at the tin,e the COL application is submitted, or if it is difficult to verify that the required inspections were completed, the CSS will incorporate the inspection guidance of MC 2511 into the site specific inspection plan and inspection schedules.
09.06 Operator Licensina Proaram. The operator licensing program will be used to provide input to the SCSR, and Regional and NRR management for determining recommendations regarding fuel load authorization and operation of the facility.
The licensee will be required to have licensed operators for receipt, handling, and loading fuel. Evaluation of the operator licensing program and its implementation should be conducted as early as possible and will be coordinated with the CSS for incorporation into the site specific inspection plan and ,.
inspection schedules.
END Appendices i
i 1
i l
2512 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT W W -4 -
DRAFT i APPENDIX A
CONSTRUCT!0N INSPECTION PROGRAM
', INSPECTION PROCEDURES
RELATED TO ,
l AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE (responsibility of the Site Chief. Civil / Structural Inspector - SCSI) i Ouality Assurance i
j 35020* Audit of Applicant's Surveillance of Contractor QA/QC l, 35051* Site Erected Reactor Vessels - QA Procedures i 35060* Licensee Management of QA Activities-
35061* In-Depth QA Inspection of Performance 3
35065* Procurement, Receiviag, and Storage 1
35100* Review of QA Manual . 3 35701* Quality Assurance Program Annual Review '
35960* QA Program Evaluation of Engineering. Service Organization 38701* Procurement Program 38702* Receipt, Storage and Handling of Equipment and Materials Program ,
38703* Commercial Grade Procurement Inspection 1 39701* Records Program '
39702* Document Control Program
, 40500* Evaluation of Licen:ee Self-Assessment Cap 6111ty Desian and Desian Chanaes 37051* Verification of As-Builts 37055* On-Site Design Activities 37301* Comparison of As-Built Plant to FSAR Description Geotechnical/ Foundation Activities I 45051 Procedure Review 45053 Work Observation 45055 Record Review Structural Concrete 46051 Structural Concrete Procedure Review 46053 ' Structural Concrete Work Observation 46055. Structural Concrete Record Review 46061 Structural Masonry Construction 1 46071 Concrete Expansion Anchors 1 Containment and Structures 47051 Containment (Post-Tension 1ng) Procedure Review 47053 Containment (Post-Tensioning) Work Observation i 47055 Containment (Post-Tensioning) Record Review
Responsibility for completion of the (*) inspection procedures is to be shared between all of the chief construction inspectors.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX A-1 2512 DRAFT . _ __ _
i DRAFT Structural Steel and Suonorts 48051 Structural Steel and Support Fracedure Review l 4
48053 Structural Steel and Support Work Observation !
48055 Structural Steel and Support Record Review j- 55100 Structural Welding General Inspection Precedure Component Suncorts
! 50090 Pipe Support and Restraint Systems Containment Penetrations
~
l 53051 Containment Penetrations (Mechanical) Procedure Review
]
~
53053 Containment Penetrations '(Mechanical) Work Observation 53055 Containment Penetrations (Mechanical) Record Review .
I l
Environmental Protection i.
Environmental Protection - Initial and Periodic Inspections I
l 80210 '
Testina
! l
! 39301* Preoperational Test Records j 61700* Surveillance Procedures and Records 61701* Complex Surveillances
70300* Preoperational Test Procedure Review i 70301* Overall Preoperational Test Program Review i 70302* Preoperational' Test Program Implementation 70311*' Preoperational Test Procedure Verification
! 70312* Preoperational Test Witnessing .
I q- 70329* Preoperational Test Result Evaluation Verification
63050 Containment Structural Integrity Test Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test - Procedure Review 70307 70313 Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test j 70323 Containment Leak Rate Test Results Evaluation i 70342 Containnient Combustible Gas Control System Test
70353 Cranes, Hoists, and Lifting Equipment Test - Preoperational Test j Procedure Review
.70370 Testing Piping Support and Restraint Systems lj 70442 Containment Combustible Gas Control System Test - Preoperational
Test Witnessing j' 70453 Cranes, Hoists, and Lifting Equipment Test - Preoperational test -
p Witnessing *
Resprm lbility for completion of the (*) inspection procedures is to be shared between all of the chief construction inspectors.
2512 A-2 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT -
~. _ .. .
DRAFT MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE (responsibility of the Site Chief Mechanical Inspector - SCMI)
Ouality Assurance 35020* ' Audit of Applicant's Surveillance of Contractor QA/QC l 35051* Site Erected Reactor Vessels - QA Procedures 1 35060* Licensee Management of QA Activities 35061* In-Depth QA Inspection of Performance 35065* Procurement, Receiving, and Storage i 35100* Review of QA Manual j 35701* Quality Assurance Program Annual Review 35960* QA Program Evaluation of Engineering Service Organization -
l
~
3870l* Procurement Program 38702* Receipt, Storage and Handling of Equipment and Materials Program 38703* Commercial Grade Procurement Inspection 39701* Records Program
.% 702* Document Control Program ,
40500* Evaluation of Licensee Self-Assessment Capability Desian and Desico Chances 37051* Vertfication of As-Builts 37055* On-Site Design Activities l 3730l* Comparison of As-Built Plant to FSAR Description l Fire Prevention and Protection 42051 Fire Protection Procedure Review 64704 Fire Protection / Prevention Program Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Pioina ,
49051 QA Review 49053 Work Observation l 49055 Record Review ,
]
Safety-Related Pioina 49061 QA Review i Work Observation 49063 49065 Record Review Mechanical Comoonents and Eauioment 50051 Reactor Vessel and Internals QA Review 50053 Reactor Vessel and Internals Work Observation ,
50055 Reactor Vessel and Internals Records Review l 50071 Safety-Related Components - Procedure Review 50073 Mechanical Components - Work Observation l
l
Responsibility for conpletion of the (*) inspection procedJres la to be shared between all of the chief I construction inspectors.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX A-3 2512 DR/ APT
DRAFT
, 50075 Safety-Related Components - Records Review i 50082 Site-Erected Reactor Vessels - Review of Procedures i 50083 Site-Erected Reactor Vessels - Observation of Erection Activities 50085 Site-Erected Reactor Vessels - Review of Records 50095 Spent Fuel Storage Racks 50100 Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Systems Weldina
.55050 Nuclear Welding General Inspection l 55092 Site Erected Reactor Vessels Observation of Welding and Associated t Activities 55093 Reactor Vessel Internals (Welding) Observation of Welding and ~ l Associated Activities !
55150 Weld Verification Checklist 1
Non-Destructive Examination ,
l 57050 Nondestructive Examination Procedure Visual Examination Procedure l Review / Work Observation / Record Review 57060 Nondestructive Examination Procedure Liquid Penetrant Examination Procedure Review / Work Observation / Record Review 57070 Nondestructive Examination Procedure Magnetic Particle Examination Procedure Review / Work Observation / Record Review 57080 Nondestructive Examination Procedure Ultrasonic Examination '
Procedure Review /Wuk Observation / Record Review I 57090 Nondestructive Examination Procedure Radiographic Examination Procedure Review / Work Observation / Record Review Preservice and Inservice Testina 73051 Inservice Inspection - Review of Program 73052 Inservice Inspection - Review of Procedures 73053 Preservice Inspection - Observation of Work and Work Activities 73055 Preservice Inspection - Data Review and Evaluation Testina 39301* Preoperational Test Records 61700* Surveillance Procedures and Records 61701* Complex Surveillances 70300* Preoperational Test Procedure Review 70301* Overall Preoperational Test Program Review -
70302* Preoperational Test Program Implementation 70311* Preoperational Test Procedure Verification 70312* Preoperational Test Witnessing .
70329* Preoperational Test Result Evaluation Verification 70304 Engineered Safety Features Test - Preoperational Test Frocedure Review 70308 Preoperational Hot Functional. Testing - PWR Procedure Review 70314 Hot Functional Testing Witnessing 70315 Engineered Safety Features Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70322 Preoperational Test Results Evaluation - ESF 70324 Preoperational Test Results Evaluatior. - HFT 70331 Vibration Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review
Responsibility for completion of the (*) inspection procedures is to be shared between all of the chief construction inspectors.
2512 A-4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRppy
L DRAFT
70332 Control Rod System Test - Preoperational T6st Procedure Revicw
70333 Chemical Control System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure i Review'(PWR cnly) l 70335 Safety and Relief Valve Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review '
, 70336 Residual /Decai Heat Removal System Test - Preoperational Test j Procedure Review i 70337 Main Steam Isolation Valve Test - Preoperational Test Procedure
!- Review .
i 70338 Auxiliary Feedwater System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure !
i Review (PWR only) e 70339 Component Cooling Water System Test - Preoperational Test 3
' Procedure Review j 70343 Containment Spray System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure i
~
Review 70344 Containment Isolation Valves Test - Preoperational Test Procedure
!~ Review
! 70345 Containment Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational Test .
Procedure Review
! 70346 Auxiliary Building Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review I
2 70355 Compressed Gas System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure. Review 70356 Standby Liquid Control System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure i Review ;
70357 Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System Test Preoperational Test :
Procedure Review i q 70358 Reactor Building Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational Test ;
' Procedure Review 70362 Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test Procedure Review l 70431 Vibration Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing i 70432 Control Rod System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing l 70433 Chemical Control System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing l 70435 Safety and Relief Valve Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing l 70436 Residual / Decay Heat Removal System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing.
70437 Main Steam Isolation Valve Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70438 Auxiliary Feedwater System' Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70439 Component Cooling Water System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70443 Containment Spray System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70444 Containment Isolation Valve Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70445 Containment Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational Test !
Witnessing 70446 Auxiliary Building Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational ,
Test Witnessing l
. 70455 Compressed Gas System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing l 70456 Standby Liquid Control System Test - Preoperational Test '
Witnessing 70457 Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing l 70458 Reactor Building Heat / Cool / Vent System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70462 Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test - Test Witnessing 70562 Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test Results Evaluation
Responsibility for completion of the (*) inspection procedures is to be shared between att 6 the chief construction inspectors.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX A 2512
DPAFT
'dECTRICAL AND I&C ENGINEERING DISCIPLINES i (responsibility of the Site Chief Electrical and I&C Inspector - SCEI) '
Ouality Assuraneg
)
-35020* Audit of Applicant's Surveillance of Contractor QA/QC 35051* Site Erected Reactor Vessels - QA Procedures l
35060* Licensee Management of QA Activities 35061* In-Depth QA Inspection of Performance 35065* ' Procurement, Receiving, and Storage 35100*- Review of QA Manual 35960* QA Program Evaluation of Engineering Service Organization 38701* Procurement Program ~
38702* Receipt, Storage and Handling of Equipment and Materials Program 38703* Commercial Grade Procurement Inspection Design and Desian Chanaes - '
l 37051* Verification of As-Builts 37055* On-Site Design Activities 37301* Comparison of As-Built Plant to FSAR Description Electrical Components and Systems 51051 Electrical Components and Systems - Procedure Review 51053 Electrical Components and Systems - Work Observation 51055 Electrical Components and Systems - Record Review 51061 Electrical Cable - Procedure Review 51063 Electrical Cable - Work Observation 51065 Electrical Cable - Record Review 71710 Engineered Safety Feature System Walkdown Instrumentation Components and Systems 52051 Instrument Components and Systems - Procedure Review 52053 Instrument Components and Systems - Work Observation 52055 Instrumsnt Components and Systems - Record Review Testina 39301* Preoperational Test Records 61700* Surveillance Procedures and Records 61701* Complex Surveillances -
70300* Preoperational Test Procedure Review 70301*
Overall Preoperational Test Program Review 70302* Preoperational Test Program Implementation .
70311* Preoperational Test Procedure Verification 70312* Preoperational Test Witnessing 70329* Preoperational Test Result Evaluation Verification 35750 QA Program Measuring and Test Equipment 61705 Calibration of Nuclear Instrumentation Systems 61725 Surveillance Testing and Calibration Control Program 70305 Reactor Protection System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review
Responsibility for coupletion of the (*) inspection procedures is to be shared between all of the chief construction inspectots.
2512 A-6 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
. _ . ~ . _ . . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ ._ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _
4 DRAPT 1
, 70306 Loss of Offsite Power Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review l 70316 Loss of Offsite Power' Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70317 Reactor Protection System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70325 Preoperational Test Results Evaluation - Reactor Protection System i_ 70326 Preoperational Test Results Evaluation - Loss of Offsite Power l 70334 Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Test - Preoperational
!-- Test Procedure Review
{ 70340 DC Power System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review 70347- Pressurizer and Level Control System Test - Preoperational Test
Procedure Review i 70348 Main Feedwater Control System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure
. Review l i, 70349 Reactor Coolant Leak Detection System Test - Preoperational Test ,
i Procedure Review l l 70350 Loose Parts Monitoring System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure i Review -
.' 70351 Integrated Reactor Control System Test - Preoperational Test
! Procedure Review
{ 70352 Remote Reactor Shutdown Test - Preoperational Test Procedure
. Review j 70354 Nuclear Instrumentation System Test - Preoperational Test '
! Procedure Review i 70359 Recirculation System Flow Control Test - Preoperational Test 3
Procedure Review i 70360 Manual Reactor Control System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure
. Review 70361 Traversing Incore Probe System Test - Preoperational Test Procedure Review
] 70434 Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Test - Preoperational i Test Witnessing
.70440 DC Power System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing
70441 Emergency / Standby Power Supply System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing j
70447 Pressurizer and Level Control System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70448 Main Feedwater Control System Test - Preoperational Test -
Witnessi'ng 70449 Reactor Coolant Leak Detection System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70450 Loose Parts Monitoring System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70451 Integrated Reactor Control System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70452 Remote Reactor Shutdown Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70454 Nuclear Instrumentation System Test - Preoperational Test
- Witnessing 70459 Recirculation System Flow Control Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70460 Manual Reactor Control System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing 70461 Traversing Incore Probe System Test - Preoperational Test Witnessing
Responsibility for completion of the (*) insperction procedures is to be shared between all of the chief construction inspectors. .
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX A-7 2512 DRAFT -
i APPENDIX B CERTIFIED DESIGN SAFETY-RELATED SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES
l. 1. GENERAL ELECTRIC - ADVANCED BOILING WATER REACTOR (ABWR) i A .' Structures: For the structures listed below, include their foundations, i basamats, structural steel, reinforcing steel (concrete),
internal supports and structures, etc.
! Primary Containment System and Structures
Reactor Building l l, Control Building j Intake Structure '
j- B. Systems: For the systems listed below,. include individual components, j
supports, instrumentation and controls.
l' Class IE Direct Current Power Multiplexing System
! Supply System (see ITAAC 2,12.12) (Essential Multiplexing System only) l j Class IE Vital AC Power Supply Neutron Monitoring System
Class 1E Instrument and Control Nuclear Boiler System -
Power Supply 011 Storage and Tr&nsfer System l Class IE Electrical Power Distribution Process Radiation Monitoring System 4 System (see ITAAC 2.12.1) (portions, see ITAAC 2.3.1) )
Containment Atmospheric Monitoring Radwaste System l
System (primary containment isolation !
l Control Rod Drive System function only) l 1 (Scram and reactor pressure Reactor Building Cooling Water System I i retaining components) (portions, see.ITAAC 2.11.3)
{ Control Room Habitability Area HVAC Reactor Building HVAC System i System Reactor. Building Safety-Related i Control Building Safety-Related Equipment HVAC System Equipment Area HVAC System. Reactor Building Safety-Related Diesel Electrical. Penetrations Generator HVAC System Emergency Diesel Generator System Reactor Service Water System Flammability Control System Reactor Protection System Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System Reactor' Recirculation System (piping and valves for fuel pool (Motor cover and its nuts and bolts makeup) only) l High Pressure Nitrogen Gas Supply Reactor Water Cleanup System System (portions, see ITAAC 2.11.13) (from RPV to outboard isolation valve High Pressure Core Flooder System only)
HVAC Emergency Cooling Water System Reactor Pressure Vessel System i
- Leak Detection and Isolation System Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System Local Control Panels Recirculation Flow Control System (portions, see 1TAAC 2.7.3) (core plate differential pressure Main Control Room Panels sensors)
Makeup Water (Condensate) System Remote Shutdown System (level sensors and associated piping Residual Heat Removal System only) Standby Liquid Control System Makeup Water (Purified) System Standby Gas Treatment System (primary containment isolation Suppression Pool Temperature Monitoring function only) System Issue Date: XX/XX/XX B-1 2512 DRAFT
DRAFT APPENDIX C INSPECTION REPORT GUIDANCE
1.0 Purpose
To provide guidance for the preparation of construction inspection reports using a draft inspection report generated by the Construction Inspection Program Information Management System (CIPIMS). [ Note: When IMC 2512 is finalized, this guidance should be included as an attachment to IMC 0610, " Inspection Reports."]
2.0
Background:
To address concerns with the ability to track and retrieve inspection generated data from past power reactor construction projects, the NRC developed the CIPIMS.
This system allows the NRC to store detailed inspection information in a data base structure to facilitate retrieval and input into routine inspection reports and non-routine management reports. The data base structure is shown in figure 1.
The inspectors will be required to record their inspection observations and findings in accordance with the guidance provided in Appendix D to MC 2512. The CIPIMS will be used to create a draft inspection report directly from the raw information gathered by inspectors. Beyond data input in the CIPIMS, minimal effort should be required by most inspectors for preparation of the inspection report.
3.0 Guidance
1 3.1 COVER LETTER The cover it:tter will be prepared by the Senior Construction Site Representative l (SCSR) for each inspection report. The cover letter should discuss the major issues identified in the inspection report body, focusing on issues that require additional licensee management attention or indicate superior licensee 1 performance. Any Notices of Violation resulting from inspections documented in the inspection report will be attached to the cover letter. Notices of Violation will be prepared in accordance with the guidance provided in the NRC's Enforcement Policy.
The cover letter will be issued (signed) by the SCSR and in accordance with the requirements of MC 0610, " Inspection Reports."
- 3.2 COVER PAGE The cover page will be developed using a standard format and the following information from the CIPIMS:
Unit Number
Inspection Report Number
Inspection Report Title
Inspecticn Start Date
Inspection End Date
Inspector Name(s)
The cover page will also provide for concurrences by the SCSI, SCMI, SCEI, and approval by the SCSR. The cover page will be arranged as outlined in Figure 2.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX C-1 2512 DRAFT
l DRAFT 3.3 TABLE OF CONTENTS l Each of the inspection procedures discussed in the inspection report will be L assigned a unique section number. The subsections under each inspection procedure j .should proceed as follows:
i j X.0 (Inspection Procedure No.) - [IP Occurrence No.] - [IP Title]
X.X [ Critical Attribute No.]
, X.X.1 [ Critical Attribute No.] Basis
( X.X.2 (Critical Attribute No.] Assessment j X.X.3.x [ Exception No.] - [Brief title of exception] ,
If the reports are stored electronically in a text retrieval data base, this arrangement should facilitate directly searching electronically the inspection j
reports, without the need to interface with the CIPIMS using text retrieval '
software. Figure 3 contains a typical inspection report table of contents. l 3.4 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
j The Executive Summary will be developed using information from the CIPIMS. This i information will include inspection procedure numbers, inspection procedure j titles, exception numbers, exception text, and exception status. Using this ;
i information the SCSI, SCMI, and the SCEI will prepare open items to include in the '
executive summary for their responsible inspection procedures (see Appendix A to manual chapter 2512). Each open item will include the related exceptions identified during inspection of critical attributes completed during the inspection period. For example, if multiple exceptions were identified under different inspection procedures related to procedure adherence, a single open item could be opened that references all of the exceptions. The SCSI, SCMI, and/or t '
l SCEI shall indicate the status (open or closed) of each open item referenced in i the inspection report in the Executive Summary. If no exceptions are identified
! for the critical attributes of an inspection procedure completed during the
inspection period, the SCSI, SCMI, and/or SCEI shall list the inspection procedure
!- number and title, and critical attribute number, and state there were no
{ exceptions. '
i
Open items shall be numbered with the following format

the type of open item;
the inspection report number the open item was initially described in; and a unique sequential number for each of the open items in the inspection report
, (i.e.,VIO4-52-001/99-001-01 would be a Level 4 violation and the first open item
in the inspection report numbered 52-001/99-001). The open item numbers will be -
recorded in the CIPIMS, and will be related to each of the associated exceptions described in the inspection report. Followup of open items will be scheduled in
! accordance with the guidance of Section 07.03 of manual chapter 2512. Open item -
closeout should generally not occur until each of the exceptions associated with 4 the open item have been reviewed and closed.
The SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI shall review the critical attribute assessments
, documented in the CIPIMS by the assigned inspectors for each of the inspection ,
procedures in their responsible areas. Following this review tney shall summarize !
and assess the overall results of the inspections performed in their areas of 1-2512 C-2 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX hf
DRAFT i responsibility. This assessment an'd sumary shall be documented in the Executive Sumary. An overall assessment and sumary shall be prepared by the SCSR considering the inputs from the SCSI, SCMI,

and SCEI. Figure 4 provides an example of a typical inspection report Executive Sumary.
3.5 REPORT BODY The body of the report will be developed the draft inspection report generated by the CIPIMS. Figure 5 provides an example of a typical section of the body of an inspection report. The draft inspection report will contain information on the
!, following:
l Inspection procedure number i Inspection procedure cycle ;
j- Inspection procedure critical attribute number ;
Basis for review of each critical attribute '
Assessment of construction activities observed and/or procedures and/or records reviewed for each critical attribute.
-Exception number (s) identified during review of each critical attribute.
The basis for each exception.
The report will be organiz.ed as outlined in Section 3.0. The purpose for structuring the inspection reports in this fashion is to allow the reports to be readily searched by a text retrieval system using standard search parameters.- The SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI will use the information from the rough inspection report, for each of the inspection procedures in their are of responsibility, to develop the final inspection report. The SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI shall review the data provided in the draft report and determine whether adequate documentation is available to identify what the inspector did to verify each critical attribute; the inspector's assessment of the activities or items observed; and whether any of the activities or items observed by the inspector require additional followup.
It is imperative that the information in the CIPIMS be as complete and accurate as possible to ensure that the NRC can readily determine the status of inspection activities for a given site and easily retrieve supporting information. In this-light, the inspector should make every effort to provide sufficient detail to allow an independent observer to determine what the inspector did to assess licensee' performance for a given inspection procedure. If the inspector is unable, for any reason, to complete a critical attribute, the inspector shall inform the SCSI, SCMI, or SCEI, as applicable, as soon as practical, and as a minimum before the inspector leaves the construction site or fabrication facility.
3.6 SAMPLE
SUMMARY
TABLE The draft report data sumary table generated by the CIPIMS will contain the i following information:
Inspection Report No.
Inspection Procedure Numbers ,
Inspection Procedure Cycle
Critical Attribute Numbers
Sample Identifiers
Sample Descriptions i
Date the sample was first inspected for the IP, cycle, and critical attribute.
l Issue Dato: XX/XX/XX C-3 2512 DRAFT
DRAFT Essentially, the draft report Sample Summary Table as created by the CIPIMS will be used as an attachment to the inspection report body without changes. The SCSI, SCMI, and SCEI, shall review the Sample Summary Table. If technical errors are identified they shall be corrected in the CIP data base and the Sample Summary Table recreated. The summary table will be a hardcopy of what licensee items were observed or reviewed by NRC inspectors that are referenced or assessed in a specific inspection report that can be distributed to the public document rooms.
Figure 6 provides an example of a typical Sample Summary Table that would be attached to a construction inspection report.
i '
i 4
i i
i f
i i
2512 C-4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX Dre,,ev,
<s
~ ~
DRAFT - '
Figure 1 - CIPIMS DATABASE STRUCUTRE ACritAtts In*P_CrHAtts CA_Saniples
~~~
IP_RecNo y CARecNo
- Insp_CA_RecNo _ CASeplRecNo ~CAf= 72-a Status _ Code IP_No Rel_FJocNo ---4 RollP_CA_RecNo .-< Rel_htsp_CARocNo CA.Excep_RecNo IP_Me C(g < RelinspJocNo CASeple Status _Deee IP_ Comp,_Dt CAB _Dt CASmplDesc CA Er. cop _ID CA Dosc IP_Close_Dt insp_ Type _ Code CAE_Dt CASmplA < ReLCASmplRecNo IPJorced CAAssess 4 Rel_% m CAExcep_ Test IP_ Forced _Cmnt CABesis CAExcep_Sts_ Code F Reports IPJlleJm -
Casts M Rolfind_RecNo CA_Insp_ Hrs ,__ RplRecNo CASmplNoJiand Wordperfect CASmplNo_Obtnd AplSeq_No BTRIVE DATA Findings Documents y ProLMngmUksvity AptYear Link (IP Date) % Rel_InsperfecNo Find _m %O N Jind_RecNo RplTMo IP_ Cycle _Pind_BegiriLDt RelRplRecNo s RplB_Dt Find _ID IP_ Cycle _Pind_End_Dt Find _ Seq _No M Type
- _ Code ss RptELDt inspir_RITS_Nm ineptr_ Red 4 y L
Find _Ste_ Code y RplFle_Nm -
Find _ Type _ Code inspir#TS_ID Find _ Text ineptr_RnS_N4e Find _Basle Wordperfect Documents inop_ Cycles unk(oDec) nAAC3 %
% ReeNo a Type _ Code NAAC_ hop _RecNo Find _1Ype_ Code w ReUPJocNo g IP_ Cycle _m ReLFind_RecNo y g
IP_ Cycle _Sts d Rel_fTAAC_Sepf_RecNo /t. SYS_RecNo _.
IP_ Cycle _E_Dt ITAAC_Excep_ID IP' s ,
ITAAC_Excep_ Text IP_Cyde_B_Dt , Sys_Nm RefDM lhisp_
'"'P D DescType _ Code ITAAC_Excep_Sts_ Code Lens _Sys_m Sys_Acr_Nm Ref_ Type _Desc I nAAc_ 5 ,,,,g_,,,p,,, 4,,;,%
p _MngmVD RecNo g
ITAAC_CA_RecNo __
_ g Insp_ Type _ Code Assesiones nAACJocNo N-h RecNo ---
ReUTAAC_CeLReeNo nAAC_SepVD MLRecNo ,,,g, ,,,,
< ITAIC_B_Dt yp g
AAC_SmplDesc _ '
[A ITAAC_ELDt nAAC_SmplDt DodteLNo ute Kg nAAC_Desc RAACJ"*P Hrs PlanLNm MLDooc M_Sysfecm m ITAAC_Sts P!antTyP' MLB_Dt
- Rp(Addmes MLELDt Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT C-s 2s12
DRAFT l
FIGURE 2
INSPECTION REPORT COVER PAGE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Report No.

52-001/99-001
Report
Title:
ROUTINE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION REPORT - EMPHASIS ON
PROCUREMENT, PIPE FABRICATION, & MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT i Addressee: Nicholas U. Power 4
Company: Vice President, Nuclear Facilities Construction
Savannah Power Station l
. U. S. Nuclear Power Construction Corporation l 238 Uranium Way i Savannch, GA 30323 -
License No.: CNPR-01 Facility Name: Savannah Power Station, Unit 1 Report Period: January 1, 1999 - January 31, 1999 Inspection Savannah Power Station, Unit 1 Locations: 238 Uranium Way Savannah, GA 30323 Nuclear Module Fabricators 493 Virtual Drive Avondale, LA 70094 Inspectors: J. A. Hakoski, Site Chief Mechanical Inspector P. I. Castleman, Site Chief Electrical Inspector A. G. Howe, Site Chief Structural Inspector M. D. Shannon, Mechanical Inspector J. E.' Beall, Electrical and I&C Inspector F. I. Young, Structural Inspector Concurrence:
Site Chief Structural Inspector Date -
Site Chief a hanical Inspector Date .
Site Chief Electrical & I&C Inspector Date Approval:
Senior Construction Site Representative Date 2512 C-6 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX b .' i
I DRAFT 4
FIGURE 3 1
INSPECTION REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS
. TABLE OF CONTENTS i Section Title hgg j 1.0 35065 - Procurement, Receiving, and Storage -
) Occurrence: 01 ....................................... I 1
i 1.1 35065.03.01 .......................................... 1 i 1.1.1 35065.03.01 Basis .................................... 1
1.1.2 35065.03.01 Assessment ............................... 1
{ 1.1.3.1 VIO4-52-001/99-001-001; Procurement Documents Specified l Equipment Specifications Contrary to Design .......... 1 i
i- 1.2 35065.03.02 .......................................... 2 -
i 1.2.1 35055.03.02 Basis .................................... 2 .
! 1.2.2 35065.03.02 Assessment ............................... 2
! 1.2.3.2 CDR-52-001/99-001-002; Followup on Construction l Deficiency Report Related to Procurement of HPCF pump. 2 4
i 1.3 35065.03.03 .......................................... 3 1.3.1 35065.03.03 Basis .................................... 3 1.3.2 35065.03.03 Assessment ............................... 3 1.3.3.1 UNR-52-001/99-001-003; Certificate of Conformance not Avail able with Procured Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 d
1. '4 35065.03.04 .......................................... 5
1.4.1 35065.03.04 Basis .................................... 5
1.4.2 35065.03.04 Assessment ............................... 5 1
2.0 50073 - Mechanical Components - Work Observation -
Occurrence - 1 ....................................... 6 2.1 50073.03.01 .......................................... 6 2.1.1 50073.03.01 Basis .................................... 6 2.2.2 50073.03.01 Assessment ............................... 6 2.2.3.1 VIO4-52-001/99-001-004; Installation of Safety-Related Valve in Module RB-X340-Y220-260-Z13 Not Per Install ation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2 50073.03.02 .......................................... 8 2.2.1 50073.03.02 Basis .................................... 8 2.2.2 50073.03.02 Assessment ............................... 8
?.3 50073.03.03 .......................................... 9 2.3.1 50073.03.03 Basis .................................... 9 2.3.2 50073.03.03 Assessment ............................... 9 2.4 50073.03.04 .......................................... 10 2.4.1 50073.03.04 Basis .................................... 10 2.4.2 50073.03.04 Assessment ............................... 10 2.5 50073.03.05 .......................................... 11 2.5.1 50073.03.05 Basis .................................... 11 2.5.2 50073.03.05 Assessment ............................... 11 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX C-7 2512 x0.==sgewr 9%r k
DRAFT FIGURE 4 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
INSPECTION REPORT:52-001/99-001 OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
[To be provided by the SCSR based on review of all inspections completed during the inspection period)
INSPECTION FINDINGS AND ASSESSMENTS 1.0 IP No: 35065, " Procurement, P.eceiving, and Storage" Related ITAAC: HPCF System - 2.4.2.1 and 2.4.2.3.e ,
1.1 During this inspection report period, inspection activities were completad for critical attributes 03.01, 03.02, 03.03, and 03.04 of inspection procedure (IP) 35065, " Procurement, Receiving, and Storage." While there -
were minor exceptions to the licensee's safety-related equipment procurament program (noted below), overall, based on the inspection activities completed this period, the licensee maintained effective controls on the procurement of safety-related equipment.
1.2 (OPEN) VIO4-52-001/99-001-001: Procurement documents referenced equipment specifications contrary to design. During review of purchase order (P0) 99-QVM0-A-00251 the inspector identified that it did not specify the correct environmental conditions necessary for qualification in accordance with design specifications for the High Pressure Core Flooder (HPCF) injection valve (HPCF-M0V-025) motor operator. Failure to accurately reflect environmental qualification requirements in P0 99-QVM0-A-00251 is contrary to the requirements of the Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP) established for procurement documents (QAP-498EP-0031, revision 2, l
" Purchase Order Requirements"). I 1.3 (CLOSED) CDR-52-001/99-001-002: Followup on construction deficiency report (CDR 99-QMP-0010) related to procurement of an HPCF pump. The licensee identified that the as procured HPCF pump (HPCF-P-002) did not comply with the engineering specifications for pump internal inlet diameter. The pump internal inlet diameter was required to be 3100 5 mm, while the as procured pump inlet diameter was 3087 mm. The design range of pump internal inlet diameters were used in the preliminary analysis of the HPCF system capability to deliver 50% of the design flow at elevated suction temperatures. Re-engineering was performed by the licensee to address this !
issue and a design change was implemented by the licensee that allowed use -
of the as procured HPCF pump. ,
1.4 (OPEN) UNR-52-001/99-001-003: The required certificate of conformance .
(C0C) was not available with the procured component at receipt inspection.
While reviewing procurement documents for receipt inspection of 'IPCF pump (HPCF-P-002) on January 25, 1999, the inspector noted that the C0C required by Purchase Order (P0) 99-QP-A-0324 was not received with the pump when it was delivered on January 15, 1999. The licensee had discussed the lack of a C0C with the pump supplier who indicated that a duplicate C0C was being forwarded. This issue will remak open pending NRC review of the licensee's investigation regarding the missing C0C and their response to the pump supplier's actions.
2512 C-8 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
DRAFT l I
FIGURE 5 INSPECTION REPORT: 52-001/99-001 .
TITLE: ROUTINE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION REPORT - EMPHASIS ON i PROCUREMENT, PIPE FABRICATION, & MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT I
1.0 35065, " Procurement, Receiving, and Storage" Cycle: 01 1
1.1 35065.03.01 j 1.1.1 35065.03.01 Basis The inspector reviewed requirements specified in the procurement documents ;
listed in the attached Sample Summary Table for the technical fabrication '
requirements, seismic / environmental requirements, and manufacturing ;
specifications. Relevant design documentation and quality assurance procedures for each procurement document were also reviewed. The associated design documentation and quality assurance procedures are also provided in the g attached Sample Summary Table.
2 1.1.2 35065.03.01 Assessecr.t With the exception of purchase order (PO) for the High Pressure Core Flooder
(HPCF) system injection valve (P0 99-QVM0-A-00251), each of the procurement 4
documents in the Sample Summary Table were found to provide specifications that j were consistent with the approved facility design. It appears that the failure 4
to provide specifications consistent with design requirements for the HPCF i
system injection valve was an isolated case. While the specified environmental conditions were not as required by the approved design, the specified conditions provided some margin to those expected during design basis accident j conditions. As a result, the safety significance of tFis item is low.
1.1.3.1 VIO4-52-001/99-001-001; Procurement documents referenced equipment j specifications contrary to design.
! During review of purchase order (P0) 99-QVM0-A-00251 the inspector identified that the PO did not specify the correct environmental conditions necessary for qualification in accordance with design specifications for the High Pressure Core Flooder (HPCF) injection valve (HPCF-M0V-025) motor operator. HPCF drawing CAE-HPCF-MOV-025, revision 1, note 3, specifies that the design accident atmospheric conditions for the injection valve are a steam environment at 130*C and 105 KPaG for up to 10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months . P0 99-QVM0-A-00251 specified j ervironmental conditions of 122 C and 105 KPaG.
- Failure to accurately reflect environmental qualification requirements in PO 99-0VM0-A-00251 is contrary to the requirements of the Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP) established for procurement documents (QAP-498EP-0031, revision 2, " Purchase Order Requirements"). Specifically, paragraph 3.1 of QAP-498EP-0031, states that the design environmental qualification requirements shall be included in any procuremer.t documents for equipment or components subject to harsh environments. Whi~ e environmental conditions for qualification of HPCF- I M0V-025 were specified, '.he conditions specified were incorrect. This violation remains open pending NRC followup of the licensee's review of this error. I 1
i Issue Date: XX/XX/XX C-9 2512 DRAFT l o
Il 61GRE 6 SAMPLE
SUMMARY
TABLE
! 20-Mar-95 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 SAMPLE ID: 99-QVH0-A-00251 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION l
SYSTEM 10: HPCF PURCHASE ORDER FOR THE HPCF INJECTION l l ITAAC No.: 2.4.2.1 VALVE l i
! CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 l SAMPLE ID: HPCF-MOV-025 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION *
SYSTEM ID

HPCF 254 m HPCF INJECTION VALVE FOR DIVISION B
[
ITAAC No.: 2.4.2.1 4
CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 -
! SAMPLE ID: CAE-HPCF-M0V-025 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION I
SYSTEM ID: HPCF COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING DRAWING FOR HPCF i ITAAC No.: 2.4.2.1 MOV-025, REVISION 1, " DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS i FOR HPCF-M0V-025" ,
1 s
! CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 )
i SAMPLE IC: QAP-498EP-0031 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION l l SYSTEM ID: QA QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURE, REVISION 2, I
', ITAAC No.: N/A " PURCHASE ORDER REQUIREMENTS" CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 l SAMPLE ID: 99-QSS-B-00849 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION i SYSTEM ID: RB PURCHASE ORDER FOR REACTOR BUILDING 42 ITAAC No.: 2.15.10.1 METER ELEVATION - STRUCTURAL STEEL NE CORNER ROOM FLOOR SUPPORT GIRDER 42-GS-X27000-
Y25500 i

CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 i SAMPLE ID: 42-GS-X27000-Y25500 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SYSTEM ID: RB REACTOR BUILDING 42 METER ELEVATION FLOOR ITAAC No.: 2.15.10.1 SUPPORT GIRDER - NE CORNER ROOM - EDG A i
! CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 4
SAMPLE ID: 99-QWR-A-00025 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION I SYSTEM ID: RPV PURCHASE ORDER FOR WELD R00 USED IN ITAAC No.: 2.2.1d.5 WELDING THE CRD HOUSING TO THE RPV - LOT No.
WRI-99-QWR-00231 MANUFACTURED BY WELD R0D INCORPORATED CRITICAL ATTRIBUTE No.: 35065.03.01 SAMPLE ID: WRI-99-QWR-00231 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SYSTEM ID: RPV WELD R00 LOT No. FOR WELDING CRD HOUSINGS ITAAC No.: 2.2.1d.5 TO RPV PROCURED UNDER P.O. 99-QWR-A-00025 1 INSPECTION REPORT No.: 52-001/99-001 2512 C - 10 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
DRAFT APPENDIX D INSPECTION FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS f DOCUMENTATION GUIDANCE
To ensure accurate inspection information is consistently recorded for 4 retrieval from the Construction Inspection Progra

t Information Management J
System (CIPIMS), predefimd requirements for recording inspection findings anj observations were developed. The data the inspectors shall record when performing inspections are provided below:
1. Inspection procedure number being performd by the inspector.
)* 2. The cccurrence of the inspection procedure being performed.
1
3. The start date inspection the inspection procedure occurrence.
! 4. How many samples were observed for the inspection procedure occurrence by the inspector.
i
5. What systems, structures, or components were inspected during the inspection procedure occurrence.
l t 6. The critical attribute number from the inspection procedure.
! 7. The basis the inspector used to inspect the critical attribute.
j 8. The inspector's assessment of the activities, procedures, and processes observed during inspection of the critical attribute.
9. The date the inspector started inspecting the critical attribute.
l j 10. The date the inspector completed inspecting the critical attribute.
l 11. How many hours the inspector spent inspecting the critical attribute.
4 i
12. The status of the critical attribute. Whether the inspector feels adequate inspection has been performed to close the critical attribute, if there is an outstanding exception, or if more inspection is required to close the critical attribute. -
13. The specific identifiers used by the licensee to uniquely identify the activity, procedure, component, record, etc., that were observed by the 4
inspector during inspection of a specific critical attribute.
4
. 14. The date an inspected item was first observed by the inspector for the subject critical attribute.
i 15. A text description of the spe'cific items observed by the inspector during inspection cf a specific critical attribute.
1 16.
The exception the critical number for attribute. The any_lf6imitT66tfiiWxEs t"iBE9uin6in$isNfilexceptio NN$ din 35kN5I!M!b${1bRN!!$itsjjdd@j$j$~'~~~~~~);
4'
17. A text discussion of the circumstances surrounding the exceptions.
g Issue Date: XX/XX/XX D-1 2512 DR57
DRAFT
18. The inspection report number obtained from tha resident staff (this item applies only when inspection of a critical attribute of the inspection procedure is completed). The inspection report number will use the same format as operating reactors. However, if multiple units are under construction at the same site, each of the units will have a unique inspection report number (no combined inspection reports).
19. The inspector's Regulatory Information Tracking System (RITS) initials.
The RITS initials will be used to document which inspectors provided input (via the CIPIMS) for a specific inspection report.
To facilitate recording the inspection information, a standard form was * '
developed for use by inspectors to record their inspection findings and observations (see Figure 1). As computer software and hardware technology advance, this form will be incorporated as an input screen on a personal computer taken into the field by the inspector during inspections. The -
inspector will use the form in the personal computer to enter inspection generated information as the inspection is performed directly into the CIPIMS. ,
In the near term however, a paper form is available that the inspector can '
take into the field to record information for later input to the CIPIMS either i
by the inspector or by a data input operator. Refer to Appendix E to manual j chapter 2512 for information related to the use of the CIPIMS. I i
Using the form, or a similar form, the inspector shall record the data l specified during inspection activities as much as practical. A new form shall l be used for each critical attribute of the inspection procedure. If necessary, attach additional information to this form for the critical attribute basis and assessment, exception text (including exception number and associated text if more than two exceptions are identified during inspection i of a single critical attribute), and information related to the inspection l item. l 1
After the inspectors' data is recorded on the form, the resident staff (SCSI, i SCHI, and SCEI) will review the information and ensure the information in 1 Figure 2 is recorded in addition to the inspectors' data. With the input of the information in Figures 1 and 2, all inspection generated information should be contained in the data base for each completed critical attribute of an inspection procedure occurrence.
l 2512 D-2 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
l DRAFT
! FIGURE 1 - PROPOSED INSPECTION DOCUMENTATION FORM 1
! TO BE PROVIDED AT A LATER DATE ,
i 4
l 4
7 j
1 i
i-1 !
4 i i l
l l
l l
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX D-3 2512 DRAFT
- . -. .. . - . - . - . . . . . . _ . - . . . . . - . ~ . _ . . . . . . - .
4 i
DRAFT FIGURE 2 - PROPOSED INSPECTION DOCUMENTATION FORM 2 TO BE PROVIDED AT A LATER DATE i
i
~
i 2512 0-4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT
- .. - . . . . ..._-_.-. - .. - .. -.. . ~ - . _
1 1
l l
i DRAFT i
p 1
.\
. ATTACHMENT 2 1
i 5
J
' TABLES OF INSPECTION PROCEDURES ASSIGNED TO FUTURE j PREOPERATION PHASE INSPECTION MANUAL-CHAPTERS l
4 A i l.
l 4
4 i
?
.l 1
a 4
1 i
.f 4
I I e
1 NEW 2511 INSPECTION PROGRAM TABLE 02-Aug-95 I
I
.IP No.: TITLE: CURRENT / REVISED i
PROGRAM J
l 30001 IE/ UTILITY CORPORATE MANAGEkENT MEETING 2511/2511 30703 MANAGEMENT hEETINGS - ENTRANCE AND EXIT INTERVEWS 2511/2511 35002 NRR/IE/ UTILITY EARLY QA MEETINGS 2511/2511 35003 QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL REVEW 2511/2511 4
35004 INITIAL PREDOCKETING QA INSPECTION 2511/2511 1
1 35006 E PREDOCKETING ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION 2511/2511 j 35008 NRR/IE/ UTILITY MEETINGS - SUBSTANTIVE QA FINDINGS 2511/2511 l 1
35012 SECOND PREDOCKETING QA INSPECTION 2511/2511 3.'016 INITIAL PRE-CP QUALITY ASSURANCE INSPECTION 2511/2511 l 35016 SECOND PRE-CP/SER QUALITY ASSURANCE INSPECTION 2511/2511
! 35020 AUDIT OF APPLICANI'S SURVEILLANCE OF CONTRACTOR QA/QC 2511/2511 l ACTIVITES 35022 E PRE-CP
SUMMARY
SER POSITION STATEMENT 2511/2511 35024 FOLLOW-UP PRE-CP SER OR SER SUPPLEMENT - QA INSPECTION 2511/2511 35026 E PRE-CP
SUMMARY
SER POSITION STATEMENT SUPPLEMENT 2511/2511 35028 PRE-CP INSPECTION OF SITE LWA-2 ACTIVITIES 2511/2511 )
35100 REVEW OF QA MANUAL 2511/2511 36100 10 CFR PART 21 INSPECTIONS AT NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS 2511/2511 45051 GEOTECHNICAL/ FOUNDATION ACTIVITES PROCEDURE REVEW 2511/2511 45053 GEOTECHNICAUFOUNDATION ACTIVITES WORK OBSERVATION 2511/2511 45055 GEOTECHNICAUFOUNDATION ACTIVITES RECORD REVEW 2511/2511
~
80210 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION -INITIAL AND PERIODIC 2511/2511 INSPECTIONS 92701 FOLLOWUP 2511/2511 il 92702 FOLLOWUP ON CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS AND 2511/2511 DEVIATIONS 92703 FOLLOWUP OF CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTERS 2511/2511 94010 E TESTIMONY FOR ASLB OR ASLAB HEARINGS 2511/2511 l 1
d 1
i NEW 2512 INSPECTION PROGRAM TABLE 02-Ag 95 I
i 1
! IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED
! PROGRAM:
300$0 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT CORPORATE MANAGEMENT MESTING 2512/ 2512 30702 MANAGEMENT MEETINGS - AS NEEDED 2512/ 2512 f
30703 MANGEMENT MEETING - ENTRANCE AND EXIT INTERVIEWS 2512/ 2512 i 35020 AUDIT OF APPLICANT'S SURVEILLANCE OF CONTRACTOR QA/QC 2512/ 2512 l ACTIVITIES
- 35051 SITE ERECTED REACTOR VESSELS REVIEW OF QA IMPLEMENTING 2512/ 2512 PROCEDURES j 35060 UCENSEE MANAGEMENT OF QA ACTIVITIES 2512/ 2512 35061 I l IN-DEPTH QA INSPECTION OF PERFORMANCE . 2512/ 2512 i 35065 PROCUREMENT, RECEIVING AND STORAGE 2512/ 2512
?
.35100 REVIEW OF QA MANUAL 2512/ 2512 l
j 35301 PREOPERATIONAL TESTING QUALITY ASSURANCE 2513/ 2512 j 36100 10 CFR PART 21 INSPECTIONS AT NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS 2512/ 2512
! 37051 VERIFICATION OF AS-BUILTS 2512/ 2512 j 37055 ON-SITE DESIGN ACTIVITIES 2512/ 2512 37301 COMPARISON OF AS-BUILT PLANT TO FSAR DESCRIPTION 2513/ 2512 f
j 38702 RECEIFT, STORAGE AND HANDLING OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS 2512/ 2512 i PROGRAM i 45051 l 4 GEOTECHNICAUFOUNDATION ACTIVITIES PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 l
! 45053 GEOTECHNICAUFOUNDATION ACTIVITIES WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 ,
l 45055 GEOTECHNICAL/ FOUNDATION ACTIVITIES RECORD REVIEW '2512/ 2512 46051 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 46053 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 )
46r,35 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 j 46061- ' STRUCTURAL MASONRY CONSTRUCTION 2512/ 2512 j, 46071 CONCREIE EXPANSION ANCHORS 2512/ 2512 i 47051 2512/ 2512 CONTAINMENT (POST-TENSIONING) PROCEDURE REVIEW 47053 CONTAINMENT (POST-TENSIONING) WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 l' 47055 CONTAINMENT (POST-TENSIONING) RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 l l .48051 STRUCTURAL STEEL AND SUPPORT PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 l 48053 STRUCTURAL STEEL AND SUPPORT WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 48055 STRUCTURAL STEEL AND SUPPORT RECORDS REVIEW 2512/ 2512 j 49051 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY PIPING - QA REVIEW 2512/ 2512 49053 REACTOR COOLAKr PRESSURE BOUNDARY PIPING - WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 j 49055 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY PIPING RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 49061 SAFETY RELATED PIPING -QA REVIEW 2512/ 2512 f
1 49063 PIPING - WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 i
i /
e r.p- , , - - . . . , , -
m .e-,-.. + -- .- ......:, - - - - - . < - -, . . , - - - - . -
-- ._. . . - . . - .. - . . . - . - . - . . . . - - - _ . . - _ . . - = _ - . - - - . . - _ . - . _ ~ . -
IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM; 49065 SAFETY RELATED PIPING - RECORDS REVIEW 2512/ 2512 1
50051 REACTOR VESSEL AND INTERNALS QA REVIEW 2512/ 2512 50053 REACTOR VESSEL AND INTERNALS WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512
, i0055 REACTOR VESSEL AND INIT.RNALS RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 50071 SAFETY RELATED COMPONENTS - PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512
! $0073 MECHANICAL COMPONENTS WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 50075 f SAFETY RELATED COMPONENTS - RECORDS REVIEW 2512/ 2512
~
50082 SITE ERECTED REACTOR VESSELS - REVIEW OF PROCEDURES 2512/ 2512
. 50083 SITE ERECTED REACTOR VESSELS - OBSERVATION OF ERECTION 2512/ 2512 j ACTIVITIES ,
j 50085 SITE ERECTED REACTOR VESSELS - REVIEW OF RECOEDS 2512/ 2512
50090 PIPE SUPPORT AND RESEAINT SYSTEMS 2512/ 2512
{ 50095 SPENT FUEL STORAGE RACKS 2512/ 2512 50100 HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS 2512/ 2512 51051 ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS -PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 51053 ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS - WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 51055 ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS - RECORDS REVIEW 2512/ 2512 51061 ELECTRIC CABLE -PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 51063 ELECTRIC CABLE - WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 51065 ELECTRIC CABLE -RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 4 52051 INSTRUMENT COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS - PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 52053 INSTRUMENT COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS - WORK OBSERVATIONS 2512/ 2512 52055 INSTRUMENT COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS - RECORDS REVIEW 2512/ 2512 !
53051 CONTAINMENT PENETRATIONS (MECHANICAL) PROCEDURE REVIEW 2512/ 2512 53053 CONTAINMENT PENETRATIONS (MECHANICAL) WORK OBSERVATION 2512/ 2512 53055 CONTAINMENT PENETRATIONS (MECHANICAL) RECORD REVIEW 2512/ 2512 55050 NUCLEAR WELDING GENERAL INSPECTION PROCEDURE 2512/ 2512 55092 SITE ERECTED REACTOR VESSELS OBSERVATION OF WELDING AND 2512/ 2512 ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES 55093 REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS (WELDING) OBSERVATION OF WELDING AND 2512/ 2512 .
ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES 55100 S'IRUCTURAL WELDING GENERAL INSPECTION PROCEDURE 2512/ 2512 55150 WELD VERIFICATION CHECKLIST 2512/ 2512 57050 NDE PROCEDURE VISUAL EXAMINATION PROCEDURE REVIEW / WORK 2512/ 2512 OBSERVATION / RECORD REVIEW 57060 . NDE PROCEDURE LIQUID PENETRANT EXAMINATION PROCEDURE 2512/ 2512 REVIEW / WORK OBSERVATION / RECORD REVIEW 57070 NDE PROCEDURE MAGNETIC PARTICLE EXAMINATION PROCEDURE 2512/ 2512 REVIEW / WORK OBSERVATION / RECORD REVIEW 57080 NDE PROCEDURE ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION PROCEDURE REVIEW / WORK 2512/ 2512 OBSERATION/ RECORD REVIEW 2
- . - ~ . . - . . - - ,
IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM:
i 57090 NDE PROCEDURE RADIOGRAPHIC EXAMINATION PROCEDURE 2512/ 2512 REVIEW / WORK OBSERVATION / RECORD REVIEW 61720 CONTAINMENT LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTING 25D/ 2512 63050 CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY TEST 2512/ 2512 64051 PROCEDURES - FIRE PREVENTION / PROTECTION 2512/ 2512 64053 FIRE LOOP INSTALLATION 2512/ 2512 65051 LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES 2512/ 2512 l- 70300 PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70301 OVERALL PREOPREATIONAL TEST PROGRAM REVIEW 2513/ 2512
. 70302 PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION 2513/ 2512
) 70304 ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70305 REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 i
PROCEDUPE REVIEW 70306 LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 4 REVIEW
)
4 79307 CONTAINMENT INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST - PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70308 PREOPERATIONAL HOT FUNCTIONAL TESTING - PWR PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70311 PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE VERIFICATION 2513/ 2512 70312 PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 1 70313 CONTAINMENT INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST 2513/ 2512 4
j 70314 HOT FUNCTIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 j
^
70315 ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 I
WITNESSING )
! 70316 LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512
' 70317 REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70322 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULTS EVALUATION - ESF 2513/ 2512 70323 CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE TEST RESULTS EVALUATION 2513/ 2512
~
70324 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULTS EVALUATION - HFT 2513/ 2512 l
! 70325 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULTS EVALUATION - REACTOR PROTECTION 2513/ 2512 l
. SYSTEM I i
70326 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULTS EVALUATION - LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER 2513/ 2512 j 70329 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULT EVALUATION VERIFICATION 2513/ 2512 l 70331 VIBRATION TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70332 CONTROL ROD SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 REVIEW 70333 CHEMICAL CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 REVIEW 70334 ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM TEST - 2513/ 2512 PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70335 SAFETY AND RELIEF VALVE TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCED'URE 2513/ 2512 REVIEW 3
i IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED j PROGRAM:
70336 RESIDUAUDECAY HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEY!
j 70337 MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVE TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 i PROCEDURE REVIEW 70338 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW l 70339 COMPONENT COOLING WATER SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 i PROCEDURE REVIEW q
,- 70340 DC POWER SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PPOCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 ,
70341 EMERGENCY / STANDBY POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512
TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70342 CONTAINMENT COMBUSTIBLE GAS CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - 2513/ 2512
!. PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW .
-70343 CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATION TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 ,
REVIEW i 70344 CONTAINMENT ISOLATION VALVES TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70345 CONTAINMENT HEAT /COOUVENT SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERAT!ONAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW l 70346 AUXILIARY BUILDING HEAT /COOUVENT SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512
'IEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70347 PRESSURIZER AND LEVEL CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512
TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70348 MAIN FEEDWATER CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 3 70349 REACTOR COOLANT LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM TEST - PR$ OPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 l TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70350 LOOSE PARTS MONITORING SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70351 INTEGRATED REACTOR CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70352 REMOTE REACTOR SHUTDOWN TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 REVIEW 70353 CRANES, HOISTS, AND LIFTING EQUIPMENT TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70354 NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL Th . 2513/ 2512 ,
PROCEDURE REVIEW 70355 COMPRESSED GAS SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROCEDURE 2513/ 2512 I
REVIEW 70356 STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL SYSTEM TEST PREOPERATIONAL TEST G13/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70357 REACTOR CORE ISOLATION COOLING SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70358 REACTOR BUILDING HEAT /COOUVENT SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 70359 RECIRCULATION SYSTEM FLOW CONTROL TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW V 4
IP No.: TITLE , CURRENT / REVISED
_ PRSGRAM:
70360 MANUAL REACTOR CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 PROCEDURE REVIEW 70362 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM HYDROSTATIC TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 2513/ 2512 70370 TESTING PIPING SUPPORT AND RESTRAINT SYSTEMS 2513/ 2512 70400 PREOPERATIONAL TEST RESULT EVALUATION 2513/ 2512 70431 VIBRATION *lEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 ,
70432 CONTROL ROD SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512
- 70433 CHEMICAL CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATION AL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 70434 ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM TEST - 2513/ 2512 I PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 70435 SAFETY AND RELIEF VALVE 'IEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST %TTNESSING 2513/ 2512 70436 RESIDUAL / DECAY HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70437 MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVE TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 4 WITNESSING l
,70438 AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 l WITNESSING j 70439 COMPONENT COOLING WATER SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70440 DC POWER SYSTEM 'IEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 l 70441 EMERGENCY / STANDBY POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 )
TEST WITNESSING j 70442 CONTAINMENT COMBUSTIBLE GAS CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - 2513/ 2512 l PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 70443 CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 70444 CONTAINMENT ISOLATION VALVE TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70445 CONTAINMENT HEAT /COOUVENT SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING ,
70446 AUXILIARY BUILDING HEAT / COOL / VENT SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST WITNESSING
~
70447 PRESSURIZER AND LEVEL CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST WITNESSING 70448 MAIN FEEDWATER CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 25'2 WITNESSING 70449 REACTOR COOLANT LEAK DETECTION, SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST WITNESSING 70450 LOOSE PARTS MONITORING SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70451 INTEGRATED REACTOR CONTROL SYSTEM TEST- PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING 70452 REMOTE REACTOR SHUTDOWN TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 70453 CRANES, HOISTS, AND LIFTING EQUIPMENT TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING S
. . . - . .. . - . - - - .- . .- - - - . ~ - - . - . . . - - . - . . . . ..
l I
IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PRQGRAM:
70454 NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING l
70455 COMTRESSED GAS SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TF.ST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512
. 70456 STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 WITNESSING l l 70457 REACTOR CORE ISOLATION COOLING SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2512 TEST WITNESSING l
l 70458 REACTOR BUILDING HEAT / COOL / VENT SYSTEM TEST PREOPERATICNc.L 2513/ 2512 TEST WITNESSING .
i 70459 RECIRCULATION SYSTEM FLOW CONTROL TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 i WITNESSING 70460 MANUAL REACTOR CONTROL SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512
WITNESSING l 70461 TRAVERSING INCORE PROBE SYSTEM TEST - PREOPERATIONAL TEST 2513/ 2512 i WTTNESSING
/0462 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM HYDROSTATIC TEST - TEST WITNESSING 2513/ 2512 l 70562 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM HYDROSTATIC TEST RESULTS EVALUATION 2513/ 2512 71302 PREOPERATIONAL TEST PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION VERIFICATION 2513/ 2512 l
73051 INSERVICE INSPECTION - REVIEW OF PROGRAM 2515/ 2512 73052 INSERVICE INSPECTION - REVIEW OF PROCEDURES 2515/ 2512 73053 PRESERVICE INSPECTION - OBSERVATION OF WORK AND WORK ACTIVITIES 2513/ 2512 73055 PRESERVICE INSPECTION - DATA REVIEW AND EVALUATION 2513/ 2512 80210 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION -INITIAL AND PERIODIC INSPECTIONS 2511/ 2512 90712 INOFFICE REVIEW OF WRITTEN REPORTS OF NONROIJTINE EVENTS AT 2512/ 2512 POWER REACTOR FACILITIES 92050 REVIEW OF QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION DELAYS 2512/ 2512 92700 ONSITE FOLLOWUP OF WRITTEN REPORTS OF NONROUTINE EVENTS AT 2512/ 2512 POWER REACTOR FACILITIES 92701 FOLLOWUP 2512/ 2512 92702 FOLLOWUP ON CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS AND DEVIATIONS 2512/ 2512 92703 FOLLOWUP OF CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTERS 2512/ 2512 92720 CORRECTIVE ACTION 2512/ 2512 92901 FOLLOWUP-PLANT OPERATIONS 2512/ 2512 .
1 92902 FOLLOWUP -MAINTENANCE 2512/ 2512 92903 FOLLOWUP -ENGINEERING 2512/ 2512 92904 FOLLOWUP-PLANT SUPPORT 2512/ 2512 93807 SYSTEMS BASED INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS INSPECTIONS 2515/ 2512 94010 IE TESTIMONY FOR ASLB OR ASLAB HEARINGS 2512/ 2512 94300 STATUS OF PLANT READINESS FOR AN OPERATING LICENSE 2512/ 2512 TBD NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO REVIEW 'IIIE ANALYSIS OF THE AS-BUILT N/A/ 2512 FUEL STORAGE RACKS - SUBCRITICAL CALCULATION NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR TESTING THE N/A/ 2512 REFUELING MACHINE INTERLOCKS 6
1 I
. 1 IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM: ;
4- TBD NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR TESTING THE HPCF N/A/ 2512
SYSTEM
' l NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO REVIEW THE ANALYSIS OF THE RCW SYSTEM N/A/ 2512 I l HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY 1 i NEED TO DEVELOP IP FOR MONITORING TESTING OF RIP M/G AND ASDs N/A/ 2512 j FOR RIP COAST DOWN CHARACTERISTICS NEED TO DEVELOP PROCEDURE (S) TO ADDRESS CONSTRUCTION OF N/A/ 2512 I . MICROPROCESSOR BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS ..
! NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR N/A/ 2512
!' DIGITAIJMICROPROCESSOR BASED CONTROL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION ~
I NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO OBSERVE OR REVIEW RESULTS OFTHE 1EST N/A/ 2512 j, OF THE HECW SYSTEM REFRIGERATOR !
l MAY NEED TO DEVELOP A GENERIC NON-SAFETY-RELATED MECHANICAL N/A/ 2512
+
SYSTEM TESTING INSPECTION PROCEDURE
! NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING OF THE HECW SYSTEM N/A/ 2512 MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN POST INSTALLATION PHYSICAL SEPARATION N/A/ 2512 l IP FOR MECHANICAL ASPECTS OF SAFE 1Y-RELATED SYSTEMS NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR REVIEW OF BOP RESPONSE DURING SSE - N/A/ 2512 SEISMIC ANALYSIS REVIEW NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR REVIEW OF TURBINE TESTING RESULTS N/A/ 2512 NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING EMS SINGLE FAILURE N/A/ 2512 SUSEPTIBILITY AND ALARM IN CONTROL ROOM NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR TESTING THE HPCF N/A/ 2512 SYSTEM FOR MINIMUM FLOW CONSIDERATIONS NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO TEST THE SAFLTY- N/A/ 2512 RELATED PORTIONS OF THE PRM SYSTEM NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO OBSERVE / REVIEW N/A/ 2512 RESULTS OF RCIC TURBINE / PUMP TEST FACILITY TESTING NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING THE EMS COMMUNICATIONS N/A/ 2512 PROTOL NEED TO DEVELOP A SEPARATE CONTROL ROOM INSTRUMENTATION AND N/A/ 2512 CONTROL VERIFICATION INSPECTION PROCEDURE
NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING S AFETY-RELATED MAKEUP WATER N/A/ 25I2 SOURCE FOR THE SPENT FUEL POOL NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING LOSS OF ONE EMS DIVISION IMPACT N/A/ 2512 ON SAFE PLANT OPERATION NEW IP MAY BE REQUIRED FOR INSPECTION OF ELECTRICAL WIRING N/A/ 2512 PENE1 RATION CONFIGURATION NEED TO DEVELOP PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS TESTING OF NON-SAFETY N/A/ 2512 RELATED MICROPROCESSOR BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS POST INSTALLATION ELECTRICAL CHECKS INSPECTION PROCEDURE N/A/ 2512 SHOULD BE DEVELOPED SHOULD DEVELOP A SYSTEM BASED RELIEF VALVE 1ESTING INSPECTION N/Al 2512 PROCEDURE FOR SAFETY RELATED SYSTEMS MICROPROCESSOR BASED SYSTEM INSPECTION PROFEDURE N/A/ 2512 IP FOR ALTERNATE ROD INJECTION TESTING PROC 5. DURE REVIEW AND N/A/ 2512 TESTING OBSERVATION 7
i
_ . - ~. ..- - - - - . . - . - - - - - - . - - - . - - - .- .- _
IP Na: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM:
TBD NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECIlON PROCEDURE TO REVIEW N/A/2512 INSPECTIONS / ANALYSIS OF RCIC CAPABILITIES W/ NO AC POWER AVAILABLE 4
MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO TEST THAT NO CONNECTION EXISTS N/A/ 2512 BETWEEN DIVISIONAL AREA DRAINS NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO REVIEW THE ANALYSIS OF THE AS-LUILT N/A/ 2512 FUEL STORAGE RACKS - COOLING WATER FLOW MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO TEST THE ISOLATION FUNCTION OF THE N/A/ 2512 RADWASTE SYSTEM NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP FOR TESTING THE ISOLATION BETWEEN THE - N/A/ 2512 SAFETY-RELATED EMS AND THE NON-SAFETY-RELAUD NEMS NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO TEST THE CAMS N/A/ 2512 .
! (SAFETY RELATED)
MAY NEED TO DEVELOP A BOP HYDROSTATIC TEST INSPECTION N/A/ 2512 PROCEDURE MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO REVIEW ANALYSIS OF THE LPMS N/A/ 2512 OPERABILITY FOLLOWING AN EARTHQUAKE NOT REQUIRING A SHUTDOWN IP FOR TESTING OF ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS MAY BE REQUIRED N/A/ 2512 MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO TEST THE ISOLATION FUNCTION OF N/A/ 2512 STEAM AUXILIARY VALVES NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO TEST THE ARM N/A/ 2512 SYSTEM (NON-SAFETY-RELATED)
MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO REVIEW THE N/A/ 2512 ANALYSIS OF THE RCIC PUMPS AVAILABLE NPSH NEED TO DEVELOP A GENERIC SYSTEM HYDROSTATIC TEST MODELED N/A/ 2512
AFTER THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM HYDRO NEED TO DEVELOP IP FOR TESTING AS INSTALLED MICRCPROCESSOR N/A/ 2512 BASED CONTROL SYSTEM ELECIRICAL SEPARATION I
MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN IP TO TEST THE SEN31TIVTTY OF TIIE LPMS N/A/ 2512 MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO REVIEW HEAT N/A/ 2512 REMOVAL CAPABILITIES OF RHR SYSTEM ,
NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE FOR TESTING THE HPCF N/A/ 2512 SYSTEM FOR ELECTRICAL SEPARATION MICROPROCESSOR BASED CONTROL S YSTT M IP REQUIRED N/A / 2512 NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO REVIEW THE ANALYSIS N/Ai 2512 OF HPCF PERFORMANCE AT DEGRADED SUCTION TEMPERATURE .
MAY NEED SEPARATE POST INSTALLATION EllECTRICAL CHECK IP N/A/ 2512 NEED TO DEVELOP A SEPARATE PEMOTE SHUTDOWN SYSTEM N/A/ 2512 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL VERIFICATION INSPECTION PROCEDURE NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO REVIEW THE N/A/ 2512 ANALYSIS / TEST OF HPCF PUMP AVAILABLE NPSH MAY NEED TO DEVELOP AN INSPECTION PROCEDURE TO REVIEW THE N/A/ 2512 ANALYSIS OF THE RHR PUMP AVAILABLE NPSH TI 2512/021 EQUIPMENT SEISMIC 2512/ 2512
- TI2512/023 HANGER UPDATE 2512/ 2512 TI2512/024 HEAT CODE TRACEABILITY 2512; :512 8
IP No.: TITLE CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM:
. TI 2512/030 SEISMIC ANALYSIS 2512/ 2512 TI 2512/032 WELDING 2512/ 2512 TI 2512/035 CONTROL ROOM DESIGN REVIEW 2512/ 2512 TI 2512/036 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION 2512/ 2512 TI ?512/038 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION 2512/ 2512 TI 2515/1? ETICTRICAL DISTRIBIJTION SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL INa'FCTION 2515/ 2512
! TI3515/109 INSPECIlON REQUIREMENTS FOR GL 89-10, " SAFETY-RELATED MOTOR- 2515/ 2512 OPERATED VALVE TESTING AND SURVEILLANCE i
TI 2515/110 PERFORMANCE OF SAFETY-RELATED CHECK VALVES 2515/ 2512 ,
9
}
a 4
l I
i i
l t
9
NEW 2513 INSPECTION PROGRAM TABLE o M ug-95 IP No.: TITLE: CURP2NT/ REVISED
~ ~ PROGRAM:
35740 QA PROGRAM (QA/QC ADMINISTRATION) 2513/ 2513 35741 QA PROGRAMS (AUDITS) 2513/ 2513 35742 QA PROGRAM (DOCUMENT CONTROL) 2513/ 2513 35743 QA PROGRAM (MAINTENANCE) 2513/ 2513
- 35744 QA PROGRAM (DESIGN CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS) 2513/ 2513 35745 QA PROGRAM (SURVEILLANCE TESTING AND CALIBRATION CONTROL) 2513 / 2513
~
35746 QA PROGRAM (PROCUREMENT CONTROL) 2H3 / 2513 35747 QA PROGRAM (RECEIPT, STORAGE, AND HANDLING OF EQUIPMENT AND 2513/ 2513 MATERIALS) 35748 QA PROGRAM (RECORDS) 2513/ 2513 35749 QA PROGRAM (TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS) 2513/ 2513 35750 QA PROGRAM (MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT) 2513/ 2513 36301 OPERATIONAL STAFFING 2513/ 2513 40301 SAFETY COMMITTEE ACTIVITY 2513/ 2513 40702 AUDIT PROGRAM 2513/ 2513 1 40704 IMPLEMENTATION, AUDITPROGRAM 2513/ 2513 42400 PLANT PROCEDURES 2513/ 2513 42450 OPERATION PROCEDURES 2513/ 2513 42451 MAINTENANCE PR'OCEDURES 2513/ 2513 45452 EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 2513/ 2513 60501 FUEL RECEIPT AND STORAGE 2513/ 2513 64100 POSTFIRE SAFE SHUTDOWN, EMERGENCY LIGifrING AND OIL 2513/ 2513 COLLECTION CAPABILITY AT OPERATING AND NEAR-TERM OPERATING, REACTOR FACILITIES
. 64150 TRIENNIAL POSTFIRE SAFE SHUTDOWN CAPABILITY REVEPJFICATION 2513/ 2513 64704 FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM 2513/ 2513 65051 LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES 2513/ 2513 71301 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION REVIEW 2513/ 2513 73756 INSERVICE TESTING OF PUMPS AND VALVES 2513/2513 79501 LWR WATER CHEMISTRY CONTROL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS - AUDITS 2513/ 2513 79502 PLANT SYSTEMS AFFECTING PLANT WATER CHEMISTRY 2513/ 2513 79701 LWR WATER CHEMISTRY CONTROL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS - 2513/ 2513 PROGRAM i
IP No.: TITLE: CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM:
80531 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING (PREGPERATIONAL AND 2513/ 2513 SUPPLEMENTAL) 81018 SECURITY PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES 2513/ 2513 81020 MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVEiriESS - SECURITV PROGRAM 2513/ 2513 81022 SECURITY ORGANIZATION 2513/ 2513 81034- SECURITYPROGRAM AUDIT 2513/ 2513 81038 RECORDS AND REPORTS 2513 / 2513 ,
81042- TESTING AND MAINTENANCE 2513/ 2513 f 81046 LOCKS, KEYS, AND COMBINATIONS 2513/ 2513 .
l 81052 PHYSICALBARRIERS-PROTECTED AREAS 2513/ 2513 81054 PHYSICAL BARRIERS - VITAL AREAS, MATERIAL ACCESS AREAS, AND 251'3/ 2513 CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS 4
81058 SECURITY SYSTEM POWER SUPPLY 2513/ 2513
$ 81062 LIGHTING 2513/ 2513 81064 COMPENSATORY MEASURES 2513 / 2513 i' 81066 ASSESSMENT AIDS 2513/ 2513 i 81070 ACCESS CONTROL-PERSONNEL 2513/ 2513 81072 ACCESS CONTROL (POWER REACTOR) - PACKAGES 2513/ 2513 81074 ACCESS CONTROL- VEHICLES 2513/ 2513 81078 DETECTION AIDS-PROTECTED AREAS 2513 / 2513 81080 DETECTION AIDS -VITAL AREAS, MATERIAL ACCESS AREAS, AND 2513/ 2513 4
CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS 81084 ALARM STATIONS 2513/ 2513 81088 COMMUNICATIONS 2513 / 2513 81401 PLANS, PROCEDURES, AND REVIEWS 2513/ 2513 -
81403 RECEIPT OF NEW FUEL AT REACTOR FACILITIES 2513 / 2513 81431 FIXED SITE PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL OF 2513/ 2513 LOW STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE 4
81501 PERSONNEL TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 2513/ 2513 81502 FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAM 2513/ 2513 i
SAFEGUARDS CONTINGENCY PLAN - IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW 81601 2513/ 2513 1 81810 PROTECTION OF SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION 2513/ 2513 82102 STATUS OF THE LATE PREOPERATIONAL PHASE EMERGENCY 2513/ 2513 PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM if 4
82301 EVALUATION OF EXERCISES FOR POWER REACIORS 2513/ 2513 2
4 IP No.: TITLE: CURRENT / REVISED )
j PROGRAM:
82302 REVIEW OF EXERCISE OBJECTIVES AND SCENARIOS FOR POWER 2513/ 2513 t REACTORS 4
83522 RADIATION PROTECTION, PLANT CHEMISTRY, RADWASTE, AND 2513/ 2513 i ENVIRONMENTAL: ORGANIZTION AND MANAGEMENT CONTROLS l 83523 RADIATION PROTECTION, PLANT CHEMISTRY, RADWASTE, AND 2513/ 2513 !
ENVIRONMENTAL: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS (PREOPERATIONAL l AND SUPPLEMENTAL l 1
83524 EXTERNAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE CONTROL AND PERSONAL 2513/ 2513 j 3
DOSIMETRY (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL) f .83525 INTERNAL EXPOSURE CONTROL AND ASSESSMENT (PREOPERATIONAL 2513/ 2513 !
AND SUPPLEMENTAL) I
\
83526 CONTROL OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AND CONTAMINATION, 2513/ 2513 i
SURVEYS, AND MONITORING (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL)
)
I 83527 FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL) 2513/ 2513 4
83528- MAINTAINING OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ALARA (PREOPERATIONAL) 2513/ 2513 i 84522 SOLID WASTES (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL) 2513/ 2513 5
84523 LIQUIDS AND LIQUID WASTES (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL) 2513/ 2513 j 84524 GASEOUS WASTE SYSTEM (PREOPERATIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL) 2513 / 2513 84525 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND CONFIRMATION MEASUREMENTS FOR IN- 2513/ 2513 1 PLANT RADIOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS )
85102 MATERIAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTING - REACTORS 2513/ 2513 l 90711 NONROUITNE EVENT REVIEW 2513/ 2513 90712 INOFFICE REVIEW OF WRTITEN REPORTS OF NONROUTINE EVEhTS AT 2513/ 2513 POWER REACTOR FACILITIES I 92701 FOLLOWUP 2513 / 2513 92702 FOLLOWUP ON CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS AND 2513/ 2513 DEVIATIONS 92703 FOLLOWUP OF CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTERS 2513/ 2513 92719 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT (SER) REVIEW AND FOLLOWUP 2513/ 2513 92720 CORRECTIVE ACTION 2513/ 2513 92901- FOLLOWUP-PLANT OPERATIONS 2513/ 2513 92902 FOLLOWUP -MAINTENANCE 2513/ 2513 92903 FOLLOWUP -ENGINEERING 2513/ 2513 92904 FOLLOWUP-PLANT SUPPORT 2513/ 2513 94300 STATUS OF PLANT READINESS FOR AN OPERATING LICENSE 2513/ 2513 3
O NEW 2514 INSPECTION PROGRAM TABLE oA4ug-95 IP No.: TITLE: CURRENT / REVISED PROGRAM:
35501 QA FOR THE STARTUP TEST PROGRAM 2514/ 251(
64100 POSTFIRE SAFE SHUTDOWN, EMERGENCY LIGHTING AND OIL COLLECTION 2514/ 2514 CAPABILITY AT OPERATING AND NEAR-TERM OPERATING, REACTOR FACILITIES 64150 TRIENNIAL POSTFIRE S AFE SHUTDOWN CAPABILITY REVERIFICATION . 2514/ 2514 72300 STARTUP TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW 2514/ 2514 72301 STARTUP TEST RESULTS EVALUATION 2514/ 2514 72302 STARTUP TEST WITNESSING AND OBSERVATION 2514/ 25'! .
72400 OVERALL STARTUP TEST PROGRAM 2514/ 2514 72500 INITIAL FUEL LOADING PROCEDURE 2514/ 2514 72502 INITIAL CRITICALITY PROCEDURE REVIEW (BWR) 2514/ 2514 ,
72504 HEATUP PHASE PROCEDURE REVIEW 2514/ 2514 72508 POWER ASCENSION PROCEDURE REVIEW: HFCI SYSTEM 2514/ 2514 72509 POWER ASCENSION PROCEDURE REVIEW: CONTROL ROD DRIVE SYSTEM 2514/ 2514 72510 POWER ASCENSION PROCEDURE REVIEW: RELIEF VALVES AND MSIVs 2514/ 2514 72512 STARTUP TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - RCIC OR RECIRCULATION PUMP TRIP 2514/ 2514 72514 STARTUP PROCEDURE REVIEW - TURBINE TRIP / GENERATOR TRIP 2514/ 2514 72516 STARTUP TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - SHUTDOWN FROM OUTSIDE THE 2514/ 2514 CONTROL ROOM (GROUP A) 72517 STAR 1UP1EST PROCEDURE REVIEW: LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER (GROUP A & 2514/ 2514 B) 72518 STARTUP TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - CORE PERFORMANCE 2514/ 2514 72524 INITIAL FUEL LOADING WITNESSING 2514/ 2514 72526 BWRINITIAL CRITICALITY WITNESSING 2514/ 2514 72532 POWER LEVEL PLATEAU DATA REVIEW (BWR) 2514/ 2514 72564' PRECRITICAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - PROTECTIVE TRIP CIRCUIT OR 2514/ 2514 ROD DROP MEASUREMENT 72566 PRECRITICAL TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - RES LEAD TEST OR PRESSURIZER 2514/ 2514 EFFECTIVENESS 72570 INITIAL CRITICALITY PROCEDURE REVIEW (PWR) 2514/ 2514 72572 LOW POWER TEST PROCEDURES REVIEW MODERATOR TEMPERATURE 2514/ 2514 COEFFICIENT AND BORON WORTH OR CONTROL ROD WORTH AND PSEUDO ROD EJECTION WORTH 72576 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - NATURAL CIRCULATION 2514/ 2514 OR POWER REACTIVITY COEFFICIENT MEASUREMENT 1
IP No.: TITLE: CURRENT / REVISED j _
PROGRAM:
72578 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - EVALUATION OF CORE 2514/ 2514 PERFORMANCE 72580 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - TURBINE TRIP OR 2514/ 2514 GENERATORTRIP 72582 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - LOSS OF OFFSITE POWER 2514/ 2514 (GROUP A) 72583 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW: SHUTDOWN FROM OLTTSIDE 2514/ 2514 THE COEROL ROOM (GROUP B) 72584 POWER ASCENSION TEST PROCEDURE REVIEW - EVALUATION OF FLUX 2514/ 2514 ASYMMETRY OR PSEUDO ROD EJECTION TEST 72592 PWRINITIAL CRITICALITY WITNESSING 2514/ 2514 72596 PRECRITICAL DATREVIEW 2514/ 2514 72600 POWER LEVEL PLATEAU DATA REVIEW (25% PWR) 2514/ 2514 72608 POWER LEVEL PLATEAU DATA REVIEW (50% PWR) 2514/ 2514 72616 POWER LEVEL PLATEAU DATA REVIEW (75% PWR) 2514/ 2514 72624 POWER LEVEL PLATEAU DATA REVIEW (100% PWR) 2514/ 2514 81502 FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAM 2514/ 2514 82301 EVALUATION OF EXERCISES FOR POWER REACTORS 2514/ 2514 82302 REVIEW OF EXERCISE OBJECTIVES AND SCENARIOS FOR POWER REACTORS 2514/ 2514 ,
83521 RADIATION PROTECTION-STARTUP 2514/ 2514 84521 RADWASTE - STARTUP 2514/ 2514 90501 REPORTABLE MA'ITERS - STARTUP TEST PROGRAM 2514/ 2514 90711 NONROUTINE EVENT REVIEW 2514/ 2514 90712 ,
INOFFICE REVIEW OF WRITIEN REPORTS OF NONROLTITNE EVENTS AT 2514/ 2514 POWER REACTOR FACILITIES 92703 FOLLOWUP OF CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTERS 2514/ 2514 ,
92720 CORRECTIVE ACTION 2514/ 2514 92901 FOLI.OWUP - PLANT OPERATIONS 2514/ 2514 .
92902 FOLLOWUP-MAINTENANCE 2514/ 2514 92903 FOLLOWUP - ENGINEERING - 2514/ 2514 92904 FOLLOWUP - PLANT SUPPORT 2514/ 2514 93806 OPERATIONAL READINESS ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTIONS 2514/ 2514 94300 STATUS OF PLANT READINESS FOR AN OPERATING LICENSE 2514/ 2514 2
U.d R ATTACHMENT 3
)
4 4
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROCEDURE FORMAT AND CONTENT GUIDANCE
\
i Addendum 1: Construction Inspection Procedure Format Addenda 2 - 5: Sample Inspection Procedures (IPs)
} Addendum 2 IP 35065 Procurement, Receiving, and Storage Addendum 3 IP 37051 Verification of As-Builts and Effectiveness of Design Change Process Addendum 4 IP 49063 Safety-Related Piping Work Observation Addendum 5 IP 50073 Mechanical Components - Work Observation
'I i
4 I l
4 4
4 t .
! I i
DRAFT INSPECTION PROCEDURE FORM AND CONTENT GUIDANCE BACKGRO'J ND:
During development of the revised Constraction Inspection Program (CIP), and in particular the CIP Information Management System (CIPIMS), the staff determined that the format and content of inspection procedures should be
, enhanced to maximize the effectiveness in implementing the new concepts in the revised CIP. Under the revised CIP, inspection procedures (IPs) will provide 1
more detained requirements on what the inspector shall inspect (sample sizes and critical attributes), and will provide the inspector with guidance on how
, to perform the inspection and what acceptance criteria to use to assess licensee performance (attribute guidance).
4 By using a more systematic approach :n directing ,nspection performance and documenting inspection results, accurate and detailed data will be obtained by
the inspoctor. This data will then be stored in the CIP IMS for retrieval, sorting, and report generation. This method of gathering and storing i inspection information will provide an auditable trail of the NRC activities performed to monitor construction of power reactors and to provide a method i
for quickly and thoroughly assessing the licensee performance to determine facility operational readiness following completion of construction.
It is assumed that when this program is implemented, tha inspectors will have access to the inspection procedures, NRC references (Standard Review Plan, NUREGs, Regulatory Guides, and others as appropriate), and many industry codes and standards on a full text retrieval system. Such electronic availability j will allow the inspector to have rapid access to an accurate body of
information that can be used to prepare for inspections.
l FORMAT:
l When preparing IPs for the revised CIP, the general guidance for IP preparation and technical writing in IMC 0040, " Preparing, Revising, and Issuing Documents for NRC Inspection Manual," should be followed. However, to permit the IPs to conform to their ir. tended integrated use with the CIPIMS, the modified IP format presented in the following extmples should be used.
. When CIP development is resumed, this attachment should be included as an !
addendum to IMC 0040.
]
The responsible technical branch shall be indicated in the upper right corner ,
of the first page of the inspection procedure. The unique inspection l l procedure number, title, applicability, SALP functional area, and inspection level of effort will be as shown. Applicability, SALP functional area, and inspection level of effort shall be determined by the responsible technical branch.
l.
DRAFT
The inspection procedure will have four major areas of discussion. Section 01 will describe the inspection procedure objective. Section 02 will describe the sampling criteria to be used by the Construction Site Scheduler (CSS) to schedule inspection activities throughout the construction phase, and by the inspector to select the sample size for each occ m ence of the procedure.
Section 03 contains the critical attributes (those aspects of a licensee's process, procedure, or practice that must be verified to determine its adequacy) that the inspector shall assess during the inspection. This section i also includes the attribute guidance for verifying the adequacy of the ,
selected inspection sample. The attribute guidance may also contain lessons learned during past inspections related to the critical attribute.
, Section 04 contains the references used either to develop the inspection ~
procedure, or from which the inspector can gain additional insights into the purpose of the inspection or into acceptable practices. When practical, the
references should include an SRP section related to the activity or process
being inspected to create a link between the facility's licensing basis and how to inspect the licensee's compliance with their permit or license and applicable NRC rules and regulations. .
Six addenda to this section follow. Addendum 1 is the sample IP format for CIP inspection procedures. Addenda 2 through 5 provide four example CIP l inspection procedures for process oriented inspections. Addendum 6 provides an example CIP inspection procedure covering system functional testing.
Existing IPs served as a technical basis for developing the critical attributes, attribute guidance, and sampling criteria that appear in the i example IPs. The examples are provided to illustrate the format and typical content. They should be reviewed by the cognizant technical organization before implementing the revised CIP to ensure adequate technical requirements and guidance has been provided.
e 8 DRAET
DRAP INSPECTION PROCEDU'lE FORMAT NRC INSPECTION MANUAL eleB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 37051 VERIFICATION OF AS-BUILTS AND EFFECilVENESS OF DESIGN CHANGE PROCESS PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512 SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: U0] Q lt0jQDEDICATEjj l
LEVEL OF EFFORT: 80 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER OCCURRENCE l
37051-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES ;
1 37051-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA '
37051-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES 37051-04 REFERENCES CONTENT:
SECTION 01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES This section shall clearly define the objectives of the inspection procedure (IP). State what the inspector is to accomplish in a broad sense while performing the IP. The responsible technical organization shall develop the inspection objectives. I SECTION 02 SAMPLING CRITERIA The responsible technical branch shall develop sampling criteria for the inspection procedure. General areas to consider in developing the sampling criteria include:
The safety significance of the activity to inspect (the more safety significant, the more samples should be taken);
The historical performance of the nuclear industry in performing the activity being inspected (if there have been significant problems in the l past, consider increasing the number of inspection samples);
The ability of a single inspector to complete the inspection of the specified number of samples during a maximum two week inspection i procedure occurrence (not including preparation and documentation time - )
80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months of direct inspection). If the effort required to complete the inspection is expected to take more than two weeks (80 hours9.259259e-4 days 0.0222 hours 1.322751e-4 weeks 3.044e-5 months DIE) by a 1-1 ADDENDUM 1 l
DRAFT ;
I L
INSPECTION PROCEDURE F0ffiAT single inspector, consider reducing the scope of the IP or reducing the depth (number of samples per occurrence) of the IP; j
Consideration of the impact of advanced constrection techniques on the activity being inspected (i.e., modular construction techniques may entail inspections at offsite fabrication facilities that might need more inspection effort and additional sampling requirements);
Insights from the sources (NRC or industry) used to develop the inspection procedure; and Consideration of the basis for determining the minimum acceptable sample q
size for each inspected activity. .
SECTION 03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES A critical attribute is a characteristic or quality of a material, object, action, or process that is vital to meeting design requirements or the successful performance of construction-related activities. The responsible technical branch shall identify specific critical attributes for the inspection procedure. Each critical attribute should be a one sentence statement that concisely describes the characteristic or quality the inspector is to inspect and assess. Limited explanatory text can be used to clarify or establish limitations or restrictions on the applicability of the critical ,
attribute. I The responsible technical branch shall develop attribute guidance in support of each critical attribute. Attribute guidance includes the inspection methods and/or specific actions the inspector should accomplish to inspect the licensee's performance related to the critical attribute. It is not expected that the inspector will complete all of the attribute guidance for each critical attribute. However, the inspector should be instructed to accomplish a sufficient portion of the attribute guidance to provide an adequate basis for assessing licensee processes and performance for the specific critical attribute.
This section shall contain an introduction that specifies, as a minimum, requirements for the following: -
Completion of the critical attributes during each occurrence; ,
~
Attribute guidance completion requirements necessary to ensure the !
associated critical attribute has an adequate basis for assessing l licensee processes and performance;
Exceptions for inspecting attributes different from those specified in l the inspection procedure; and ;
l
Inspector preparation expectations.
1-2 ADDENDUM 1 i
DRAPT l
INSPECTION PROCEDURE FORMAT SECTION 04 REFERENCES This section contains those NRC (5RF sections, certified design sections, NUREGS, Regulatory Guides, SAR, BTP, SER, etc.) or industry (A5ME, IEEE, etc.)
references used during development of the inspection procedure. This section should also include references the inspector can use to review past performance concerns or to gain an understanding of industry practices. This
. section should be the last page of the main body of the inspection procedure.
The references should not list the revision of the document and there should be a note or statement directing the inspector to the licensing basis documentation to determine the appropriate revision.
l l
1-3 ADDENDUM 1 DRAFT
s' DRAFT NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 35065 PROCUREMENT, RECEIVING, AND STORAGE PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512 SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: 1T Q QPJjo M E03 Alin jl e LEVEL OF EFFORT: 80 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER OCCURRENCE i
35065-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES i
01.01 To determine whether equipment procurement specifications include the applicable quality assurance (QA) and technical requirements identified in the i
safety analysis report (SAR) or license.
01.02 To determine whether receipt inspection and storage activities are conducted in compliance with QA program requirements. l l
1 01.03 To determine whether the licensee's processes and procedures for ,
procurement, receiving, inspection, and storage of safety-related equipment and '
components are adequately and effectively implemented.
35065-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA 02.01 Verification of procurement specifications, receipt inspection, and storage activity adequacy should be performed periodically early in the construction phase. The intent of this procedure is to accomplish the critical attributes as specified in Section 03 for each of the occurrences. Inspections I should start shortly after the licensee begins receiving safety-related equipment '
or componerts from vendors (or for modular construction, shortly after module l fabricators begin re'ceiving equipment and components) and should be finished by the end of the construction phase. For a typical 60 month construction inspection period, the procedure should be performed annually or at least four occurrences.
02.02 For each occurrence of the inspection procedure select as a minimum l the number of safety-related equipment or components as listed below. At least i one of the selected components or equipment should be a complex engineered l component' (if available). The inspector should attempt to select samples for l each class of component storage (Class A, B, C, and D, as defined in ANSI Standard N45.2.2) and different storage conditions (in an established storage facility, in-place storage, or in-plant storage).
l 1 nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) electrical panel / component 1 NSSS mechanical component 1 Non-NSSS electrical component or panel l 1 Non-NSSS pump, valve, heat exchanger, and pipe fitting (4 samples)
, 1 Non-NSSS structural steel procurement 1 Non-NSSS welding consumable procurement 1 Non-NSSS cable procurement i I
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 35065
k. ADDENDUM 2
_ _ . . . . - - - - - - - ~ . - - .. - - - . - - - - . - - - . - - - -
02.03 DRAFT For each occurrence of the inspection procedure, the inspector should select a minimum of one component or piece of equipment using the guidance provided in 02.03 for which the receipt inspection and acceptance was based on a certificate of conformance from the supplier (if available).
i 02.04 For each occurrence of the inspection procedure select at least two audit reports by the licensee's Quality Assurance organization that document the licensee's review of a suppliers' or vendors' Quality Assurance Programs. If modular construction techniques are used, this sampling criterion shall be applied to the module fabrication facility consistent with the licensee's Quality Assurance Program. For example, if the licensee's QA Program relies on the module fabrication facility to audit their suppliers or vendors QA program, then the NRC should review the audit reports developed by the facility's QA .
organization. However, if the licensee's QA organization audits the module fabrication facility vendors' and suppliers' QA programs, the NRC should not routinely review the audit reports developed by the facil.ity's QA organization. ,
02.05 For facilities constructed using modular construction techniques:
Inspections shall be performed both at the module fabrication facilities and at the construction site. Each occurrence, in addition to onsite inspection, select at least one module fabrication facility that performs safety-related work for the licensee. Inspection at individual fabrication facilities should be of reduced scope (focusing on a small (1 or 2) sample of safety-related equipment or components procured to fabricate a single module). Because of the potential for differences in the QA programs at module fabrication facilities and the need to send an inspector to the facility, it is expected that an additional 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months of direct inspection effort at each selected module fabrication facility will be required to satisfactorily complete each occurrence of this inspection orocedure.
The intent of this sampling criterion is to ensure each module fabrication facility is assessed by the NRC either by direct observations at the fabrication facility or by inspection of the licensee's procurement, receipt inspection, and ,
storage of completed modules at the construction site. Inspection of the components and equipment listed in 02.03 above may occasionally (no more than ,
every other occurrence) be substituted by inspection of a module or modules that contain equivalent components or equipment.
35065-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES Critical attributes shall be verified for each inspection procedure occurrence by ensuring that attribute guidance has been performed correctly based on direct observation and record review of procurement, receipt inspection, and storage practices and policies.
03.01- The specified design parameters in the procurement documentation for the selected equipment and/or components are consistent with the specifications -
in the certified design, license, SAR, or other approved licensee documentation.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check, by record review, that the procurement documents and specifications identify the applicable technical requirements committed to by the licensee that the vendor / supplier shall adhere to during fabrication of the component or piece of equipment.
2. Check, by record review, that requirements for seismic and/or environmental qualification (as applicable) of equipment, components, and replacement parts are included in the procurement specifications.
35065 nyga Issue Date: XX/XX/XX w FL% ADDENDUM 2
3.
DRAFT Check, by record review, that adequate manufacturing specifications
! (i.e., component drawings and specifications include material, 3 dimensions, tolerances, etc.) are provided with the procurement documents
for the selected components and/or equipment.
1 03.02 . The procured equipment and/or components (for the selected samples) i satisfy the design and manufacturing specifications in the procurement documentation.
1 Attribute Guidance:
1. Check, by record review of related vendor / supplier documentation, whether the technical manufacturing requirements (odes and standards) specified i, in the licensee's procurement documentation, were met for the purchased i
! material or equipment. I i* 2. Check that the vendor / supplier documentation includes adequate detail to !
! determine the environmental and/or seismic qualification, as applicable, .
of selected equipment or components.
]
l 3. Check, by direct observation and record review, that the selectec equipment and/or components conform to the material and phys'ical j- requirements in procurement documents.
4 4
03.03 The licensee's administrative controls and procedures establish j adequate guidance for receipt inspection and acceptance of procured equipment and/or components.
Attribute Guidance:
t i 1. Check, by procedure and/or record reviews, that the licensee has adequate j procurement' document requirements for acceptance of the selected 4 components and/or equipment during receipt inspection. Factors such as
! safety significance and whether the procurement relates to an engineered i item or one of standard design (off the shelf) should be considered.
i Where a certificate of conformance (C0C) is to be used for acceptance in I
lieu of some or all final conformance records, examine specifications for i the C0C document to determine whether the following information was
. required to be included in the C0C

L (a) Identification of the purchased material or item (C0C reference to the purchase order or procurement document is acceptable).
4 (b) Identification of what requirements specified in the procurement documents or purchase order were met and those requirements not met.
(c) Identification of the supplier's QA organization member (by name or i position) required to sign the C0C.
(d) Identification of the procedures or QA program to be followed for I
filling out, reviewing, and approving the C00.
2. For the selected components and/or equipment, check the requirements j
specified in the procurement document for documentation and acceptance of the item to ascertain whether receipt inspection and acceptance was based 3 on one or more of the following:
j (a) An acceptable certificate of conformance.
4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 35065
[ ADDENDUM 2
(b) Supplier-forwarded documentation (inspectiIn, test' ma erial, etc.) ,
required by the procurement document.
(c) Direct examination (of items or sample thereof) to verify that specified " design / physical" acceptance requirements are met (i.e.,
other than review of supplier documentation or a check for damage). 1 (d) Receiving inspection based on record of source verification resulting in acceptance, or conditional acceptance, of the item (s).
3. For the selected components and/or equipment, check, by record review, that receipt inspection records are available.
~
4. Check, by record review, that acceptance of the selected components and/or equipment complied with receipt inspection requirements.
~
5. Observe a receipt inspector performing a receipt inspection of one of the selected components and/or equipment, and determine whether the following aspects are adequate. If it .is not possible to obseue an inprogress receipt inspection, the inspector should review the licensee's procedures, interview receipt inspectors, and inspect the receipt i inspection facility to determine if the following aspects are adequate. l (a) Inspection facilities such as proper tools and handling is available.
(b) Staff is adequate and properly trained in receipt inspection. I 4 (c) Proper tools are dedicated for inspection purposes.
(d) Review the documented records, such as procurement specifications, purchase order, C0C, material certifications, etc., available to the receiving inspector to assist him in his inspection.
(e) Observe if the inspector follows a QA/QC receiving procedure or uses .
a check form.
6. Check whether an approved bidders list is readily available and that the selected equipment and/or components were supplied by a listed vendor.
The approved list should identify the type of components or material the vendor is qualified to supply. Refer to RG 1.123/ ANSI N45.2.13, Section 10.3.1. ,
03.04 Licensee administrative controls for the identification, documentation, segregation, storage, and disposition of nonconforming procured equipment and components are adequate to ensure only equipment and/or components -
that satisfy design requirements are used in the construction of the facility.
4 Attribute Guidance:
1. For the selected components and/or equipment, check that discrepancies identified during receipt inspection (if any)'were adequately documented,
reviewed, and dispositioned by QA and/or engineering, as appropriate.
i
2. If nonconformances are identified for the selected components and/or equipment, review the nonconformance file for the nonconforming items and inspect areas where these item are stored to determine whether they are J
properly tagged and segregated, and if precautions are taken to prevent 35065 -4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DMn ^ootaoua 2
their release for installation ~or use. no nonconformances were identified for the selected components and/or equipment, review the nonconformance files and select a minimum of two nonconforming items and l inspect the storage areas as described above.
3. Checkthatincaseswherethereceiptinspection(ortheNRCinspection) identifies a deviation in the C0C or other vendor-supplied documentation, that corrective actions are proposed that include a requirement to
. reaudit the vendor's system for preparation and issuance of C0Cs or the 3
other vendor-supplied documentation specified by the procurement documents. Also, determine whether the " deviation" is subject to a 10 CFR Part 21 evaluation.
~
03.05 Adequate documentation is available for the selected components and/or equipment (if any) that were receipt inspected and accepted based on a vendor's certificate of conformance (C0C) to ensure the component and/or equipment satisfies procurement specifications and design requirements. This critical attribute applies only if a C0C was used as the basis for receipt inspection and acceptance of the material.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check that other documentation (e.g., test, material and inspection data) presented with certificates of conformance are reviewed by technical personnel who are capable (through experience, education, or training) to assure that the components meet all specified safety-related requirements and that the other vendor documentation includes data required to perform this review.
2. Check, by record review, that the C0C identifies the purchased material or item (reference to purchase order or procurement document, if available, is acceptable).
3. Check, by record review, that the C0C identifies which requirements specified in the procurement document or purchase order were met and which procurement requirements.were not met, if any.
4. Check, by record review, that the C0C was signed by the appropriate ,
member of vendor / supplier's QA organization as specified in the purchase I order or procurement documentation.
)
5. Check, by record and procedure reviews, that the appropriate QA procedures and programs were followed for filling out, reviewing, and i approving the C0C. i 1
- 6. Check, by interviews, and by procedures and records review, that the licensee's receipt inspection organization has the ability to determine that purchaser / agent has verified by audit (or source verification) the validity and effectiveness of the supplier's C0C system. i
7. Check, by record and procedure reviews, that when source verification is specified for acceptance of an item in addition to a C0C, the appropriate receipt inspection organization is aware of the source verification results.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 35065 ADDENDUM 2 ,
03.06 DRAFT Licenste administrative and Quality Assuranc'e programs and procedurrs are established that verify the adequacy of the supplier / vendor Quality Assurance programs.
Attribute Guidance:
1. For the selected components and equipment, determine whether the i procurement documents impose the requirements of 10 CFR 21 when " basic l components" are purchased. (Basic components are discussed in NUREG !
0302.) l
2. For the selected licensee QA audit report, check by interviews, and by record and procedure reviews, whether the vendors' quality assurance (QA) ,I programs have been audited by the purchaser's organization.
3. Check that the licensee has established an approved list of suppliers that have been audited by the licensee's QA organization. '
4. Check that the licensee's vendor / supplier QA program verification adequately considers requirements for approval of supplier special' processes such as welding, nondestructive examination (NDE), heat treatment, coating, and plating (including post-plating processes to prevent hydrogen embrittlement).
J 03.07 Adequate administrative controls and procedures are established to l ensure that procurement documents are developed consist with the requirements (NRC or industry) committed to by the licensee.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check, by procedure review, that administrative controls exist that require the licensee to identify each site contractor who prepares and/or issues procurement documents.
2. Check, by procedure review, that the administrative controls specified for development of procurement documents are adequate for the protection, handling, an'd conhel of procurement specifications and purchasing documents.
3. Check, by procedure and record reviews for the selected components and/or equipment, that the administrative controls for development of the procurement documents require that the documents specify appropriate requirements that are consistent with the practices committed to by the
licensee and that include requirements for protection of the material against environmental conditions, packaging, and shipping.
4. Check, by procedure review, that administrative controls exist that require the licensee to monitor and assess through surveillance, reviews, or audits, each contractor's (onsite and offsite as applicable) procurement activities.
5. Check, by procedure review, that the administrative controls require the procurement documents to specify any source verification requirements ;
relative to acceptance of the components and/or equipment in addition to '
a certificate of conformance for complex engineered components.
35065 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 2
03.08- For stcrage of-equipment .D and ncomponentsqAF7lishsd est facilities,.the administrative controls and processes, and facilities for the storage of safety-related equipment and components are adequate'and in accordance with the practices constitted to by the licensee. As a minimum the inspector shall perform the actions described in attribute guidance 1, 3, and 4.
Attribute Guidance:
1.. Review the QA/QC procedures established for storage of safety-related items in Class A, B, C, and D (as available) levels of storage to determine whether these procedures are adequate. Refer to ANSI Standard N45.2.2, Sections 2.7 and 6.1.2.
2. Check, by direct observation of the storage facilities, that storage of Class A equipment is in an environmentally controlled atmosphere and that provisions are established to prevent animals (especially rodents and birds) from entering.
3. Check, by direct observation of. the storage facilities, that the facilities and/or other requirements for Class A, B, C, and D equipment l storage are being satisfactorily implemented consistent with licensee commitments and in accordance with the licensee's approved procedures..
4. For the selected components and/or equipment, check, by direct observation, their storage conditions to ensure the appropriate environmental conditions are established, the components and/or equipment "
are adequately protected from damage, access to the storage area is j appropriately controlled, stored items are adequately identified, '
adequate controls are established and implemented for control of the l items before use, and any special storage requirements specified by I egineering or the supplier are appropriately implemented.
5. Check, by direct observation and record review, that the testing equipment is available and suitable for their intended use.
6. Check, by record reviews and/or interviews, that the licensee performs periodic inspections of the storage facility as specified by approved procedures, and that the inspection are conducted in accordance with the requirements committed to by the licensee.
7. Check, by record review, that the storage records for the selected
~
components and/or equipment are being maintained as specified and are current. This review should verify: that the site (or project) storage ,
documents ' adequately identify the type of storage and inspections '
required for each type of equipment; that the records reflect licensee inspection of storage facilities and storage activities, and; that the records reflect that specified storage conditions are met.
8. For the selected components 'and/or equipment, check, by record reviews and/or interviews, that the licensee satisfactorily performs the periodic maintenance or storage requirements specified in licensee procedures or by the vendor / supplier (such as lubrication, periodic rotation, nitrogen blankets, desiccants, etc.).
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 35065 DRAFT ADDENDuN 2
l i
03.09 . For in-place storagtof cquipment and DRA components, the afin l c:ntrols and processes for the storage of safety-related equipment and components j
are adequate and in accordance with the practices committed to by the licensee.
l Attribute Guidance:
! 1. Review QA/QC and work (installation) procedures established to conduct activities for equipment such as heat exchangers, large motors, diesel
, I i generators, large pumps, and other components, that are stored in-place
to determine whether they comply with licensee commitments.
2. For the selected components and/or equipment stored in-place, check, by l 4
direct observation, their storage conditions to ensure the appropriate ,
, environmental conditions are established, the components and/or equipment are adequately protected from damage by construction debris and '
L activities, and that any special storage requirements specified by ~
engineering or the supplier are appropriately implemented.
i
3. For the selected components and/or equipment stored in-place, check, by 1 1 record reviews and/or interviews, that the licensee satisfactorily l
[ performs the periodic maintenance or storage requirements specified in ;
i the licensee procedures or by the vendor / supplier (such as lubrication, ;
periodic rotation, nitrogen blankets, desiccants, etc.). l
4. Check, by record review, that the storage records for the selected components and/or equipment stored in-place are being maintained as !
specified and are current. This includes that the site (or project) !
storage documents adequately identify the type of storage and inspections
! required for each type of equipment; that the records reflect licensee 2
inspection of storage facilities and storage activities, and; that the ,
' records reflect' that specified storage conditions are met.
l i
5. For the selected components and/or equipment stored in-place, check by
! record review and/or interview that the licensee performs periodic l i; inspections as specified by approved procedures and vendor requirements,
and that the inspections are conducted .in accordance with the 4 l
requirements ' committed to by the licensee.
03.10 For in-plant storage of equipment and components, the administrative I
controls and processes for the storage of safety-related equipment and components I
are adequate and in accordance with the practices committed to by the licensee.
It is expected that in-plant storage of safety-related equipment and components will be a transient condition. If the licensee uses in-plant storage for long
periods, the inspector should follow the attribute guidance specified in 03.08 to assess licensee performance.
Attribute Guidance:
4 1. Review QA/QC and work (installation) procedures established to conduct activities related to the selected equipment and/or components stored in-place (such as valves), and other items not being stored in-place, to determine whether they comply with licensee commitments.
2. For the selected components and/or equipment stored in-plant, check, by direct observation, their storage conditions to ensurr- that the components and/or egripment are adequately protected from damage by construction debris ard activities, and any special storage requirements specified by engineering or the supplier are appropriately maintained.
35065 Issue Date:
DMn XX/XX/XX
^ooenous 2
F _ _ _
If no safety-related components D and/or AFT equFpment' were selec occurrence of the inspection procedure, the inspector should select an area in the plant where safety- or non-safety-related components and equipment are temporarily being stored, and assess the storage conditions !
of the components.
35065-04 REFERENCES The inspector should refer to the licensing basis documentation to determine the applicable revision to the references listed below.
Most of the chapters in the facility SAR, including pertinent codes and 4
, standards referenced in these chapters.
NUREG-0302, Rev. x (10 CFR 21 Remarks and Discussion) - especially staff positions relative to paragraphs 21.3(d), 21.31, and 21.51.
Regulatory Guide 1.123, " Quality Assurance Requirements for Control of Procurement of Items and Services for Nuclear Power Plants."
Regulatory Guide 1.28, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Design and Construction)."
Regulatory Guide 1.38, " Quality Assurance Requirements for Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage and Handling of Items for Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."
ANSI - N45.2 - Quality Assurance Program for Nuclear Facilities.
ANSI - N45.2.13 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Control of Procurement of items and Services for Nuclear Power Plants. .
ANSI - N45.2.2 - Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage, and Handling of Items for Nuclear Power Plants.
END Issue Date: XX/XX/XX AR s ;
DRAFT NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 37051 VERIFICATION OF AS-BUILTS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF DESIGN CHANGE PROCESS PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512
, SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: Mg!)RPppnE18EAHM LEVEL OF EFFORT: 80 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER OCCURRENCE 37051-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES 01.01 Determine whether the as-built design and construction drawings and specifications correctly reflect the as-built condition of the plant.
l 01.02 Determine whether the changes from the original design (or SAR) were properly reviewed and approved.
01.03 Determine whether plant seismic and other stress calculations are based on as-built conditions. l l
l 37051-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA 02.01 Verification of the as-built condition of systems and structures should be performed routinely during the construction of the facility.
l Inspection should start approximately 6 months after system or structure fabrication begins (either offsite or onsite) and ends at the completion of the '
construction phase. The inspections should be performed at least annually (this is approximately 5 occurrences during a typical 60 month construction inspection period). The intent of this procedure is to accomplish the critical attributes as specified in Section 03 for each of the occurrences. Exceptions to completion of critical attributes will be made on a case by case basis by the Senior Construction Site Representative.
02.02 For each occurrence of the inspection procedure, select representative final design documents (including detailed design drawings and construction specifications relative to the specified inspection items) following the guidance provided in criteria 02.04 through 02.10 below. By comparing final detailed construction drawings and specification requirements with the actual installation, determine whether final design drawings and specifications reflect as-built conditions for each selected item. Except as noted below, each item should be completed and accepted through quality control inspection prior to this inspection.
02.03 Pioina systems. From the safety-related piping systems, select a minimum of two (or two groups of) isometric drawings (accepted through QC inspection) showing pipe welds, supports and restraints. All safety-related piping systems should be inspected before completion of the last occurrence of this inspection procedure.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX MAP Es1 5
02.04 Electrical raceways.
DRAFT From different safety-related electrical divisions and locations in the plant, select appropriate electrical drawings and specifications (accepted through QC inspection) that include a minimum of two Class 1E conduit and two Class 1E cable tray runs.
02.05 Electric cables. From different electrical divisions and locations in the plant, select appropriate electrical drawings and specifications (accepted through QC inspection) that include a minimum of one Class 1E cable run from each of the different safety-related electrical systems.
02.06 Structures. Select appropriate drawings and specifications (accepted through QC inspection) for a minimum of one structural steel assembly from a Seismic Category I structure. Each assembly selected should contain at least
three welded and/or bolted joints. Samples shall be inspected from all Seismic Category I structures before completion of the last occurrence of this inspection procedure.
02.07 From the drawings and specifications reviewed for the samples selected in criteria 02.04 through 02.07 for this inspection procedure occurrence, select a minimum of two plant changes for safety-related sy3tems and/or structures not yet incorporated into as-built drawings to verify the status of the review, approval, and revision of these identified changes from the
" original" design. The plant changes selected are not required to have been completed and accepted through QC inspection.
02.08 From the drawings and specifications reviewed for the samples selected in . criteria 02.04 .through 02.07 for this inspection procedure occurrence, select a minimum of two as-built changes on design / construction drawings for safety-related systems and/or structures that have been incorporated into the as-built drawings to verify that the changes were properly reviewed and approved by appropriate personnel (including QC inspection). For esrly inspection procedure occurrences, there may not be any as-built changes yat 4
incorporated into as-built drawings. If this condition exists, this sampling criterion does not apply. However, significant delay in incorporating as-built design changes into as-built drawings and specifications should be assessed for impact on development of the final as-built drawings and specifications.
02.09 Select a minimum of four drawings and associated specification, from any licensee drawing on a safety-related system or structure, in which changes have been incorporated to determine whether the as-built condition of the plant is used as the input to the seismic analysis of the system. At least two of these drawings and specifications should be from safety-related piping systems.
This criteria should only be applied to the last occurrence of the inspection -
procedure and an additional 20 direct inspection hours (100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months total for the last occurrence) is expected to complete evaluation of these samples.
02.10 The sampling criteria specified in 02.01 through 02.10 apply to modularly constructed facilities also. Because the intent of this procedure is to verify the as-built configuration of the facility, inspection will be performed at the construction site. No inspections at module fabrication facilities are expected.
37051-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES Critical attributes shall be verified for each inspection procedure occurrence by ensuring that attribute guidance has been performed correctly based on direct observation of as-installed systems and structures, and review of licensee 37051 -2 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX p ADDENDUM 3
DMART requirements and applicable industry codes and standards. Emphasis shall be on directly comparing the as-installed configuration with the as-built drawings when practical.
03.01 As-installed system, subsystems, and components conform to the as-built drawings and specifications. To complete this critical attribute, the inspector (s) shall review and assess licensee performance in each of the subsets of attribute guidance provided below. For each subset, most of the attribute guidance should be considered by the inspector (s) before completing their review.
Attribute Guidance:
For oioina systems:
1. Check by direct observation that all accessible piping supports for the selected samples are in the proper location, of the specified type, and in the correct configuration. For those inaccessible supports review installation documentation and records.
2. Check by direct observation that all accessible pipe welds for selected samples are in the location specified in the as-built drawing and are
] appropriately identified consistent with requirements (industry codes and standards or NRC requirements) committed to by the licensee. For inaccessible welds review welding records.
3. For the selected samples, check all accessible piping by direct observation that the location, size, and configuration are as shown on the as-built drawing. For inaccessible portions of the system piping, review installation documentation and records.
4. For the selected samples, check by direct observation and record review that component location, weight and orientation (including valve operators) are as shown on the as-built drawings.
5. Check by record review that the material used to fabricate the system piping and components for the selected samples are consistent with the design specifications.
For conduits and cable trav runs:
1. For the selected samples, check by direct observation that the location, size, and routing of all accessible conduits and cable tray runs conform to the as-built drawings. For inaccessible portions of the conduits or cable trays, review installation documentation and records.
2. Check by direct observation that all accessible conduit and cable tray run supports for the selected drawings are in the proper location, of the specified type, and in the correct configuration. For inaccessible conduit or cable tray support, review installation documentation and records.
3. Check by direct observation that the as-installed configuration of the selected conduits and cable tray runs maintains appropriate separation and isolation in accordance with the requirements (industry codes and standards or NRC documents) committed to by the licensee. This includes checking separation and isolation into and out of structural penetrations.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX gg- ADDENDUM 3 37051
4. Check by record rsview and direct- observation that the as-installed configuration of the selected conduits and cable tray runs are in accordance with the licensee requirements for cable loading (physical and thermal) and are consistent with the commitments made by the licensee.
5. Check by direct observation that the as-installed identification of the selected conduits and cable tray runs are in accordance with the as-built drawings.
l l
For electrical cable:
1. For the selected electrical cable, check by direct observation and/or j record / procedure review that the as-installed cable has been routed
i I consistent with as-built drawings and design requirements. This includes l checking that cable splices, bends, and pulls are made in accordance with l
accepted industry practices committed to by the licensee.
l
2. For the selected electrical cable, check by direct observation that the as-installed cable identification is consistent with the as-built drawing and system design at each termination point.and as required by licensee procedures (based on licensee commitments to Industry or NRC guidance) between termination points.
3. Check by direct observation that adequate physical and electrical protection / isolation are provided for the selected electrical cable that is consistent with requirements (Industry or NRC) committed to by the licensee. This includes checking electrical cabling electrical protection / isolation into and out of structural penetrations.
' 4. Check by direct observation that adequate physical and electrical separation exists between the selected electrical cables and redundant cable (s) consistent with requirements (Industry or NRC) committed to by the licensee.
5. Check by record review that the as-installed cable meets design specifications, such as electrical capacity (current and voltage),
insulation resistance, environmental qualification, and other relevant characteristics.
For structures:
1. Check by direct observation that the configuration of the selected
structural assembly conforms to as-built drawing and design -
specifications.
2. Check by direct observation for selected structural drawings, that the .
joint location / orientation., dimensions and configuration conforms to as-built drawing and design specifications.
3. For the selected structural drawings, check by record review that the proper material is used to fabricate the structural assembly as required by design specifications.
l 37051 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 3
03.02 DRAFT Lictnsa c:ntrols for g:nirating and completing as-built disign documents, including design modifications (i.e., drawings, specifications, and calculations), are adequate to accurately maintain as-built drawings and facility design. 4
1. Verify for the selected plant changes that, as modifications are completed, the controlled copies of all as-built documents are either revised and distributed for design changes, or have been legibly marked-up on an interim basis to show all relevant changes.
2. Using the selected plant changes, check that the administrative procedures and responsibilities have been established for updating and maintaining the as-built documents. These administrative procedures should include requirements for incorporating design changes on an interim basis, reviewing and approving changes, verification and authentication of the marked-up documents, safeguarding the documents and related information until all marked-up changes have been incorporated -
into the revised documents, and the as-built record retention period.
3. Check that the administrative procedures direct users of as-built- ,
documents to use and refer to, the marked-up copy for the purpose of l 4
testing, maintenance, and future design change activities, until ' the revised as-built document incorporating all the marked-up changes is
officially issued.
4. Using the selected plant changes, check completion schedules for as-built I design documents to monitor for a growing backlog of incomplete as-built design documents. I
5. Check that the revision of documents incorporating all marked-up changes for the selected plant changes are issued and distributed in a timely )
manner.
03.03 Engineering evaluation has been performed to provide an adequate I basis to allow implementation of the design or field change and has determined the impact on original design specifications.
1
1. Check by review of the selected drawings, specifications, and supporting engineering analysis that all associated design and field changes have received an engineering evaluation (by the licensee or for the licensee) that clearly documents the basis for the change.
2. Check by review of the selected drawings, specifications, and supporting engineering analysis that if design and/or field changes have been implemented that the engineering evaluation clearly documents the impact of the change on the plants original design.
03.04 Final seismic and other stress calculations and evaluations are performed using the as-built drawings and specifications. This critical attribute shall be performed during the last occurrence of this inspection procedure only.
1. Through independent review of the selected drawings and specifications, and independent review of the final seismic calculation, check that the as-built condition of the plant was used as the input to the final seismic analysis of the system / structure, or that the as-built condition conforms to the original seismic criteria, as applicable.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 5
2.
DRAFT Through independent review of the selected drawings and specifications, and independent review of licensee stress calculations (such a pipe stresses induced during normal, abnormal, and accident conditions), check that the as-built condition of the plant was used as the input to the final stress calculation for the system / structure, or that the as-built condition conforms to the original design criteria, as applicable.
3. Check that adequate administrative controls are in place to ensure that final as-built design documents (drawings, specifications, and calculations) will be readily available to site operations personnel when commercial operation is initiated. If certain as-built design documents (e.g., system analysis) are to be retained by the nuclear steam system supply (NSSS) vendor or architect-engineer (A-E) examine adequacy of
licensee's timely access to such records for analysis of plant operating conditions.
37051-04 REFERENCES 1
Applicable chapters of the SAR, including pertinent codes and standards referenced in these chapters )
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, "NCA 4137.7 and NCA 3554."
IE Bulletins 79-14 and 79-04 Regulatory Guide 1.26, " Quality Group Classifications and Standards" Regulatory Guide 1.28, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Design and Construction)"
Regulatory Guide 1.29, " Seismic Design Classification" l Regulatory Guide 1.32, " Criteria for Safety-Related Electrical Power Systems for Nuclear Power Plants" l l
Regulatory Guide 1.75, " Physical Independence of Electrical Systems" l l
ANSI N45.2, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities" ANSI N45.2.11, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants" END Issue Date:
37051
% W" XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 3
NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 49063 l l
SAFETY-RELATED PIPING WORK OBSERVATION l
PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512 l, SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: HG8M80lIDE[QTiEg1 LEVEL 0F EFFORT: 60 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER Occurrence I 49063-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES 01.01 By direct observation, and independent evaluation of work i performance, work in progress and completed work, determine whether activities !
relative to safety-related piping (except welding and nondestructive examination (NDE)) outside the reactor pressure coolant boundary are being accomplished in ,
accordance with NRC requirements, CP or COL conditions, licensee commitments, and I licensee procedures.
01.02 Assess the adequacy of the completed work, partially completed work, or work activities in progress to determine if there are any indications of management control problems or generic weaknesses.
49063-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA 02.01 Observation of safety-related piping fabrication should be performed routinely during the construction of the facility. The inspections should be performed at least semi-annually while pipe work is ongoir,g. The intent of this procedure is to accomplish the critical attributes as specified in Section 03 for each of the occurrences. Inspection should start ,nortly after piping system fabrication begins onsite and ends at the completion of the construction phase.
02.02 Select at least two safety-related piping systems each occurrence to observe piping fabrication.
02.03 From the selected piping systems, select at least four piping sections for observation. The selection of activities to be observed should be from diverse piping systems and pipe fabricators. The selection should not
. establish a pattern so that the licensee / contractor can axpect only certain activities or components to be inspected. About three-fourths of the selected activities should be from Quality Group B (see Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.26). l 02.04 For facilities constructed using modular construction techniques Inspections shall be performed both at the module fabrication facilities and at l the construction site. As appropriate, inspections shall be schedule at the j module fabrication facilities and/or the construction site for each inspection occurrence. In periods of high offsite fabrication, more inspection effort i should be expended observing safety-related pipe fabrication and installation at I the fabrication facilities. Because of the potential for differences in work ,
processes and QA programs at module fabrication facilities and the need to send inspectors to the facility, it is expected that an additional 32 hours3.703704e-4 days 0.00889 hours 5.291005e-5 weeks 1.2176e-5 months of direct Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 49063 hMf ADDENDUM 4
DBtr inspection effort at each selected module fabrication facility will be required to satisfactorily complete each occurrence of this inspection procedure. The .
intent of this sampling criterion is to ensure each module fabrication facility '
is assessed by the NRC through direct observation to determine whether adequate controls are in place for safety-related piping fabrication and installation.
49063-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES The critical attributes are intended to be inspected by direct observation of the selected samples of piping fabrication and the installation process to determine whether conformance to applicable requirements is being accomplished. Each 4 critical attribute shall be completed each occurrence to satisfy the objectives '
of this procedure.
03.01 For the selected piping sections, determine whether piping fabrication is being performed in accordanc.e with licensee approved procedures -
J
+
and consistent with .the industry codes and standards, and/or NRC documents, .
committed to by the licenseo. Refer to the licensee's fabrication instructions when necessary to determine dimensions, tolerances, and specifications. ;
1 Attribute Guidance: 1
1. Check by direct observation and record review that the proper materials ;
are used to fabricate the piping section by verifying that the markings on the material or packaging are consistent with the material specified I in design drawings and specifications.
2. Check by direct observation and/or record review that for the selected piping sections the piping material dimensions (diameter, wall thickness) are within the tolerance specified in the licensee fabrication procedure
. and design specifications. Additional guidance can be found in the revision to RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
3. Check by direct observation that handling and storage of the selected piping sections during fabrication precludes material degradation such as denting, corrosion, and chemical contamination. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.38, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
4. For the selected piping sections, check by direct observation (of the a
fabrication process itself or subsequent measurement by the licensee or the inspector) that fabrication processes such as cutting, grinding, and -
bending do not adversely impact the minimum wall thickness, and that they satisfy industry practices committed to by the licensee.
5. Check by direct observation that the installation of components in the selected piping sections (such as pipe spools, fittings, valves, orifices, and bellows) meet design requirements and are properly oriented. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
]
DRAPT 49063 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 4
DRAFT 03.02 F:r the selected piping secticns d;termins wheth:r piping installation is being performed in accordance with licensee installation instructions and are consistent with industry practices committed to by the licensee. Refer to the licensee's installation instructions when necessary to determine dimensions, tolerances, and specifications.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check by direct observation that handling of the selected piping sections during installation precludes material degradation such as denting, corrosion, and chemical contamination. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.38, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
2. Check by direct observation that the installation of the selected piping sections to adjacent components meet design requirements regarding i placement, orientation, and alignment. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
3. Check by direct observation or record review that attachments (especially welded) to the selected piping sections do not cause excessive distortion ;
or result in less than the specified minimum wall thickness. Additional '
guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
4. Check that the piping / component supports and restraints for the selected I piping sections are installed in accordance with applicable drawings, specifications, and procedures. Additional guidance can be found in the ,
revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the licensee.
1 03.03 Configuration controls of the selected piping systems and sections I are adequate to ensure that piping fabrication and installation are consistent with final plant design requirements / specifications, or that design and/or field changes are appropriately incorporated into the final plant requirements.
Attribute Guidance:
l
1. During piping' fabrication for one of the selected piping sections, check by procedure review that the fabrication procedures or work instructions include all of the field and/or design changes to the fabrication drawings and specifications associated with that piping section.
2. During piping installation for one of the selected piping systems, check by procedure review (for all of the installed piping sections) that the installation procedures or work instructions include all of the field and/or design changes to the installation drawings and specifications associated with the installed piping sections for that system.
3. For one of the selected piping systems, check by direct observation that the installed piping sections are configured as required by the latest approved specifications, drawings, and procedures for that system.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX DRAFT 490e3 ADDENDUM 4
!_. DNAFT 03.04 Licsnsee management /supervisicn oversight of tha selectcd piping i section' fabrication and installation is adequate to ensure adherence to licensee
approved procedures and applicable industry practices.
f Attribute Guidance:
1. Check, by record reviews or interviews, worker / inspector qualifications and training. Personnel performing quality-sensitive or special
. processes related to piping fabrication and installation, inspection, and q testing work, should be qualified by certification, experience or i training that satisfies licensee comitments. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.58, if applicable, comitted to by the l licensee. ,
4 l 2. Check, through interviews with the work crew or by direct observation, 4 licensee management's control over piping' fabrication and/or installation
activities by determining the level of interaction between licensee '
l l and/or contractor managers and supervisors and the work crew.
! 3. During piping fabrication and installation, check, by direct observation, i the ability of the licensee staff to perform their assigned duties and
! assume their assigned responsibilities.
l 4. For the selected piping sections, check by procedure review that i i fabrication and installation specifications and/or work instructions are '
i complete, including necessary reference materials and are of the correct l t
revision.
4 03.05 Quality assurance and control (QA/QC) processes and procedures l impunented during piping fabrication and installation demonstrate the licensee's l wiiity to adequately monitor and control piping fabrication and installation j- g ocesses to identify and address discrepancies in a timely manner.
Attribute Guidance:
1. For the selected piping systems, check by direct observation that measures are'used to maintain piping cleanliness and preclude the entry 1 of foreign material into the piping systems. Additional guidance can be
! found in the revisions of RG 1.28 and 1.37, if applicable, comitted to l by the licensee.
4
2. For the selected piping systems, check that the licensee appropriately implements procedures for cleaning and flushing the piping systems during
} and following piping fabrication and installation. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.37, if applicable, comitted to by the licensee. -
3. For the selected piping sections, check that quality-related inspections including NDE, independent checks, and " hold point" verifications are <
performed in sequence and according to the work document. Quality related checks include checks by line workers and supervisors, as well as independent organizations. Additional guidance can be found in the revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, comitted to by the licensee.
4. For the selected piping sections, check that the work documentation is up-to-date and in conformance with licensee record-keeping requirements.
l 49063 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX kf ADDENDUM 4
DRAPT
5. For the selected piping sections, check that nonconformances are '
identified, documented, prioritized, tracked, and resolved according to j their impcrtance and licensee procedures. Additional guidance can be ,
found in the revision of RG 1.28, if applicable, committed to by the '
licensee.
49063-04 REFERENCES j
SAR Chapters 1, 3, 5, 7, and 17, including pertinent Codes and Standards referenced in these chapters
, Regulatory Guide 1.28, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Design and Construction)"
Regulatory Guide 1.37, " Quality Assurance Requirements for Cleaning of Fluid Systems and Associated Components of Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants" Regulatory Guide 1.38, " Quality Assurance Requirements for Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage and Handling of Items for Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants" l Regulatory Guide 1.58, " Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Inspection, Examination, and Testing Personnel" Regulatory Guide 1.64, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants" t
) END a
O Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 49063 ADDENDUM 4
DRAPT NRC INSPECTION MANUAL or l
~
. INSPECTION PROCE:,idE 50073 MECHANICAL COMP 0NENTS - WORK OBSERVATION PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512 SALP AREA: H 03 @ M VIji @ TERj LEVEL OF EFFORT: 60 DIRECT INSPECTION HCURS PER Occurrence i
50073-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES l 01.01 By direct observation and independent evaluation of work performance, work in progress, and completed work, determine whether activities relative to safety-related components (other than the reactor pressure vessel and piping) are
, being accomplished in accordance with NRC requirements, SAR commitments, and '
licensee procedures. l 01.02 To determine whether inadequacies in completed work, partially completed work, or work ' activities in progress associated with safety-related components indicate a management control problem or generic weakness.
50073-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA l
. 02.01 Because of the importance and extent of safety-related component installation, observation of work activities in this area shall be scheduled to be performed at least quarterly during active mechanical systems work (this is approximately 16 occurrences during a typical 60 month construction inspection l period). The intent of this procedure is to accomplish all of the critical I attributes of Section 03 for each of the occurrences starting when component installation activities begin (either offsite or onsite) and ending at the i completion of the construction phase. For each occurrence of the inspection I procedure follow the guidance provided in criteria 02.02 through 02.05 below. l l
, 02.02 Select a minimum of 2 representative mechanical components within the I reactor coolant pressure boundary and a minimum of 5 components in safety-related systems outside the reactor coolant pressure boundary. If available, at least one of these components is to be a motor-operated valve:
. 02.03 As used in this and related procedures, mechanical components pertain to those components important to safety within the reactor coolant pressure boundary (as defined in 10 CFR 50.2(v)) and components in quality groups B and C (as defined in RG 1.26) except the reactor pressure vessel and piping.
Component selection should be representative of the type of plant components
involved, such as pumps, heat exchangers, system valves (and operators),
safety / relief valves, pressure vessels, and storage tanks.
02.04 The inspector may not be able to observe all facets of all activities identified in Section 03 of this procedure. However, direct observation of important activities should be made on a sampling basis. In some cases it will be necessary to observe a completed activity rather than work in progress. The Issue Date: XX/XX/XX gpy ADDENDUM 5 50073
D$ APT inspector's judgment in sample selection should consider both t e importance of the component to overall plant safety and the opportunity to inspect during the most advantageous part of the installation effort.
02.05 For facilities constructed using modular construction techniques:
Inspections shall be performed both at the module fabrication facilities and at the construction site. As appropriate, inspections shall be scheduled at the module fabrication facilities and/or the construction site for each inspection occurrence. In periods of high offsite fabrication, more inspection effort should be expended observing safety-related work at the fabrication facilities.
Because of the potential for differences in work processes and QA programs at module fabrication facilities and the need to send inspectors to the facility, it is expected that an additional 32 hours3.703704e-4 days 0.00889 hours 5.291005e-5 weeks 1.2176e-5 months of direct inspection effort at each ,
selected module fabrication facility will be required to satisfactorily complete each occurrence of this inspection procedure. The intent of this campling criteria is to ensure each module fabrication facility is assessed by the NRC through direct observation to determine whether adequate controls are in place -
for safety-related mechanical component installation.
50073-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES Critical attributes should be verified for each inspection procedure occurrence by ensuring that most of the attribute guidance have been performed correctly based on direct observation, and review of licensee installation requirements and applicable industry codes and standards. Emphasis shall be on directly observing licensee compliance with approved procedures and industry codes and standards to which they are committed. Each critical attribute shall be completed each occurrence to satisfy the objectives of this procedure.
03.01 The selected components were installed using the applicable licensee approved installation procedures. Refer to the licensee installation instructions when necessary to determine dimensions, tolerances, specifications, etc.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check that the proper material and equipment are installed by verifying that the markings on the material or packaging are consistent with the material and equipment specified in design drawings and specifications.
h the case of fasteners, compliance with the applicable material specitication (e.g., ASTM or ASME material and grade) should be verified by required markings on bolts and nuts and certified material test reports or certificates of conformance as required by the applicable procurement drawings and specifications and/or by the applicable codes and specifications. In the case of vendor-supplied equipment assemblies .
containing fasteners, samples should be inspected to verify compliance with approved vendor drawings and specifications and other information such as materials used for equipment qualification tests and/or analyses.
Caution should be exercised to ensure that the required markings on material and equipment, including fasteners, not only exist but that the markings indicate the correct material and grade as specified.
2. Check proper location, pl acement, orientation, and alignment of the component during installation.
3. Check mounting (torquing of bolts and expansion anchors) of components, supports, and attachments.
50073 -2 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX p ADDENDUM 5
~ ... -. .. . =. - --. .. - - - . . . - -- .- . - - - - - . -
4. For valves check flow direction.
5. For motor operated valves check that torque switches, limit switches, and bypass switches are properly installed, adjusted and checked out in accordance with. established licensee procedures.
6. Check that interferences with other components / structures, tolerances, and expansion clearance are satisfactory based on direct comparison of the as-built / final design drawings to the as installed configuration. ,
i 03.02 Pre-installation / installation handling and control of the selected i components are adequate to prevent damage to the component.
Attribute Guidance:
! 1. Check that precautions in the installation instructions to prevent damage l during placement / mounting are adhered to, where appropriate.
1- ,
2. Check on the availability and use of specia ly trained personnel and equipment if required to meet manufacturer's astructions.
03.03 Post-installation control of the selected components are adequate to I i prevent damage to the component, and post-installation preventive maintenance
! activities are performed as required.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check that protection is provided as required, including protection against adverse temperature, humidity, flooding, and foreign material intrusion.
2. Check that the component manufacturer's recommended preventive maintenance tasks are scheduled and performed appropriately. Examples include component lubrication, rotation, and electrical resistance checks. ;
3. Check that appropriate records are maintained regarding the status of installed components.
4. Check that the licensee uses appropriate controls (such as stamps, tags, markings, etc.) to ensure that the required inspections are performed, l post-installation component or system tests are completed when required, verification of operational acceptance of the component is documented, l and inadvertent operation of the component is prevented. l
. 5. Check that the preparation and maintenance of installation and inspection '
records are adequate.
03.04 Control and oversight of the selected components installation are l adequate to ensure adherence to licensee approved procedures and applicable industry practices.
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check that appropriate drawings and work procedures are available and ;
used by the installers. ,
i l
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 50073 i hhf ADDENDUM 5 l
2. Check that DNAPT installation requirements, construction drawings,
specifications, and work procedures have received appropriate licensee i review and approvals. The process for developing licensee approved j installation instructions, construction drawings, specifications, and work procedures will be assessed separately. However, obvious errors or j deficiencies should be identified to the licensee for correction.
} 3. Check, through record review and direct observation, that hold points are l observed, when required.
1 4. Check that licensee inspection activities including scope and frequency l are being performed according to instructions.
! 5. Check, through interviews and/or direct observation, that QA/QC personnel
are allocated adequate time to study installation specifications and
. instructions, and to perform the required component inspections. ,
! 6. Check, through interviews with the work crew or direct observation,
licensee management's control over component installation activities by i determining the level of interaction between licensee and/or contractor j managers and su'pervisors and the work crew during component installation.
7. Check, by record review, that the qualification and/or training of
) licensee staff eng. aged in component installation and inspection work are
adequate and commensurate with the work in progress. In determining the
! adequacy of QA/QC staffing, the effectiveness of their activities should be considered.
8. Ch'eck, through direct observation, the ability of the licensee staff to
perform their assigned duties and assume their assigned responsibilities.
i 03.05 System configuration and design controls are adequate to ensure field
changes are incorporated into the as-built drawings and the impact on design
specifications are adequately addressed. !
Attribute Guidance

1-l 1. Check that field and design changes relevant to the work being observed l 1
have been appropriately processed through the required review and t approval processes approved by the licensee. Discrepancies observed may i
be due to in-process changes such as those initiated by the design j organization or those initiated in the field. ,
! 2. Review the as-built drawings, and installation specifications, drawings, and records to verify that field changes made during the selected components installation are adequately incorporated into the latest as- -
built drawing.
3. Review the engineering analysis / evaluation providing the justification for implementing the field or design change for the selected components to verify that appropriate consideration is provided on the impact of the change on the design specifications.
50073 -4 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 5
50073-04 REFERENCES pg Regulatory Guide 1.26, " Quality Group Classifications and Standards" Regulatory Guide 1.28, " Quality Assurance Program Requirement (Design and Construction)"
Regulatory Guide 1.29, " Seismic Design Classification" Regulatory Guide 1.38, " Quality T.ssurance Requirements for Packaging, Shippinn, L.eceiving, Storage and Handling of Items for Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants" Regulatory Guide 1.39, " Housekeeping Requirements for Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants" Regulatory Guide 1.58, " Qualification of tiuclear Power Plant Inspection,
, Examination, and Testing Personnel" Regulatory Guide 1.88, " Collection, Storage and Maintenance of Nuclear
Power Plant Quality Assurance Records" NRC report, AE00/C203, " Survey of Valve Operator-Related Events Occurring During 1978, 1979 and 1980," dated May 7, 1982 -
' END l
l l
l l
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 50073
, ADDENDUM 5
DNApr NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PIPB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 70456 STANDBY LIQUID CONTROL SYSTEM PREOPERATIONAL SYSTEM TESTING PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512
^
SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: B 07BE M ID E Afi g @T E D W LEVEL 0F EFFORT: 80 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER Occurrence 70456-01 INSPECTION OBJECTIVES 01.01 Through direct observation of system testing, and review of the test procedures and test results determine whether the performance of the standby liquid control (SLC) system satisfies design basis commitments contained in the ,
safety analysis report (SAR) and/or the inspections, tests, analysis, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) provided in combined license.
01.02 Through review of the test procedures, ensure that they are technically adequate, provide appropriate provisions for the use of measuring and testing equipment (M&TE), and qualifications of licensee personnel performing the test (s).
01.03 Through review of the test result records, ensure that the required information related to M&TE used during the tests and test results are accurately recorded.
70456-02 SAMPLING CRITERIA 02.01 This inspection procedure will be performed for one occurrence unless previous performance of this inspection procedure identified issues requiring licensee corrective action that includes reperformance of all or parts of the standby liquid control system testing. Should it be necessary to reperform i portions of this procedure, the construction site scheduler (CSS) will schedule their performance in coordination with the licensee.
02.02 All of the critical attributes of Section 03 shall be completed during the performance of this inspection procedure. All of the test procedures used to functionally test the SLC system related to critical attributes 03.03 through 03.11 of this inspection procedure shall be reviewed. All of the test results for the SLC system related to critical attributes 03.03 through 03.11 of this inspection procedure shall be reviewed.
02.03 If testing is performed at offsite testing or fabrication facilities '
for components or subassemblies of the SLC system, the CSS shall schedule the performance of the appropriate critical attributes of this inspection procedure at the offsite location (s), including the test procedure (s) and record review critical attributes.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 70456 ADDENDUM 6
70456-03 CRITICAL ATTRIBUTES For each facility, the Senior Construction Mechanical Inspector (SCHI) shall ensure that this inspection procedure is revised to contain site specific information related to SLC system performance in critical attributes 03.03 through 03.11 listed below. For facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part 52, the SCMI should reference the applicable ITAAC associated with critical attributes 03.03 through 03.11 listed below. For each facility, the SCMI shall ensure that '
the SLC system piping and instrumentation drawing (s) (P& ids) provided in the SAR or license for the facility is/are attached to this inspection procedure.
03.01 The test procedure (s) provide adequate guidance for performance of the functional testing of the standby liquid control system. (Note: the adequacy of the procedures used to test system performance will be performed using inspection procedure 70300, " Test Procedure Review." Inspection procedure 70300 will, on a . sampling basis, validate the process used by the licensee to .
develop the testing procedure, and review procedure format and general content. .
The intent of this critical attribute is to provide a quick review of the inspection procedure for technical adequacy.)
Attribute Guidance:
1. Check, by procedure review, that adequate controls are in-place to ensure the measuring and testing equipment (M&TE) used during performance of the f test (s) are currently in calibration and of the appropriate scale.
2. Check, by procedure review, that the qualifications of the licensee personnel performing the testing are clearly defined.
3. Check, by procedure and design basis information review, that the test procedure accurately reflects the safety-related performance characteristics of the SLC system specified in the design basis information. (This attribute guidance shall be performed)
4. Check, by procedure review, that adequate controls are in place to prepare the system, subsystem, or component for testing (i.e., system alignment and test equipment installation).
5. Check, by procedure review, that adequate system, subsystem, or component restoration controls are in place.
6. Check, by procedure review, that adequate human factors considerations -
have been incorporated into the procedures' organization and appearance to facilitate completion of the procedures.
03.02 The test result records completely document the results required by the test procedure (s) and provide an auditable record that can be used to verify that the SLC system satisfies design requirements.
Attribute Guidance:
1. For each test procedure, review the final record copy of the procedure to ensure all of the required information is recorded in the test procedure.
70456 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 6
q '
DRAFT i 2. Ensure adequate technical justification is provided with the test records l
, documenting any deviations from the results specified in the test !
4 procedure (s). !
3. Ensure that the results are consistent with the design basis requirements i for the SLC system contained in the SAR and/or license condition (ITAAC).
4. Ensure that the records are legible and adequately controlled to prevent misuse or unintentional damage.
03.03 The as-built SLC system has the capability for testing the system during plant operation.
1. Testing of the as-built SLC system demonstrates the ability to inject water from a test tank to the reactor pressure vessel. [(GEfA8WHITAAC ggg_ggggy
2. During testing of the SLC system, each division of the SLC system can pump against a pressure greater than or equal to 8.72 MPaA at greater than or equal to 189 L/ min in a closed loop on the test tank. [(GEMBWR ~
llN$1b$3Ik1E11 03.04 The SLC system can deliver greater than or equal to 378 L/ min to the reactor pressure vessel against a pressure of greater than or equal to 8.72 MPaA with both pumps running 1GEi n jlI n [ Q { H31p{.
03.05 The SLC system can deliver greater than or equal to 189 L/ min to the reactor pressure vessel against a pressure of greater than or equal to 8.72 MPaA with either pump running ;(GEJh8ki lTAAg Q i4 g @ .
03.06 Testing of the as-built SLC system demonstrates that each division of the system can be initiated manually using the division's manual initiation switch. ly@@WR]QAjQl2{433]d{
03.07 Both divisions of the as-built SLC system automatically initiate when an anticipated transient without scram (ATWS) signal is generated [GQB$dTMG MMM3]el.
03.08 The as-built SLC system pump starting logic prevents the system pumps from operating unless signal exist indicating that a suction path is available from the storage tank (pump suction valve fully outlet valve fully open) ;(GEJABWQIJMMC[2]f[g3f..open) f). or test tank (test tank 03.09 The as-built SLC system available net positive suction head (NPSH) at the pump suction exceeds the required NPSH as demonstrated by the SLC system
. injecting greater than or equal to 378 L/ min into the reactor pressure vessel at normal operating pressure using both system pumps with the storage tank at the low level trip (pump trip level) and a temperature greater than or equal to 43*C
$$E$$dlN31NS$hl-03.10 The SLC system pump relief valves open when the inlet pressure to the valve equals or exceeds 10.76 MPaG as demonstrated during shop or field testing
'(GEEABWRTITAACl2?2T3?i{. This critical attribute can be verified by either d" fM6t7EisiFratifE6~7if~the relief valve testing or by record review during SLC system functional testing.
Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 70456 ADDENDUM 6
03.11 The as-installed SLC system mottr operated valv;s (MOVs) cpen upon receipt of an actuating signal under preoperational differential pressure, fluid flow, and temperature conditions. }GQ @ 11 M i g @ ls{ ;
03.12 The as-installed SLC system check valves (CVs) either opens, closes, or both opens and closes, depending on the valve's safety function, based on the direction of the differential pressure across the valve under system p !
3$reoperational
$$4}l1 pressure, fluid flow, and temperature conditions. XGEMB@@
70456-04 REFERENCES The inspector should refer to the licensing basis documentation to determine the applicable revision to the references listed below.
General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (GE ABWR) Certified Design -
Material (specifically Table 2.2.4, " Standby Liquid Control System" and Figure ,
2.2.4, ' Standby Liquid Control System," of the ITAAC). )
1 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix ??, " General Electric ABWR Certified Design Rule" i
l 1
l 1
i l
l 70456 Issue Date: XX/XX/XX ADDENDUM 6
STANDBYLKNMO CONTROL SYSTEM (SLC), ABWR-Figure 2.2.4 Vent t Prknary NHS containnwnt 2 o
43 C
. . . . . - - - - . . . - . . . . . - H l
4 y] 7$ STORAGETANK!!! .
pai,eMe.enene ## an er*::
H l ii 5 .i M menos ~~~~~
3 SAM sLC l t ~
I
,f -
f Note 1
i l h mov lsucnonvm.ws asov lNse>2 ,
I,
\ s[
< A .d k
)
REACTOR HPCF- 8 VESSEL ..
W "
a.n u Paa E Note-1 Noto-2 5 b 6
/ O 7 X - -
valvo lf 1
y \ Noto 1 2 1 g Not>2 , , , . NNS 2A NOTES: ! we us,. Inlet
1. Powered by Class 1E DMalon L V
,$I alve
2. Powered by Class 1E DMalon 11.
P 2 I b. TEST..
i _ _ m .,..
NNS Q !!TANKj Issue Date: XX/XX/XX 70456 ADDENDUM 6
DRAFT ATTACHMENT 4 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM INFORMATION SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Final Report from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for Task 94-02 of JCN L-2502 D
8 e
a
I i JCN L-2502:
NRC-NRR/ Branch Chief -- Richard W. Borchardt l NRC-NRR/Section Chief -- Loren Plisco REV 1 - 7/30/96 NRC Project Manager ------ Patrick 1. Castleman l
NRC Technical Monitor ---- John A. Nakoski i*
l
! l l
I i
l OBattelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories g:ry;,t;n.;="
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS CIPIMS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Background:
The Integrated System (Application) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Reoo rt Desi en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 SECTION ONE, CIPIMS Schedule / Resource Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
. Introduction : S RM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Information Coding " Smart-Coding" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 System Design: ..............................................................9 The Integrated System: (Application) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ;
Imoorting and Exoortinc: Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Settine-up the Schedule / Resource Manager: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 1 SECTION TWO, CIPIMS Work-Flow User Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Introd ucti on : WFUI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 WFUI S chem es : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 SECTION THREE, CIPIMS Relational Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 i
Construction inspection Information Management System (CIPIMS) Database Design . . . . . 24 I Innod uction : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 i How the CIPIMS database was desiened: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 I
Whv the CIPIMS Database was desiened the way it was: ............................ 25 )
Database Dictionary of terms, source & use, and rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 How the CIPIM S Vlmks: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Data Set (Table) Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6 Primary Key Determmation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
~
Reference Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6 Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7 i' Referential-integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8 Cascading Update / Deletion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Data Form Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8 Main Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8 S ubforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8 Combo-box's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9 Data Queri es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9 Repo rts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9 Report Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9
3 Configunng your system to run the WP connection to Access tables, and for using the WP Macros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,3 0 Integration with Scheduler / Resource Manager (SRM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Importing and Exporting Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Converting Database Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Alternate ITAA C Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 Setting up & running the MS ACCESS database as a "Run-Time" application . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Setting up the Database on a network share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 TABLE OF FIGURES & ATTACHMENTS Figures:
Figure ONE-1, CIPIMS Activity Smart-Code Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure TWO-1, CIPIMS Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure THREE-1, Software Data Exchange / Sharing Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Figure THREE-2, CIPIMS Database Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure THREE-3, Design for CIPIMS Database ITAAC Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Attachments:
Attachment ONE-1, WFUI Home-Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Attachment ONE-2, WFUI WBS Code Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Attachment TWO-1, WFUI Inspection Procedure Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Attachment TWO-2, Inspection Procedure Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Attachment TWO-3, Example-Standard Plant Simplified System Drawing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Attachment THREE-1, CIPIMS Database Flowchart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Attachment THREE-2a, CIPIMS Database Relationships-Initial Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 -
Attachmen't THREE-2b, CIPIMS Database Relationships-Final Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Attachment THREE-3, Database Interface with Scheduler / Resource Manager (Example) . . . 41 APPENDICES:
Appendix - A, CIPIMS User Installation Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Appendix - B, CIPIMS Tutorial Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 45 Appendix - C, CIPIMS Administrators Ouide-Initial Data Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
! 4 i
CIPIMS INTRODUCTION
Background:
The Integrated System (Application)
CIPIMS is not a software or program, but instead an integrated application of several commercially available software which collectively serve as a Schedule / Resource Manager
, (SRM), an Inspection Database, and a interface to the data via a mimic of the inspection process called the Work-Flow User Interface (WFUI). Since no single software has both the capability and flexibility to manage the complexities ofproject and information management cheaply and easily, this system (based upon smart-coding--discussed later) was devised to easily and -
j practically share information between software applications. Highly compatible software was j chosen which minimind the need to do programming (which would have also necessitated
, expending time and resourcesfor developing user manuals / guides, on-line help, and training.)
4 The software; ABC Flow-Charter, Primavera SureTrak, and MS ACCESS collectively, form CIPIMS. MS ACCESS was chosen because ofits compatibility with the other software, and because ofits good Graphic-User-Interface (GUI) capability. One of the most important design
feature of CIPIMS is its reporting flexibility / capabilities. CIPIMS can report from MS ACCESS or to Wordperfect, or from SureTrak directly, or to Wordperfect through a Btrieve link to ACCESS ,or to Wordperfect via preset macros.
1 The SRM work breakdown structure (WBS) provides a stmeture for the inspection procedures
that will be used to monitor and verify construction activities during site development and
constmetion. This WBS will be used in the project management software (only the schedule /
resource management features are currently being utilized) to relate construction activities to
, inspection procedures and inspection cycles so that the inspection process can be monitored, I tracked, statused, and documented. :
Besides serving as a graphics aid to depict the inspection process and relationships, the WFUI (Attachment ONE-1) which mimics the construction work flow can also serve as the road map (i.e., home-page) to guide the user's to specific compartmentalized information while at the same time keeping track of the information's source, path, and relationships. A generic hierarchical workflow layout (mimic) was developed for each inspection preparation, planning, or .
performance step. These steps were then coded to serve as the basis and foundation for common .
understanding / agreement to " Smart-Code" activities into/for the project management software.
In addition to the database, other tools were developed -The layout of the generic inspection preparation, planning, or performance steps was managed by a software called ABC FlowCharter. This layout could also serve as a WFUI / Home-Page which would act as an information layering structure through which necessary information can be retrieved either in storage within ABC or by launching to various applications like SureTrak or MS ACCESS. ;
Other obvious use for this tool could be to serve as a basis for the inspection planning and l I
preparation phases, and to access and manage inspection procedures.
l l
l
5 The Highly Relational Database provides the inspector with the interface to the Database, and makes the inspection activities truly " Schedule-Driven" because the Project Management Activity smart-code from the SureTrak project management software is broken down into its .
component parts (" PARSED") along with the corresponding planned activity start, end date, and resource. This data, which is Btrieve linked to the Relational Database, generates a record for each identified activity, and fills in the Activity ID (Proj._Mngmt_ Activity code, resource, planned begin and end dates. (De data is parsed via a query from the MS ACCESS Relational Database to the SureTrak SRM. The query returns with and distributes the information into the appropriate Database table and fields.
Egort Design:
The CIPIMS design report consists of three sections. These sections are, by intent, designed to be -
" stand-alone". The rational for this approach is, that since there are three different and distinct -
application that are being integrated together, it is rather overwhelming for the reader to try and ,
digest and understand the integrated application without first understanding some things about the individual parts. Additionally some users will not have an interest in all parts, so the individual sections need to be able to stand on their own.
These three sections are: !) The Work-Flow User Interface,2) The Schedule and Resource Manager, and the 3) Assessment Database Design. Several important appendices are included, which are also intende.! to wrve as stand-alone's so that this report will also serve to document the design, installation, and operation of the CIPIMS. These appendices are: 1) A User instillation guide which provides step-by-step CIPIMS workstation installation instructions is included herein as Appendix - A.
~
Appendix - B, How the tutorial gets installed, provides installation instructions for installing the database tutorial. (The tutorial is an ABC flowcharter created file that contains screen-captured images of all of the database forms. These forms contain representative data within the database fields / forms) The tutorial requires installation of a viewingprogram. This viewing program i.e.,
ABC Viewer, is a royalty-free run-time application that allows viewing, manipulation, and ,
printing of ABC Flowcharter created files.
. Appendix - C, CIPIMS Administrators Guide, provides installation instructions that a " Database Administrator" would require to set-up the CIPIMS for Workstation Sharing. The primary configuration for the CIPIMS is envisioned to be installation onto a network share system instead
. - of a network system with a dedicated SQL server (for example, a system using Windows-95 to create a network at a construction site). This document will provide step,by-step instructions for setting up the network shared Database (MS Access), setting up the network shared scheduler / resource manager (SureTrak) that includes configuring SureTrak to format the schedules in the P-3 protocol (create the Btrieve files to athch to the network shared Database);
installation of the WFUI (ABC Viewer) on network and on individual workstations; and the CIPIMS Tutorial. The Database Dictionary and description of the relationships between tables and fields i.e., defmition of the field variable, where it comes from, where it goes to, how it is used in relationships, etc is included within the database.
3
l l
SECTION ONE i l
,,:>.... .c . :,
. . a' ,
i 1
SCHEDULE / RESOURCE MANAGER !
l l ..,....: l
! l i :
l l
Schedule / Resource S"" """ )
e m sys ;
l
/- oDec CODE 1 i
i l
SoftwareDataEmi ge/ i gg Sharing Formats ,
\
N conceptualDesigrt o.wiseet Database Desigru R Smoter
i i
i i
j 7 i
i 1
SCHEDULE / RESOURCE MANAGER
Introduction:
SRM i
The Schedule and Resource Manager (SRM) acts as a work breakdown structure (WBS) for the inspection procedures which will be used to monitor and verify construction activities and i~ completion during site development and plant construction. This WBS will be used in the project I management software (only the schedule / resource management features are currently being utilized) to relate construction activities to inspection procedures and inspection cycles so that j the inspection process can be monitored, tracked, statused, and documented.
! The Work-Flow User Interface (WFUI) Home-Page (Attachment ONE-1) mimics the inspection 3
work flow and serves as the road map to guide the user to specific compartmentalized
! information while at the same time keeping track of the information's source, path, and i relationships. Additionally, a generic hierarchical work flow layout (mimic) is then developed for each inspection preparation, planning, or I.orformance type of activity. These steps are then
. coded to serve as the basis and foundation for common understanding / agreement to " Smart- )
l Code" activities into/for the project management software. !
i
The layout of the generic inspection preparation, planning, or performance activities is managed by a software called ABC FlowCharter. This layout becomes a WFUI / Home-Page which j serves as an information layering structure through which necessary information can be l retrieved either in storage within ABC or by launching to various applications like SureTrak, l l
ACCESS, FOXPRO, etc. !
l Information Codina: " Smart-Coding" i i j The " Smart-Coding" evolved into two separate but related code areas. These are WBS code
! and Activity Code. Since the constraints of the project management software dictated the i
coding size, characters and format, it took significant trial and error to come up with both a !
j practical and workable solution. Using Primavera, the WBS consists of at most 25 digits, the )
activity code 10 digits.
l~ The activity code (which is a subset of a specific WBS Code) depends upon and relates to the i process step (inspection activity). However, the WBS can be constructed based upon l 1 systems, design document sections (CIPIMS WBS is based upon the Design Document l* sections (refer to Attachment ONE-2]), or other logical, ordered or systematic categories. For i
activities that are repeated within multiple WBS - part of the WBS or additional codes can be i included within the activity code to make it unique.
i l Letters allow up to 26 permutations per code position instead of 10 for numeric. The key is to
} set up your process breakdowns to get to the lowest level in as few steps as is practical. The j goal of smart-coding is to provide easily understood information imbedded within the code so as i to be useful, rather than a dumb-code that would not be associated with any specific or reoccurring process, step, activity, or etc. (The smart-code, when derived from a generic i
8 ;
The CIPIMS Activity smart code is designed as follows:
10 positions total:
Position 1-5 = Inspection Procedure Number Position 6-7 = Plant System (same as WBS Code)
Position 8-9 = Critical Attribute (The prefix for all critical Attributes is 3., so it is assumed for economy of space / size)
Position 10 = Cycle Number (alpha numeric starting at a and ending with Zero for a total of 36)
Example: as in Figure ONE 1 37051BC01D inspection Procedure No. 37051 .
Plant System BC=FWCS (Feedwater Control System)
Critical Attribute 3.01 Cycle 4 ( A=1, B=2, C=3, etc) n Progress inspection Activities . . X
-:, swu mwa.mm-r
{ , :v,tiibentoF w3
, .ms:uw.,l
%Mamalh# ' Aalivtly CadeWWMy y"e.DW.,8 M i g,3 g@u~ .,LPl@dgjggRetor.
aegy;2ggreggc 4)h@p3_7851_8C._01.D,nq Mjns M a_ mop
. , ,nlsr n Q'ahau ,% ,d @,s ; p W . n m ~ ~~+=*~ uurr:q p.
s g$g j w swww, m:mnumwljEV$ampleiW@lfki3 l,
gr .
.-g QF gap "WDgeesec.. W... Z7""*BE*
. . _ . 4.. %:r- . . ..& . :n :
W *M$
... ., . O_ . . FF5f?$5PT*,@k%W .
g m%2W4M.......................,F.......
a._. /m %
W MQ QMienesEgh d $gu p&q % a.+.n~:- ~ *~~ %
y 45 umana"WWGff#9NMrf4gWapMPMWW4$fCensisETH6mh y
%gmhosentionWlj O@P' %M m u n w m & B0.00]piggn@$$nsisOR5SdMdN#E%k*
5 % $ n titi W kMMMDW 1 2 oc?g:gk*h5EG&&':
,MHAcitisityl0Cosil!StsfDaniWSy:GssMEa&WE7taten edwe:I PEQiL%tWla jfe 2_3_705,MC01D..
- h m. p. ~ .S. /23/95g-FWCSPS/23/95 ~ "S/23/95MWN051M$jB10tiiM m_ 6S g
(37951,BH02C d $7/4/95)QRFCS$$f/4/95) pf4/95fgs@WO511@j;0101sM %d{
6
$[ h j @j![g%)$$3dhhhh Q3 F]$Wgf hhh .. $hh$f r4M%{jfkgg6fg h@$(jkgpfg%!ky#hp h @hhsg hhhh 4<.... w.
-w ..e m:.ep :uenw .
m 6 e vn ;og p ,. - \
.. M,. S.:.>,,.,
ortO ej ;.
.'rdec;?3mj.n, g }MM&n?QFV%p:m:yyp.g>pyy;jo;:.ygyq Ktg.mpm Meesh 3nspection m ne +W, Y1,Mys &y >
,78%$ggss@h,aj,(($jde,$dbhggM@hh wr MMMggdMN Td l
~
Hj 4 l Record l1 lol 2 hkDU Figure ONE-1 CIPIMS Activity Smart-Code Examole l
l l
l l
l t
i f Svstem Deslan:
The goal of integrating the Schedule / Resource Manager with the inspection databa'se and l WFUI was to obtain optimum efficiency and practicalimplementation. To accomplish this goalit
! was determined that an integration of technology and a systems approach must occur.
l History, indicated that relying on either technology or a systems approach alone was both i
inefficient and impractical. Relying to much on technology can be overwhelming for an already i over burdened staff or system. Likewise too dramatic of a change in the systematic day-to-day business can be to disruptive in achieve successful change.
1
in order to apply a systems approach it was accepted that it was necessary to first be able to l recognize all the parts of a system, and be able to create a hierarchy of system parts- where l
any part can be traced through the hierarchy to identify its predecessors or successors. l
Experience indicates that most system problems are due to sin's-of-omission where critical )
{ parts are left out, or interfaces between parts, components, or organizations are not established l
, appropriately. (Systems' engineering identifies the most practical way to complete an action -
l 1.e., exhaustive evaluation of the attematives but not necessarily an acceptable method.) l i Some of the advantages of standardizing an organizations project management system are: 1) )
This provides the foundation and basis for training, improvement, and documentation, and 2) a l
! standard system enables staff to switch from project to project and to focus on the project l
{ specifics rather than leaming new fundamentals (i.e, software, procedures, processes, forms, )
etc). ;
The Integrated System: (Application)
{ CIPIMS is not a software or program, but instead an Integrated Application of several commercially availabie software. Since no single software has both the capability and flexibility to manage the complexities of project and information management cheap:y and easily, this system (based upon smart-coding) was devised to easily and practically share information between three applications. Highly compatible software was chosen which minimized the need to do programming (which would have also necessitated expending time and resources for i
developing usermanuals/ guides, on-line help, and training. Instead, the usermanuals/ guides,
on-line help, tutorial training, and technical support help lines are all available, automatically updated and free of charge from the software vendors.)
ABC Flow-Charter, Primavera SURETRAK, and MS ACCESS collectively, form CIPIMS. MS i ACCESS was chosen because of its compatibility with the other software, and because of its
- good Graphic-User-Interface (GUI) capability. The second most important design feature of CIPIMS is its reporting flexibility /capabHities. CIPIMS can report from MS ACCESS or to
. Wordperfect, or from SURETRAK directly, or to Wordperfect through a BTRIEVE link to MS ACCESS, or WORDPERFECT via specific macros.
. l To make a project or activity truly " Schedule-Driven" the project management activity smart- l code from the SURETRAK project management software is broken down into its component I parts (" PARSED") along with the corresponding planned activity start date, end date, and resource. This data, which is BTRIEVE linked to the Relational Database, generates a record 1
i
l l
l 10 for each identified activity, and fills in the Activity ID, (project management activity code, resource, and planned begin and end dates). The data is parsed via a query which retums and distributes the string information into a database table and fields that have pre-established relationships with other database tables and fields. (Refertopage 590 of the MS ACCESS 2.0 manual for furtherinformation on the parse capabilities - or search the Microsoft knowledge based articles at FTP.Microsoft.com -look at Q100135 and/or Q115915).
Imoortina and Exoortina: Information ODBC (Open Data Base Connectivity) and BTRIEVE files are used to import information from the SRM to the CIPIMS Database. The following describes how to setup SURETRAK for use with MS ACCESS: (be sure you have the BTRIEVE file BTRV110A.DLL or BTRV200.DLL in l
the Windows system subdirectory [you can get these files from the Microsoft public access directory at microsoft.com]). The Run Time Application will install these BTRIEVE files. .
1) Use NOTEPAD (or some other text editor) and modify the STWIN.INI file in the WINDOWS directory as follows: l
[DDFOptions]
NoDDF=0 ActivityCodes=1 CustomDataltems=1 Advanced =0
2) After restarting SURETRAK, save the SURETRAK Project in the P3 file format.
3) When the Update Data Dictionary dialog box aopears.. choose yes (accept the default settings (which you established in 1 above when you edited the STWIN.lNI file]). This creates two files; FIELD.DDF and FILE.DDF which are required for MS ACCESS to open project files. The .DDF files are created in the current project directory (usually
\STWIN\ PROJECTS).
4) Quit SURETRAK and start MS ACCESS.
5) In ACCESS Choose the database you want the SURETRAK data to be in. .
6) Choose ATTACH TABLE under FILE. When prompted for the SOURCE of data -
select BTRIEVE. ,
7) Wnen prompted for the location of the DATA SOURCE files... enter the directory where the FIELD.DDF, FILE.DDF, and SURETRAK project files are stored (usually
\stwin\ projects), and select OK.
l
8) When you are prompted for the file you wish to ATTACH to your MS ACCESS database... select the desired file and click attach. Repeat as necessary. I The files you can attach are listed with the four-character project filename (????) plus three 1
. - - -.. - . . . . . - . - . - - . - . _ _ . - _ . ~. - . . -_ - - _._. _ .
r, i
11 l
I characters that identify the contents of the files. The following is a brief listing of the kind of
! Information you will find in the different project files:
i ??'??ACT: Activity information
} ????DTL- Activity Code Dictionary Information i ????REL: Predecessor / successor relationship information
! ????RES: Resource Assignments
????STR: WBS structure 1
!* . ????RLB: Resource Dictionary information
????WBS: Activity WBS assignments l
????ACC: Cost accounts (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK)
????ATT: Custom data items (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK) !
???? LOG: Activity log records (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK) l
????RIT: Resource custom data items (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK) l NOTE: To use BTRIEVE data you must have the BTRIEVE for Windows dynamic-link library; l WBTRCALL.DLL, which is not provided with MS Access but comes with SURETRAK (move this '
dll to the C:\ Windows \ System directory. The Run-Time Application will install this file.
For MS ACCESS to use BTRIEVE Tables (which are the format of data generated by SureTrak i and P3), you must have the data definition files FILE.DDF and FIELD.DDF, which describe the structure of the BTRIEVE tables. When you make the modifications to your .INI file and save the project in P3 format, as described earlier, you have configured SURETRAK to generate these files.
You can use MS ACCESS as you normally do to create custom reports. You can make changes to data such as descriptions, durations, calendar ID's etc. Generally, you should not change calculated information (such as early start and finish dates). Any changes you make using MS ACCESS will be saved to the SURETRAK project files. (You can find additional infonnetion relative to BTRIEVE Tables and MS Access on page 166 & 167 of the MS ACCESS User's Guide Ver. 2.0)
Spttina un the Schedule / Resource Manaaer:
Setting up the SRM is relative simple (once you have determined the WBS Scheme). The most practical approach is to set up a SURETRAK project as a P3 subproject for each Nuclear Facility 1.e., plant. The sample project; NRCX has been set up for a ABWR. This project uses the GE- ABWR Design Document Sections prefixed by a NP.3.1.1 (NP is a place holder for a alpha-numeric designation for a specific facility / plant. 3 is for nuclear facility,1 is for BWR and
.1 is for ABWR).
Once a WBS for facility / plant type has been developed it is a simple matter to utilize this as a template for others of the same type. Designating each project (i.e., facility / plant) as a subproject, allows them to all be " rolled-up" into a master project that share common resources and work calendar, which then enables an organization to do resource management &
schedule leveling (also provides a basis for budget management).
12.
Since only part of the capabilities of the SRM are being used, only a portion of the normal
] project management information needs to be loaded to set up a CIPIMS project /subproject.
The CIPIMS Database is looking for a particular activity code and the resource associated with it i.e., RITS ID. In addition the database looks for the scheduled start and stop date for each
. activity. The CIPIMS Database will operate without this project information because it only queries the SRM for this information, and if it does not exist it will continue to rt:n anyway.
i All of the data for the SRM must be loaded, nothing is automatic. Data can however, come from another source such as an EXCEL spreadsheet and then be imported to convert the *'
EXCEL data to WBS/ Project Activities. Data does not come from the CIPIMS Database automatically or directly. However, there is a report in the CIPIMS Database that provides all of the activities in the CIPIMS Database that are not part of the SRM, so that the SRM can be
4 manually updated.
As stated earlier, MS ACCESS can be used to modify SURETRAK BTRIEVE Tables by .
changing data such as descriptions, durations, calendar ids etc. Generally, you should not change calculated information (such as early start and finish dates). Remember, when you save these changes that are Btrieve attachments to MS ACCESS, you change the attached BTRIEVE files.
l O
e 1
4 4
4
, - - - - =-r, --.,vi e -- - + - ,- -
+--
13 i
i ATTACHMENT ONE-1, WFUI Home-Page Osanese_ _ . _ . . . - . . _
NRC CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROCESS M
N P.1 A
N P.3
< CONSTR UCTIO N > 1NSPECTION
~
LtCENSEE ~
SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE INSPECT PERFORMANCE NP.3.2 h CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT ACTIVITIES VERIFY IP - -
INSPECTIONS CRITICAL t ATTRIBUTE ACCESS NP2 -
LICENSE E __
N P.3.22 PROCESS N P.5 1r V
GENERATE I RECORO INSP. INSPECTION 4 . REPORTS '
CIPIMS RECORD CRIT
9 ATTRISSTATUS uesem N P.6 37 N GENERATE BACK MANAGEMENT REPORTS ;
NP.7h
}&R NRC CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION WORK FLOW USER INTERFACE np*'*',R*'",',t g,
READINESS
i 4
14 i
i i
! NP.3.1.1.1 NP.3.1.1.9 Attachment, ONE-2 -
Nudear Steam -
PMoactive WFUI Flow Chart & Supply Waste WBS Code Scheme -
t' '
. NP.3.1.12 NP.3.1.1.10 Control and -
< Power Cyde instrument Site inspecuon " '
i a NP.3.1.1.2 NP.3.1.1.11 E2 Radation Station
)
Monitority) Awdliary i
-1 i
I NP 31'1'12 Procedures SW@A(A3h
< t,-
1;1 -<-
Station j
~
! Perform eggg Bectrical Inspections j l i 4
NP.3.1.1.13 )
NP.3.1.1 hr !
ABM Trarumission i
NP3.1 NP3.12 NP.3.1.1.5 NP.3.1.1.14 )
B&W - Reactor -
Containment Rant Se @ Environmental InSPec6on l NP3.1.3 CE NP.3.1.1.6 NP.3.1.1.15 '
- Reactor - Structures & i Amdliary Servicing l l
NP3.1.4 . 1 Westinghouse W.3.1.1.16 NP.3.1.1.7 Yard /Struct. &
W PWs !
Equipment l OTHER i
NP.3.1.1.8 NP.3.1.1.17 Nudear Fuel Emergency Ranning
l 1 .
i j SECTION TWO i
WORK FLOW USER INTERFACE (WFUI) i*
1 l
i 1
. . e o
i
! . te .
., CABC USERi f )
jWORKFLOWj
INTERFACE
,W,'
l 1 g
^
l (ACCE
/ '
l ~ \,
l I
j ConceptualDesign: D.Willett DetaBase Design: R. Smoter i
}
t
- . = - . - - - . . _ . _ _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _
_7_
j 16 i
l
, WORK-FLOW USER INTERFACE (WFUI) 1 l
Introduction:
WFUI i
, The WFUI, which mimics the inspection work flow, acts as a "Home-Page" by serving as the i road map to guide the user to specific compartmentalized information while at the same time keeping track of the information's source, path, and relationships. The second level below the
Home-Page (see Attachment, ONE-1) consists of generic hierarchical work-flow layouts l* (mimics) for each inspection preparation, plannmg, or performance type of activity. These steps l are then coded to serve as the basis and foundation for common understanding / agreement to
, " Smart-Code" activities into/for the project management software.
! The layout (process map) of the inspection preparation, plannmg, or performance activities is j managed by a software cal!ed ABC Flowcharter. This layout becomes a WFUI i.e., Home-Page, i
or lower tier layer and serves as part of the information layering structure through which
! necessary information can be retrieved either in storage within ABC or by launching to various j applications like SURETRAK, MS ACCESS, FOXPRO, etc.
1 The WFUI is " Point-and-Click"in the Windows environment, and allows for password protection ofinformation at alllevels. In addition this interface has features which will enable the users to
, incorporate specific templates for work and instruction while not penahzmg the proficient user by a routine ofinescapable menus. The WFUI provides idormation in a user 4
friendly, logical, and layered structure that is easily retrievable and auditable m which also links together the component parts of the CIPIMS, and serves as a road-map and guide to the process and informatiori.The WFUI can interface with the CIPIMS if a link (launch) to Microsoft Access is built. This link is accomplished economically by using a "Run-Time" MS ACCESS executable routine that allows access / input to the database without owning MS ACCESS itself. !
RUCT l 1 l 1 Figure TWO-1. CIPIMS Attributes l l
i
17 i
j WFUI Schemes-There are multiple schemes possible for implementation of the WFUI. Originally it was envisioned 1 (in the earliest designs) that the CIPIMS user would utilize the WFUI to manage the inspection i process - focusing on managing the process rather than the person. The goal was to use the WFUI >
i to visually mimic the inspection process and use this mimic to help guide the inspector through the I l maze of information needed both for preparation and performance of the inspection i.e., inspection j j procedures, critical attributes, sample selection, etc, and the required documentation of the inspection i.e., sample ID, exceptions, findings, etc.
)
l This earliest design is still a viable implementation scheme. This scheme breaks inspection j~ procedures down by section (see Attachments, TWO-1 & 2) And provides for a link to the database
(access to information is all " Point-and-Click"). There are several ways to handle the inspection j procedure information. The procedures can be divided up accordmg to their respective sections and
be handled via ABC Flowcharter, or they could be handled by a database with links that could keep l the sections updated as the master dahW is updated. Another option is to use the flowcharter tool l for developing the process graphics which can then be pasted into the front-end of a database on top l of which " Hot-Buttons" can be overlaid to access dahhaw info, etc.
1
) In addition to providing the user with the process interface and servmg as the foundation for the j RMS WBS " Smart-Coding" scheme, the WFUI is also envisioned to offer significant utility as the i foundation for plant systems information, i.e., system design. Simplified system drawings for 4
standard plant types can be used and modified to reflect specific plants. Specific facility l nomenclature i.e., names, valve numbers, etc, can be easily modified, and notes attached (see j example in Attachment, TWO-3) to individual components, lines, etc for information before, after or during the inspection process.
This system offers great economy- since once the generic plant design has been laid-out it can be j
! used over and over and tailored for similar plants. In addition to their primary functions - the same ;
lay-outs can be used for discussions, training, and as the foundation for presentations. (ABC l l Flowcharter has a Viewer Program f.e., a royalty-free "Run-Time" program, that can view, j 1 manipulate, andprint thejiles created with the main application). As stated earlier, the WFUI
l. mimic manages the process, but an additional goal is to train the user in the process while it is being l used. Hopefully, after using the process for some time, the user will become so familiar with the l process and steps that they will have a broader understanding of the inspection process as a whole, and how individual components interface and complement one another.
t
An example WFUI demonstration using an Advanced Boiling Water Reactor vias developed. The directory name is ABWR, and the beginning file is named begin.aD. Also available is a Tutorial for the WFUI that is accomplished using the Flowcharter itself to run the tutorial. The directory for j the tutorial is tutor, r.nd the beginning file is named intro.aG. Both of these dirxtories/ files can be l run using the ABC Viewer program. The Viewing program, the necessary DLL files, and demo j files are available via "self-extracting" files.
i I
s
18 These files are contained withinin viewer.exe, dilfiles.exe, ABWR.exe, and tutor.exe. Put these files in your " root-directory", i.e., C:\ viewer.exe. Then call up the files as follows- in Windows go
to RUN and type C:\ viewer. Respond yes (Y) to the two queries, and the excecutable will place on your system a directory called C:WIEWER. Repeat the same for the DLLfiles.exe. To run the ,
j Viewer program type C:WIEWER\ABC.exe, then select the directory / files to view i.e., ,
C:\ABC\ tutor \ intro.a0 or ABWR\begin.aG.
l i
I l
l 1
l
19 ATTACHMENT TWO-1, WFUI Inspection Procedure Interface kNhkfh
~
NP.3.1.1 ABWR NP.3.1.1.5 Reactor SeMcIng CF PROGRAM W '
CONSTRUCDON INSPECDON PROGAM ,
Procedures enNEEmHG D SCIPUNE SUBJECT #C USPECDON l PROCEDURE RE.ADONAL INFORMADON I
I I l Strutbral Mech &hical BectriceMI&C Engirweing Engineering Ergneering Discipline Discipline %-m I
1 i
l 35XXX 46XXX 45XXX 80XXX Quality Structural Geotechnical / Enwonmental TESTING Assurance Concrete Fomdation Protection 37XXX 47XXX Design & Design - Contairvnent &
Changes Structures 37051' Vedfication of As-Bulits 48XXX
- Structural Steel 37055' On Site Design & Support h i l
-N 50XXX l 37301' Comparison or
- Compment !
As Built Plant to FSAR Suppos 53XXX Containrnent Penetrations
20 ATTACHMENT TWO-2, Inspection Procedure Example (Point-and-Click interface)
NRC INSPECTION MANUAL PlPB INSPECTION PROCEDURE 37051 VERFICATION OF AS-BUILTS PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 2512 SALP FUNCTIONAL AREA: ENGINEERING LEVEL OF EFFORT: 80 DIRECT INSPECTION HOURS PER CYCLE -
J
.N Attachment 1 37051-01 Inspection Objectives N
37051 02 References Sampling Criteria BACK 02.01,02.02,02.03
-N
02.08,02.09,02.10 3 Additional Sample Criteria I
N -N N N -
02.04 02.05 ENTE ATA 02.06 02.07 Piping Electrical .
Electrical Structures Sydems Raceways Cables .
A A , A A
fX., CRIT ATTRIB l l
-N l N N N -N 37051 03 Piping Electrical Critical Attributes Electrical j Systems Raceways Cables Structures 1
4 i
1 SECTION THREE l '
4 1
i I
a .- --~.nn7 ,a: -:<::sv.r,ema,wmna,.w .. :e. p+~-1 .,,
i l
DATABASE DESIGN (RELATIONAL) 4 i
i i
1 i l 4
1 l 4 !
j nspettam D.stabase Mam Menu ~
X l l l l
Ni$$NM$5NN hdMMMIN 1 i
j NI@dd$$5fi0iE35$$N hIMT$ilI835 1
)
1 1 l
4 f Arc Q
WHW]
l tu
- o I i
3 e.
0 2
l
! o C 3 vs g I
) ') 4 4**# l
)
i 3
1
! l i
!* l i
1 i
ConceptualDesign: D.Willett Database Design: R.Smoter l
4 I
1 t
)
23 Construction inspection Program information Management System (ClPIMS) Database Design introduction:
Although database design is guided by several norms (rules), appropriate construction still remains some what of an art form. And like all art forms, there are a variety of styles and approaches utilized to accomplish the same ends. Although a database structure may be designed appropriately, it may in fact not be the most practicat in use.
Reasons for this are many, such as it may lack flexibility to accommodate any future change, or it may operate inefficiently requiring extensive time to function or great amounts of repetitive data storage areas. Many database designers employ rules-of-thumb that they have developed via trial and error, and these are as obvious signatures of their work as are Picasso's and other artists works.
Database designs can also employ and include many features that enhance usability and/or reliability. These include referential-integrity and cascading features for updating or deleting related data fields within or linked to other databases or tables.
Unfortunately, even though you may develop a very satisfactory and efficient database design on paper, it may not work within the confines of the computer database program you have to work with. So there is a constant iterative design /re-design as you attempt to balance the requirements of good database construction with the rules and limits of the computer database program (this is a " tuning-up" process).
In addition to the conditions and restraints already mentioned, this database was designed to interface and integrate with two other software programs. These are a flow-charting program that can act as a work flow user interface to input / extract information with the database and/or scheduling / resource management scftware. The
. only flowcharting capability currently being used, in conjunction with the database, is to provide the tutorial for the database. in addition it can be used to act as the home page
. to drive the planning and/or preparation phases of inspections-which is outside the scope of the this project. The SRM and database are currently linked by queries.
. Another consideration during database design, as equally important as efficiency and data integrity, is ease of use (user-friendliness). Many pure database programs are cumbersome and/or require a high level of computer expertise to use them reasonably well. This is why many after-market suppliers have developed graphic user interface (GUI) programs to support database input / output / management. Some database p:ograms give up database capabilities to enhance user-friendliness.
Lastly, and as equally important as the previous mentioned considerations, is the ease of database modification to accommodate the user's changing needs. Many database programs require someone with programming capability to effectively implement l changes. However, some programs utilize extensive GUI which allows the user to i
i a
i I
1
I l 24 j -
easily modify the database design (many employ " Wizards" which are templates and l cook-book approaches to modifications) to accommodats individual needs.
i How the ClPIMS Database was designed; i
The CIPIMS Database was designed in three phases by following the classical steps
[ outlined by database and engineering principles. The basic premise was to adhere to )
j first principles as closely as possible in order to develop a solution that could be .,I
[ applied generically. To do this, first the inspection process was modeled by laying out i the process steps in sequence (using a flowchart). Once this process was understood, ,
i the individual components of each step were identified and analyzed. Then a data -
j j dictionary was developed to describe and identify each component of the step along l with its expected format (i.e., number, alpha-numeric, counter, text, etc). Then each
! process step was further defined and uniquely identified (smart-coded) to assure l uniqueness, and practical construction relative to the rest. This concluded Phase One, i
l Phase Two started once the dra fields were smart-coded and they were grouped l together by function. The resulting data sets (Tables) were then laid onto the process flowchart to further establish and define the set relationships of the data tables (database design is based upon " set theory"). Ths entities (fields within the data sets) 3
{
were examined to determine which, if any, contained unique (non-repetitive) data.
j Fields that contain unique entries are used to form controls for that data set to relate j data in other fields of the set to each unique entry in the control field. The control field
! is called the " Primary Key" (the primary key may however consist of several fields within i the set that collective constitute a unique entity- this is called a " Concatenated Key"). If j no field in the set contains truly unique data, a record number can be assigned to each
' row of the set. This record number can be generated by assigning a counter function to automatically assign ~ a unique number to each row of the set. This record number can l then becomes the " Primary Key".
With the identification of the " Primary Key" for each table there exists a method to uniquely identify and relate each field within any table to any other field of another table. -
Onw this was accomplished, other data of the nice-to-have nature was also identified j and Om ud in the same manner before including it within the process flowchart model. ;
In adurtion, sets of data can be separated into static and dynamic data sets to facilitate
and speed up data input, and data queries. (Static data is information that is not expected to change very often such as addresses, etc.)
The third phase of database development was to establish the relationships between the sets. As stated earlier, this was a iterative process -a constant design /re-design attempt to balance the requirements of good database constructior, with the rules and limits of the database program. A flowchart identifying the individual components of each step of the inspection process and relationships is included as Attachments THREE-1 and THREE-2a.
i l j
25 Why the CIPlMS Database was designed the way it was:
t NRC is developing a revised Construction inspection Program (CIP) to complement the new and different approaches to licensing plants under 10 CFR Parts 50 & 52. As part l of the revised CIP, NRC is developing new methods to administer the program l including, the use of computerized databases. The NRC approach to construction s inspection will be based upon completion of plant systems. The program's framework
, will closely follow the plants construction schedule, and will provide the NRC staff with
! the management tool for planning, conducting, and documenting inspections by plant i system, from initial construction, through final testing. The CIP!MS Database was l
designed to record inspection data with a systematic and quality method to assure data .
e integrity, security, and retrievability. .
! The database was designed to integrate with and complement two other software '
)
} applicatiop, ABC Flow-Charter and Primavera SureTrak (see Figure THREE-1) which, j collectivey,< form the Construction inspection Program information Management l SystemICIPIMS). MS ACCESS was chosen because ofits compatibility with the other i
software, and because of its good Graphic-User-interface (GUI) capability. This eliminated most of the need to do any programming which would have also l necessitated significant time and resources to develop detailed user's manuals and guides, on-line help, and training. Instead, the user's manuals and guides, on-line help, tutorial training, and technical support help lines for the system software l
applications are all available from the software development companies (Microsoft, i Micrografx, and Primavera) and are automatically updated when the system software is j updated.
! Once the construction inspection process was understood and flow-charted, and all the j information that was needed at each step of the process was identified, the CIPIMS j design basis was essentially complete. Minor additions of the nice-to-have nature i continue to be added to simplify and enhance the overall CIPIMS. This includes such j' items as a cross reference to the NP (nuc! ear plant) code (two digit (letters]) and NP System Code (two digit [ letters] system number) that are used within the Schedule /
j Resource Manager (SRM) to code inspection activities.
4 L Dynamic data was separated (as much as possible) from static data to increase the
}* efficiency of the database. Record numbers were used as much as possible to give
flexibility to the database design and to make it easier to modify the database later on.
2 in addition, the design focused on structuring the database so that referential integrity could be maintained, and cascade forward updates or deletions could be accomplishei Additional rules for data relationships within and between tables were incorporated to facilitate Form Design and database input. (The tables, fields, de/Tnitions, and rules for data relationships, are contained within the database in the data dictionary.)
\
26 Database Dictionary of terms, source and use, and rules:
The database dictionary of terms, source and use, and rules have also been included in the CIPIMS Database to assist and inform users. The database was configured to provide easy public access to the information while maintaining database security / integrity. Database access is facilitated by using royalty-free software so that users do not have to purchase either the viewing software or database software in order to access or use the database. Attachment THREE-3 is provided as an example
~
of how a similar " smart-coded" database design would interface with the Schedule / Resource Manager.
When it is time to put the CIPIMS in to operation it will be prudent and practical to put the database into a SQL Server database. This makes the database " Bullet-Proof' because the database is still manipulated using MS ACCESS, and if the system
" crashes" for any reason while the database is open, the database will not be corrupted because SQL does not modify the data unless and until it is saved in a i
" Transaction Table" first. This transaction table also keeps a log (record of changes &
1 date) of all the changes so that you can go to and recover any previous data version by date. Another major advantage of having the database mimickad in SQL is that SQL format is compatible with all other database systems including the INTERNET and SRP database. The costs for this conversion are about $100 to purchase a MS ACCESS i "Up sizing Tool" part # 077-051-455 (order 1-800-451-4239) that can save MS ACCESS files to SQL (migrate the data structure to SQL), and about $2500 for the SQL database program (multi-user MS SQL Server).
How the CIPIMS Works:
4 Data Table Design: Primary Key Determination Primary keys were carefully selected and record numbers were used as much as possible in relationships between tables to give flexibility to the database design, i and make it easier to modify the database later on. " Concatenated Keys" (a primary key consisting of several fields within the table that collective constitute a -
unique entity) were not used in relationships between tables becauae MS ACCESS will not allow a concatenated key to be the primary key in a relationship with another table and also maintain referential integrity. -
MS ACCESS will not index record numbers (create a map of where the data is located on the disk to speed-up access) nor will it allow a relationship between a record number and a data type field in another table that is other than a long-integer. Therefore, when establishing primary keys and/or relationships for the CIPIMS Database, record numbers are used in relationships with long-integer fields that are identified in the CIPIMS Database design schema as "Related" field (Rel__??). Attachment THREE-1 depicts how one table is related to another table using the record number and the related field.
]
1 27 i
Just how this works is difficult to visualize, and may become clearer later on in
the discussion of database form design and use. But for now, just focus upon the fact that the database knows the relationship between the record number from one table and the related record field in another table, and the database i knows the relationship between the record number field and the other fields in its j table. The use of record number

: is a round-about-method for establishing data
table relationships, but it compensates for some limitations and restrictions of MS l, ACCESS.
l Reference Tables:
! Reference tables are used to overcome many-to-many relationships between tables. Many-to-many relationships prevents referentialintegrity and thus i
significantly reduces the confidence in the data integrity. The inspector l qualifications table (in Attachment THREE-2a) is an example of a reference table. Note that in the inspector Qualification Table there are two fields that corresponds to one field in the inspection Type Table (Qual _ Code _ Type _No),
and one field in the Inspectors Table (Insptr_RITS_ID). This database schema 1 overcomes the many-to-many relationship between the inspectors and their j qualifications (since each inspector may have several different qualifications). ;
(NOTE- A table set up with inspectors in one field (column) and qualification in '
another corresponding field (column) would show duplicate names and qualification records in each column. Even though, collectively, their would be )
no duplicates, MS ACCESS will not allow us to establish referential integrity because the table would require a concatenated " Primary Key" using two fields in the same table.
Relationships:
The key relationships are somewhat self-explanatory as they follow (since they are based upon) the inspection process, and the relational tables and concept has been previously explained.
The inspection process is layed out in Attachment THREE-1, the Database Flowchart, and the relation of the individual steps is further depicted in I Attachment THREE-2a, Database Relationships. Inspections are all completed using an inspection procedure. The procedure contains inspection criteria called critical attributes. The critical attributes identify sample area and size / numbers.
The logic is as follows: one inspection procedure can have many critical i attributes... each critical attribute can have many samples.. each sample can have many axceptions. The logic is the same for ITAAC's because there is a relationship between the ITAAC criteria and inspection procedures. Plant Systems are related to the many ITAAC's and Critical Attribute Samples.
Milestones are related to many Plant Systems. Inspectors are related to many critical attributes, and Exceptions are related to Reports.
l 28 1
i Referential-integrity:
j Referential integrity is essential to ensure accurate imformation is maintained in a
ddatabase. During design and development of the CIPIMS, ReferentialIntegrity was
an important consideration because of the nature of the inspection process being
! modeled and the importance of data accuracy. Briefly, what referential integrity implies
! is that there could not exist (in the database) a finding or exception that cannot be l traced to the sample, the inspector, the criteria, the inspectors qualifications, etc.
i Additionally, this feature prevents deletion of data that is part of this chain.
j Cascading Update / Deletion: ,
) A component of referential integrity provides for " Cascade" updating or deletion of data.
[ What Cascade means is that if, for example; a category like " violation" is changed to .
" deviation" - everywhere in the database where the violation category is used it will be i changed to deviation. When an entry is made into a table such as Critical Attribute a
corresponding Sample ID is generated. This Sample ID is automatically cascaded- .
I foreward into the Exception Table. Likewise if a sample is deleted... all of the related I
! information is deleted also. This precludes information in the database like an j i exception that has no history or trail to what generated it. j Data form Construction:
Main Form:
Database inpuy/ output forms were generated to provide a graphically friendly I method to input and view database information. One form can be used to input and view information in several tables at ont Ume. In addition, you can easly set-up the form (because of the relationships inside of the table) to select one l field in the table but out-put a related field in the same table into another table. l A usefull feature of MS ACCESS when using forms is that you can set up rules, and parameters when in the forms mode that are different (but not conflicting) .
with those establised when the tables were set up. For example: you can establish a rule in the forms mode that you cannot have an entry in the Critical Attribute Exception Text field (CA_Excep_ Text) unless there is an entry in the -
Critical Attributes Assessment field (CA_ Asses).
Subforms:
Subforms are those which are included within a main form. It is possible to generate a form that has a main and subform part, and then include it as a subform in another form (i.e., you would have three form sections in one form).
l i
29 i Combo-boxes:
J For ease of data entry, and to insure that the data entries are of the correct type, i
combination boxes are used in the forms. This allows rapid input of data by simply ponting and clicking on the desired input. This also displays all possible
input options, and keeps from miss-keying information as all of the allowed choices have already been typed.
Data Queries: l l
Data and cross-tab queries are accomplished visually by query by example. The user i can develop whatever combination they desire. Common queries have been j
, developed for repetative or periodic type data reports. These are in the database query ;
j table. The common queries that are to be included with the CIPIMS are those to be used to i generate the management reports and the inspection reports. Other queries will be created by '
i the user if the user is knowledgeable in Access or through a request to a CIPIMS system administrator.
j Reports:
l Report Design:
4 l All reports, are formated in the MS ACCESS report mode, much the same way l i
forms are designed, including the monthly inspection Report which can also be formated in Wordperfect. All reports have a filter capability, that allows the user to selectively identify and sort the information for the desired report To convert MS ACCESS data to Word Perfect reports can be done by: saving the report (oufput option under File ) in ACCESS as: Rich Text Format (.rtf), and
then retreiving the file in MS WORD and saving the MS WORD file as a Word
Perfect Document. However, this method generat.es an extreme amount of j pagination information so that any attempt to edit the information, either in WORD or Word Perfect, is extremely challenging.
l To overcome this difficulty, one approach that could be used is to format the j, reports in Word Perfect and then use the Word Perfect Merge Function to bring j in the MS ACCESS database information. The method to be used includes
! using Word Perfect (6.1) to establish a " LINK" to the database using open l database connectivity (ODBC) software. Select " Establish Link" and then " Data i Source Type".
Initially, there were some difficulties experienced in WP for this ODBC link.
i These problems were eliminated by purchasing and installing " Version 2" of the i
Microsoft ODBC Desktop Database Drivers [" Fulfillment Kit", part number 273-l 054-030, Microsoft sales at 1-800-426-9400 for S 5.00 + $ 5.00 for shipping.)
i
l 30 The ODBC Version 2 does not require a license and is distributable ( the Version 1 was 1 licensed because of a PARADOX Software interface component).
Unfortunately, when using ODBC to bring MS ACCESS database information into Wordperfect as a table there does not seem to be a straight foreward way to be able to set the table up in WP so that it does not exceed the right margin (theryby loosing data). To overcome this obstacle, we have resorted to the following steps.
Numerous attempts were made using several different approaches to convert MS
ACCESS data into a readly editible Wordperfect format. A " brut force" approach was finally taken before it was discovered that there were easy work-arrounds to the ,
problems of using ODBC directly with Wordperfect. A couple of unsurmountable problems surfaced during development of several approaches. MS ACCESS; 1) does not allow any sub-report output (e.g., for a monthly report of inspection activities, findings would be a sub-report to an activity.),2) the ASCl output function limits the
! character length, based upon font size & type. The brut-force approach was to generate 12 pages of computer code, that along with a Wordperfect MACRO collects i and distributes the data into the merge-fields of a editable Wordperfect " Boiler Plate" Document.
When using ODBC, depending on table field size and/or the number of fields within the table, a table is often created that exceeds the Wordperfect page and column widths.
The table and field sizes can sometimes be adjusted to acceptable dimensions while in Wordperfect, but each time the report is run the settings retum to the MS Access defaults. The work-arround for using ODBC:
1) Make smaller tables, and do the query of MS ACCESS in Wordperfect by linking to the Query in MS ACCESS (It was only recently leamed that WP could ODBC link to an MS ACCESS qt.: - Previous approaches used a query i
generated in MS ACCESS which generated a table based upon this query, and then Wordperfect was ODBC linked te this query table).
2) Bring in several tables and place them side by side if necessary. .
i
3) Use a WP MACRO to preset the table column widths.
9 This makes the reporting from MS ACCESS to Wordperfect relative simple and straight
foreward.
Configuring your system to run the WP connection to Access tables, and r'or Using the WP macro There are two Wordperfect files associated with the Wordperfect report function:
1) CIPIMS.WCM - A Wordperfect macro that generates the report.
i i
31 i
2) CIPIMS.WPD - A Wordperfect boilerplate document file that defines the report layout. (This boilerplate contains the merge fields for the data from MS ACCESS) l Copy the two Wordperfect files to any directory. Just remember where you put them (l put them in a subdirectory "C:\ Access \Cipims\WPFiles"). The first time you run the Wordperfect report feature, it will ask you specify the location of these files. At the first i run, CIPIMS remembers where they are and only asks for the locations again if it can't
) find them. One other thing to keep in mind - After the Wordperfect report is generated,
l. the report is saved as "< inspection report number >.WPD" (e.g., "96-01.WPD"). The file i will be saved to same directory that CIPIMS.WPD is located. So, where you put
! ClPIMS.WPD controls the destination path of all Wordperfect reports created.
l Integration With Scheduler / Resource Manager (SRM):
i i importing Info & Exporting info:
! l
) OBDC (Open Database Connectivity) and BTRIEVE files are used to import i j
information from the SRM to the database and to directly edit SRM project data l l files. The following describes how to use MS ACCESS with SURETRAK: (Btrieve ;
j file BTRV110A.DLL and BTRV200.DLL belong in the Windows / system subdirectory l
(available from the Microsoft public access directory at HTTP/TWWWMicrosoft.com),
! are installed automaticaly during the int,tallation of the runtime application). The j following steps outline the method used to generate the Sample SRM files. The GE l ABWR design was used as an example for this prorotype. When necessary these
same steps can be performed to create new SRM files for different reactor designs. !
} I I 1) Use NOTEPAD (or some other text editor) and modify the STWIN.INI file in l i
the WINDOWS directory as follows:
[DDFOptions)
! NoDDF=0 !
! ActivityCodes=1 i CustomDataltems=1 i Advanced =0 l 2) After restarting SURETRAK, savo lhe SURETRAK Project in the P3 file format.
l 3) When the Update Data Dictionary dialog box appears.. choot,e yes (accept
the default settings (which you established in 1 above when you editited the
STWIN.INI file]). This creates two files; FIELD.DDF and FILE.DDF which are
} required for MS ACCESS to open project files. The .DDF files are created i in the current project directory (usually \STWIN\ PROJECTS).
j 4) Ouit SURETRAK and start MS ACCESS.
I j 5) In ACCESS Choose the database you want the SURETRAK data to be in.
3________ _ - .. .. -
i !
A i
32
l
! l
6) Choose ATTACH TABLE under FILE. When prompted for the SOURCE of l data - select Btrieve. I i
! 7) When prompted for the location of the DATA SOURCE files... enter the i directory where the FIELD.DDF, FILE.DDF, and SURETRAK project files are
. stored (usually \stwin\ projects), and select OK.
i 8) When you are prompted for the file you wish to ATTACH to your MS -
l ACCESS database... select the desired file and click attach. Repeat as necessary.
The files you can attach are listed with the four-character project filename plus three characters that identify the contents of the files. The following is a brief listing of the kind of information you will find in the different project files:
????ACT: Activity information
????DTL: Activity Code Dictionary information l'
????REL: Predecessor / successor relationship information
????RES: Resource Assignments
????STR: WBS structure
????RLB: Resource Dictionary Information
????WBS: Activity WBS assignments
????ACC: Cost accounts (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK)
????ATT: Custom data items (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK)
???? LOG: Activity log records (Supported by P3 not SURETRAK You can use MS AC, CESS as you would normally do to create custom reports. You can make changes to data such as descriptions, durations, calendar ids etc. Generally, you should not change calculated information (such as early start and finish dates). Any changes you make using MS ACCESS will be saved to the SURETRAK project fi!es.
To make the inspection Program truely " Schedule-Driven" the Project Management Ar vity ,
smart-code from the SureTrak project management software is broken down ',nto its component parts (" PARSED") along with the corresponding planned activity ute., end date, and resource. This data, which is BTRIEVE linked (refer to Figure THREE-1) b the .
Construction Inspection Relational Database, generates a inpection record for each 1 I
identified activity, and fills in the Activity ID (Proj_Mngmt_ Activity code, resource, planned begin and end dates. Refer to page 590 of the MS ACCESS 2.0 manual for further information on the parse capabilities (or search the Microsoft knowledge based articles at FTP.Microsoft.com - look at Q100135 and/or Q115915). The data is parsed via a query which retums and distributes the string information into a database table / fields that has pre-established relationships with other database tables / fields. l
. . = _ . . .. . . .- . . . .
I 33 Converting Database info:
MS ACCESS can export information to a great variety of formats as well as import f. rom many formats. For a similar project, the develoment team has utilized the Microsoft ACCESS for Windows Upsizing Tools (MS product ID # 077-051-455, $ 99.85, available
. from 1-800-451-4239). The upsizing tool allows you to migrate a MS ACCESS database i to an SQL format. What this realy means is that the database and relationships are recreated in an SQL format. Unfortunately this is not as straight foreward as it sounds ,
because there are several significant differences between SQL and MS ACCESS. First !
,- SQL does not recognize counter data type, second SQL does not enforce referential
integrity. and ACCESS allows characters in variable names that SQL does not. You must i rename your variables or use aliases. SQL can use triggers to overcome some of these difficulties but this reouires writing comouter code and an intimate knowledge of SQL.
s 4
l
/
! sURETRAK
'i WORDPERFECT BTRIVE SMART
/
/ ODBC i
l CODE i .
/
Ms ACCESS f
i ABC FLOW CHARTER ,
Figure THREE-1 l Softvrare Data Exchange / Sharing Formats !
Tr.c way the previously mentioned project upsized the MS ACCESS database was to j overcome these problems by SQL coding. This project labored to keep the SQL and MS {
ACCESS Databases syncronized so that the same forms could be used when attaching l to either database type. This has the advantages in that individuals or groups can, at the !
same time, run their own copies of the same database (in MS ACCESS) in addition to the SQL datadase, to manage their individual work or group activities-- and this can be accomolished either on individual PC's . or network shares.. i l
I i
f
" l 1 Alternate ITAAC Anoroach The initial design (Attachment THREE-2a) of the ITAAC related tables currently duplicates l
, the structure of the non-lTAAC inspection related records below the procedure level l (ITACC and "non-lTACC" inspection records share the same Procedures table).
It is assumed that "non-lTAAC" inspections will be used to satisfy ITAAC inspection cycle requirements. The current NRC inspection procedure scheme does not provide any cross-reference between the the standard inspection program criteria and ITAAC inspection requirements / criteria (Provisions have been made for them to share the same Procedures .
table). The following (Figure THREE-3) illustrates an alternate approach (simplified scheme which was used for the final design) to the inspection data base structure
! regarding ITAAC items. This structure replaces four tables (ITAACs, ITAAC_Insp, -
ITAAC_ Samples, and ITAAC_ Exceptions) with one ITAACs table and two cross reference tables (Attachment THREE-2b)
Figure THREE-2 SCnEDUUNG/
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS h
DATABASE DESIGN qp SYSTEM DATA
~
l NAMES l
--9 REVIEWERS QU FIC S l LOCATIONS l DRIVERS l OTHER l l PROCEDURES l l REQUIREMENTS l 1r IF l ITAAC's l l OTHER l CRITERIA REVEW REPORTS p l ATTRIBUTES l l LIMITS l ISTATUSl fCd SAMPLES % +
M EXCEPTION l l DOCUMENTATION l SPEcumTERu l FIPOINGSl l OTHER l l PERFORMANCE l 8 l TREND ANALYSIS l l STATISTICS l In this model all ITAAC items are verified by performing inspections documented in a single set of inspection records. All ITAAC items would be loaded at one time prior to starting construction inspections for a specific project. The source of the data is the ITAAC -
portion of the Design Control Document associated with the certified design being
, constructed. At the time of loading the ITAAC items, inspection procedures would be selected that relate to the ITAAC item (these relationships are recorded in the ITAAC_lP_Xref table).
It is not expected that every critical attribute for every procedure inspection cycle would always be related to verification of an ITAAC item, even if the associated inspection procedure is also related to an ITAAC item. Relationships to specific inspection activities (critical attributes associated with soecific insoection cycles) are related to the ITAAC
35
items as inspection records are created. These relations would be established as 4
inspection records are initiated by the project management software. When an inspection record is created, ITAAC items that reference the same inspection procedure as the inspection activity would be displayed. The user would then select those ITAAC items, if any, that are related to that specific inspection activity (of course, the application would also allow adding or deleting these relationships outside of inspection record creation time). These relationships between inspection activities and ITAAC items are recorded in the ITAAC_Insp_Xref table that cross-references the ITAACs table and the insp_CritAtts
, table. It should be noted that this model also results in exceptions, findings, and inspection report records being related to specific ITAAC items through the relationship established with Insp_CritAtts table.
~
', f } lQ( ?$$&$4%}
m NF9 ~f [^D M 9 2Eacep6ensv 3 Insp~RecNo s _
E*=
I ReLP M.ddQ in mig : MIIRIIEW@ CA.E=:ep_RecNo j mg W jl-y p n $ py_Redio ,g -esm t h@fpeevisireug ReLCA_saptRedio g i 5 IP_ Cycle _B_DI .. MMEM N Y,w g$_1*m * -
CA_Eing_O 4 j
@s-@tecedises 4..
g j IP_ Cycle _E_Dt -
gg & D h= i
. CA_Em:ep_Ted 3 IP_Cvele Sts WOLTGIAb4f4 CA Encep_Sts_ Code j ReLAReddo 8 N ReLP_CA_Redio CA_Smpl_RecNo #2 ReL{ rid _RecNo j
Relinsp_CA Redio IP Tm - I"*P CA RecNo _
IP~ Comp _Dt -- -- ' I 5 ~
t IP~ Close~ Dt kb NN# <
r -
Dt ;'. l CA_S$_Deze M $" CA Asses: A-
?
IP_ Forced IP~Forced _Cmnt E IP_CA_RecNo U8N I
j j j RelSv RecNo _'-
IP File Nm E ReLP_Redeo -
3
.H 1 CA_O
CA_Insp_ Hrs s ,
M%p)w@{: CA_SmplNo_Pland j
"? k@-
f CA Desc
}gg# M f Inso Tvoe Code CA_Smpl_No_Obtnd g, , , _. m
[y y ggue.- ;g
~
4 g~ s 4
q. Rellnsptr_RecNo .,
p .
& $ltAAghPAnfMp .ProtMnamt Activity ;
4 mm RelPJtedio .
I Ret RAAC_Redio 1
_RAAC Redeo :
.- - - - ~ "-
. W' .A
} .:m
}I }#l
~ c m'g di3 ~g%
a
.- ..m =m 4 s
~
gg 9
3
,_ ~ ;g
.. 4 assamme 4 w $ -
ITAAC_D gn Cmtm 4
Q{ ,,s s
- Sye_RecNo 9
pi i}f Sys_Nm i& ITAAC_lTA ,
y 4 m 1.M i Sys_Act h-W RAAC_AC -
g @ g, & Lens Sys_ID s. ' i m ITAAC_B.Dt . .
m. . .c
~
ITAAC_E Ct
! ', .. D
ProLMrvnt_ID j$ ITAAC~Ciose~Dt
.- kh "luy%gg4 dl@fbs).#
00 Rdvyggggggggsk&ys 5 RelS -
RecNo t
?
N iLag Whhjgni I Figure - THREE-3. Design for CIPIMS Database ITAAC Component l
l l
l
! 36
Please note that any type of inspection activity (special, team, augmented, etc) could be substituted inplace of the ITAAC inspections and the current database and structure would support these activities equally well- with only minor name changes.
i Setting up & running the MS ACCESS Database as a "Run-Time" application:
l The database can best be utilized by placing the database on a network " server" and then accessing this database from individual workstations. The way this is accomplished is by installing the database forms, on the individual workstations, as attachments to the ~
database on the server. This configuration allows multiple concurrent database access. I
' l l A "Run-Time" version of the database can be generated using the MS ACCESS !
i Developers Toolkit'. This must be generated using Windows 3.1 and not Windows 95 !
because if Win 95 is used it will replace the following Windows 3.1 system files with Win
[
95 equivalents (from MS Document Q130399): J 4
i COMPOBJ.DLL OLE 2.DLL OLE 2. REG
OLE 2 DISP.DLL OLE 2NLS.DLL STDOLE.TLBx j STORAGE.DLL l 5
l Once the Run-Time" application is compiled in Windows 3.1 it will run on a WIN 95 PC.
i When generating the "Run-Time" application a setup screen (Shell) must be generated because the main menu does not come across in the run-time version. To do this, set up j the screen for the user to access differerit forms, tables, etc. To access the setup screen 1
when the program is first started - include an autoexec macro pointed to opening the setup ' screen. (It is important to remember when using the Developers Toolkit, that l everything must be in or generated to the C: drive.) (Additionaly, the ACCESS 2.0 Service i Pack (upgrade) should be installed to minimize subsequent problems) 1
- The "Run-Time" application can be instr.' led on a server and accessed from a workstation.
This is accomplised by copying the setup disks to the server and then running setup.exe from Disk 1. The command is SETUP /A. This cammand is an administrative setup, and l will setup the database so it can be accessed from workstations- but it will not run the applicatior: on the server. You then need to go to a workstation and setup to run either the
. entire application OR the workstation link to the database. To do the setup... from your directory c:\ type: (server drive id) setup. The program will give you the choice of complete -
1 i or workstation setup.
4
{ Settina Un the Da* abase on a network share: l 4
, There are two files: 1) insp_dat.mdb and 2) insp_usr.mdb. insp_dat.mdb contains the
! tables and data, insp_usr.mdb contains forms, queries, etc (the user interface). There l
'Be sure to install VSHARE.386 to your system directory, insert MS ACCESS disk 4 and type Decomp A \Vshare.3ft,_ C:\ Windows \ SYSTEM \VSHARE.386
l l
37 The connection of the CIPIMS database to the SureTrak BTRIEVE files (as attachments) is accomplished during the setup and installation of the CIPIMS when it is first run. These files should reside on a share that all users can access. They are included in a self-extracting file named Projects.exe (which includes file.ddf and field.ddf)
When the Run-Time application of CIPIMS is installed it puts a line in the BTRIEVE section l of the WIN.lNI file located in the WINDOWS directory. If MS ACCESS has been previously l
. Ins *alled on the PC, the WIN.lNI will look like the following and you will get an error '
(ERROR 3221, invalid entries in [BTRIEVE] sechon of WIN.lNI) when trying to connect to I the FILE.DDF file for the first time. (This problem is documented in the Microsoft j Knowledge Base under Q94827, Q121650, and Q122246) .
I
[BTRIEVE] )
options =/M:64/P:4096/B:16/F:20L:40/N:12 /T:C:\ ACCESS \BTRIEVE.TRN l access ,,cptions=/m:64 /p:4096 /b:16 #:20 /l:40 /n:12 /t:C:\CIPIMS-A\BTRIEVE.TRN i
Change theWIN.lNI to read as follows and restart the PC after saving. 1 l
(Btrieve]
options =/M:64/P:4096/B:16/F:20L:40/N:1:! TT:C:\CIPIMS-A\BTRIEVE.TRN
jpOn;--/

04 /p

4000.t

10 #

20 ll

40 in:12 n:C:'.ClP:t10."'""lC'/C.".N (i.e., replace (under options =) ACCESS with CIPIMS-A, and delete the access _ options line.)
O O
i
-m__.-.m..._m.-- - ,~..._....-_._.____.___._...-..._...--_._-._m-k 38 ATTACHMENT THREE-1, DATABASE FLOWCHART FELDS & IEY' TABLES If6ECT10N m0CEDLSES IfERCTKNm0GIRBECRT ATTS IPSECTION CYCt.ES IP IP_Corrg IP.Onne_ IP iP.Ftremel Imp.hpo IP.CA Q 1rup P.%.%isusul IPCYCtf H!iFECTIG6 F%-
Ot Dt Fteemo .Crnne p Rutet Dame r__^
q IPCYCtf FCTCt1 '
1TTIE _ Code Rut 9b--- ^^ Z vuf 6 IEIW4DATE BODA1E STA1LE l s - T T !
/
^ IPERCTIONOWTICAR. ATTRBUTES agTICAR. IPH ICTG E ATTFWlUfES h gspappg ,,L.,,,c-; iga ! I'uP_G MW WDF MM_ gg, CA CA CA CA cam ptd % gg ( 3 CA SAARES Pensed fed _Nusa 5W08 De l Ru8b N8 hel- --
-NB Reul -
DI O '-
BA HG8tS Jht9b Acedey r CA EN2PRONB Y fu trN1CIKN IW1S n CRTICAL ATTRBUTE SARAFLES OtllCAL ATTf48UTE E)sTPnopeS j
N!IPECTIG4 r T -EKG DEBOUPT DA Ret 90s T
~
ltG1 CTG 100/th j gygyggs -.Y_. 3%S. Sys Sys_ tsum_ Op. E rhet Rnit g phie Rime _ Rnd_ ptn(, t hbg.D _Mui Asr Sys D Rdy Sag tb hps E _A Tee Buds '
Shn_ Code RALESTGES Sytent M 35tsf ; L NMN STATUSCCEES .
lALESTOES ALISTOE M_ RA. M. . 80 _ Phut_
l Fbal DM Stuhm m e Dame S Dt ELD hpOler hpeEmac EFype Cadd Dunc - ,
ITAACS ITAACS N9FECTIO4S } ITAACS N ; g 3%it FtruiIbei 5%st IW Type Code ITAAC_CA% ITAAC ITAAC_ ITAAC_ f7AAC Dd.fTAACg p ITAAC. Insp_hpo Rul_% ITAAC. _ _ M_hy. _ W_byn
_Ruefen E _Sta B_Dt ELDI inspJt ERug 3 Rusfie _ Cods Rus90s Omme Ondo _Dene V I " .
TAAC SAArtR Y ll ITAAC ;( ITAAC SAARES NAAC
g IEPGUS ENTPfl0NS sup fAAC E ITAAC_ ITAAC_ ITAAC augd 5td ffAACFEErTAAc.e a, TAAc_si mp_
,gpa,ws r r _ , m3 aigs. Deme an,sD _Receb pbes r_- _ ---- 4 _ Rush rTAAc_ Rd>mus sw. % y sw. g y ,i,g_
Enosp_ Tee Sas_Cade Jtm885 Seg)b Year S lite BD ED RheJen 1 Y Y U.C m LDOC g(OF M el CDON M th*
gg snewusebasnRAxphowesame- ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1
,s> DATA IMadonal Datahnste R4 888 qui # C 8'** 'P CF d* CF d* - Decem Hee More Mat _ ggit_ phg,
,'.",'$,' NPA ~ _,,,,. -.m. ~
.. .D n _,
n. _
n-FWi.- 6 22-95 me,,, PM (Otlery)---
g y 9
m._____. . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ - . _ . __._._. _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _. .._ ._
39 ATTACHhfENT THREE-2a, DATABASE RELATIONSHIPS-1nitial Design Procedures Insp. N CA D CA_Beceptions Reports P RecNo P CA_Rech kwp_ CARS-b -
CA_Emosp_Rech CA_95LRoch __
_ %Rech i
pb ---4 RoLP_RecNo ---4 Rei P_CARecNo 4 Rol hap _CA RecNo R Exmp_D p'rde CA D --4 Relinsp_Rech -4 N_CA_SrmLRech h _ Code %SRh CA_Dese CA 9m(D~ pp_y,,,
p'Ca m_Dt CA_B_D Regl_Desc QEmep_ Tow 4 hp_ Type _ Code CA_E_Dt gg go P Oase Dt RSml_Dt CA_Ex=p_Sts__ Code >
FW Tde P'Forceo CA_Amess ReLSys_RecNo p_ ( ReL%Redb pp, B_Dt P Famd Ont Q& mis CA_9s M %ELDt P2FleJ*n -
%Rejen -
V**dPedd CA_
NM --
-+4 D""eS > Rnd_RecNo ReLRnd_Redb M(PDat i PkLMxptJcMy >--- N ury e my %FW_Rech p M i Retheper_Rech - RndjD Ret _Tp_ Code p_ D m m res p P.cytes Hr4 EhuktD RrutSeq_No tir*(COBC)
Rethepw_Rech F.cy'** arut r, eta
M*
g %
g hop _ Type _ Code W Rnd_ Type _ Code Rnd_ Tow .ummmmmmimumm Ir=P_Rech --)- heptr_Rech RrulBeeis N n nnd Type Code w Type _ Code
-4 M P_ RecNo pnsp_ Type _ Code kgtr_RTS_D ,t - -
P- D lhp_ Type _Deec Irger_RTSJ4n hap _CA_RecNo > Ref_Tp_Deec
%TpA _
P'_Oyde[ELDt J rulT JNmr P_Oyde_B_DI UAAC CA Rech l
ITAAC_Insps '
TAac_ssngdes trAAc_F=r*==
ITAAC_CA_RecNo RelRRecNo E"_g RAAC_Fn R Rec h - ITAAC Emep Rech
- Rert_Nn fTAACs_tems r t M _Sys_ Rec h Rert_T p SYS Rech
-H MJrup_Rech
~
hp_ Type code
~
) 4 RollT/.AC_Ce RocNo ReLFhd_Redb >- N Rel_iTAAC_RecNo 1 ReijTAAC_99LRecNo SpJen ITAAC_99_D 1 Mlestones ITAAC Rech B_D ITAAC_SqlDes: ITAAC Encep_D NED Lan_%D
--4 nei F_Rech -
nAAC_SrrAot N Emep_ Tex SpJaJ4n M_RecNo -
rTAAC D NhPN TTAAC_Emep_Sts_ Code p _). Cp_RY ene to many ITAAC_'Desc FhlSys_RecNo y
- 8 Prog _Myrt_D M_D M_Desc RED = Primary Key
(
CONSTFUCTION NSRCTION PROGRAM PFCFMTION I#NAGEnENT SWTEM M 8 Ot -
... FRATORDATABASE5muCTUNOONFOURGON M ELD
- lMcDen]
._________m-__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i 40 ATTACHMENT THREE-2b, DATABASE RELATIONSHIPS Final Design bh insp_ N N CA_ Exceptions E CA_Rech
~
Insp_CJLRecNo IP_RecMo -
CA8npl_RecNo CA Encep_RecMo
_ Rpt_RecNo ,
EMIgEMIEggm IP_No -4 Rel_tP_ Rec h 4 Rel_lP_CJLRecNo -4 Rel_Insp_CA RecMo CA_Emep_ID IP_ Tale CAllD H Rel_Insp_RecNo CA Snplg -4 Rel_CA_Snyl_RecNo
- h % % No '
IP_ Comp _Dt CADesc CAB _De ~ CA_Emep_ Text gy, CASmp_Desc g go e IP_Close_Dt y insp_ Type _ Code CA ELDI CA_Exmp_Ste_ Code CASm#_Ut > '
IP_ Forced CAAsseen ( Rolftnd_RecNo % Tine ReLSys_RecNo p %B_Dt !
IP_ Forced _Cmnt CA_ Bee" AplELDt IPfde Nm -
CALSte M RplFee_Nrn gg% I L.v. -
Wordperfect CA_SmplNo_ Rend BTRVE DATA '
g CAEknplNo_0 bend Find _RecNo ---t-4 Rolfmd_RecNo LM (tP Data) -wg Proj_M1gmm Nwm M_RptRecNo p_. WWM ReLinsper_RecNo Find _ID Ref_ Type Code p._ Domrnente p.
g y to - *Cr*
N m And_ Seq _No LiniqODBC)
Rel W _ Rec h MM i,n Rnd_Ste_ Code p__
In8P_. W - -
pq PM p b TM Inspir_RecNo p '
4 RellP_RecNo insp_ Type _ Code - Rnd_ Type _ Code YP8-
'h
~ -
' Relinep_CARech h- 1
_ S_Mn An tT p _Deec ReLType_Desc l IP_Cyde_ELDt FrulType_Abbnr ggg %
IP_Cyde_B_Dt _
AAC_F_ ITAACs
'l M NP_ID ReLIP_RecNo -
- Sy500ffW DodusLNo RelML_RecNo PlenL %
1ReLITAAC_RecNo RAAC_O ITAAC_Degrt.Cmemt ITAAC_ITA SYS_RecNo RelSye_Rech Type ITAAC_AC 8*M Y
^~
C_ S'Y- ' N" " RecNo l
ITAAC_Close_Dt D% m to many Prog _MigmLID M_ID Rel_Sye_RecNo 3 -- L M Desc
( .
RED =Prienery Key CONSTRUCTION r4SPECTION PROGRAM INFORhMTION MANAGEM_NT SYSTEM M_B_Dt RELAUONAL DATABASE STRUCTURE / CONFIGURATION mm M_E_Dr l Static Datel
41 A TTA CHMENT THREE-3, DA TA B.4SE INTERFA CE WITH SCHEDillfR / RESollRCE MANA GER (ELtMPLE)
' WORK-FLOW PROCESS 'A't*i'i i -- DREL ,
x.i '[ s=Anr-coor 1 A s. i.i.: SCHEDULE / RESOURCES csuneinAxipneuAvcnxisortw4nti
- OTHER '
l =ss -
scimry coot lpe sen-mm par
- OPERATIOldS OI -
Ai
p=> pwr m um nu ipimn X.1.1.1 . . .
o
cii A j,1, j,3 Wt1I A1116 -DRIL L
, Shh DAY - JOE - HAROLD =
SPECIAL -
DAYS - At113 -CUT MM M4D + ED CALVIN ai . enm
'. A ..ii.
WELD .w u o ., sat unolo
.p , pAcnA , m. o..av .
,ue rnAuu. utiau xj3 X.1.1.2 .
F ITY _ A1114 -
ep Aai AnstasMENT PACKAGE '
X.1.1.3 ..
X.2.1
_ g,gg3 h ; ,
MANAGEMENT -
m m NT . ; SURETRAK (PAnse) h"
[ ses4nT-C00E" ] g W (,Anst
X.2.1- COMPUANCE REPORTS '.
l (,AnsE) '. '.
X.2.3 OTHER "*"**) ~
MS ACCES3 D'uremittg svue n .. AC' CESS DATABA5E INPtJT 1 OUTPUT FORM n., si , . s. n.* -
o gi WWM
== 'm c=$- R REPORTS TABLE DAYA ININel SHIFT '. l DAY l l 6.1 A o.,.
ACTMTY. tj DRIU_ j STAFF M
pour w.s u.s. 9 JOE l y s== im c 8"
REPORTS Day l 119s y FOREMAN Bhe Type Dese l HAROLD f TABL DATA
^[7 ,
c MS ACCESS MS ACCESS PARTE l27351Al 8 PRODUCED l 237 l t W RELATK)NAL COMMENT Drtiling MacNne # 6 Out of Cantraeon DATABASE m rone m tem v h
APPENDIX - A CIPIMS INSTALLATION SCHEME'S
1) Minimal space required on METHOD PC. Program and Files ONE WORKSTATION INSTALL i.e., Database & Tutorial reside on different servers.
Method is slower than 4 -
TUTORIAL - --
others. M .
SHARE
2) Connection to a MS Access ,
Database only.. using a workstation or complete hstall. k SQL
/ database f f METHOD TWO 74
/ \ /
. l i <
~ MS ACCESS TUTORIAL l SHARE [
l DAILY l EVENING I UPDATES
\
OR
3) Complete install that \
is connected to either METHOD '
. an MS Access database THREE -
V or SOL database and could exercise several options for connceting 4 SQL database -
> S Efi R to the tutorial. ,$-
LI COMPLETE INSTALL
n 43 1
Appendix - A: User installation Guide General:
The database and forms are two separate entities. This allows the user to connect to different databases using the same forms. The database may be an MS ACCESS Database or a SQL Database.
For the Complete Install, the forms are installed on the PC while the database resides on the server / share. For the Workstation Install, the database connections are the same except the forms reside on a share and are accessed by the PC... obviously this is slower.
The recommended connection for the tutorial is on a share.. since it is believed that after initial use it will not be accessed often.
The CIPIMS "Run-Time" application can be installed from a share or disks. To install from a share a Network-Install must first be run. This is accomplished by copying the run-time disks to a network share and doing a " Administrative install" the format for this is :
C:\ setup.exe\CIPIMS_/A.
Subsequently, Complete or Workstation installs can be accomplished from the file !
generated by the Network Install. The format for this is: C:\ setup.exe.CIPIMS. The setup program will give you the option for a Complete or Workstation install.
Snecific: Setting Up the Database on a network share: l There are two files: 1) insp_dat.mdb and 2) insp_usr.mdb. insp_dat.mdb contains the tables and data, insp_usr.mdb contains forms, queries, etc (the user interface). There should only be one central copy of insp_dat.mdb regardless of the number of database users. A copy of insp_usr.mdb goes on individual workstations or the network share.
The corinection of the CIPIMS database to the SureTrak BTRIEVE files (as attachments) I is accomplished during the setup and installation of the CIPIMS when it is first run. These
- files should reside on a share that all users can access. They are included in a self-extracting file named Projects.exe (which includes file.ddf and field.ddf)
When the Run-Time application of ClPIMS is installed it puts a line in the BTRIEVE section l of the WIN.INI file located in the WINDOWS directory. If MS ACCESS has been previously I installed on the PC, the WIN.INI will look like the following and you will get an error (ERROR 3221, invalid entries in (BTRIEVE] section of WIN.lNI) when trying to connect to the FILE.DDF file for the first time. (This problem is documented in the Microsoft Knowledge Base under Q94827, Q121650, and Q122246)
44
[8TRIEVE]
options =/M:64/P:4096/8:16/F:20L:40/N:12 /T:C:\ ACCESS \BTRIEVE.TRN access _ options =/m:64 /p:4096 /b:16 /f:20 /l:40 /n:12 /t:C:\CIFIMS-A\BTRIEVE.TRN Change theWIN.lNI to read as follows. and restart the PC after saving.
[Btrieve]
options =/M:64/P:4096/B:16/F:20L:40/N:12 /T:C:\CIPIMS-A\BTRIEVE.TRN -
_;p'JeneJ.n;M /p;4000 lb;10 !l

20 !

;40 /n.12 !;.0;',0lP

MC-A',0TClC'/C. TON (i.e., replace (under ootions=) ACCESS with CIPIMS-A. and delete the access _cotions line.) ,
4 Configuring your system to run the WP connection to Access tables, and for Using the WP macro
There are two Wordperfect files associated with the Wordperfect report function

1) CIPIMS.WCM - A Wordperfect macro that generates the report.
2) CIPIMS.WPD - A Wordperfect boilerplate document file that defines the report layout. (This boilerplate contains the merge fields for the data from MS ACCESS)
Copy the two Wordperfect files to any directory. Just remember where you put them (I
put them in a subdirectory "C:\ Access \Cipims\WPFiles"). The first time you run the Wordperfect report feature, it will ask you specify the location of these files. At the first run, CIPIMS remembers where they are and only asks for the locations again if it can4 find s
them. One other thing to keep in mind - After the Wordperfect report is generated, the report is saved as "< inspection report number >.WPD' (e.g., '96-01.WPD'). The file will be saved to same directory that CIPIMS.WPD is located. So, where you put CIPIMS.WPD controls the destination path of all Wordperfect reports created.
mfe tw m Auens reng auw E3 dd5!!EEGsBsMn W MMinE M M MdH15MeNa h E E MWiMWi; -
tasas samesmRwatWmmsserairemmensamm&NiMR&B9 a
.wwmeen me & - $w m w$$$$$hhhW?hhh____kh$hM:s w - e u mh .______ _emma
<rQy nmwan
.f
, @v '
e kWier sGw;N w d& a.9 ....W wwmenn www - wwm -wnn w men w a w - -sm h
h"?Sb ses I - . McWSWWMNVW59FER i :
fMf
_ . 4 m.J n enw wwnmp + nn~ n .n g, -
h g hf un . - nn ,
a amrewnweenwwwmd~Mk ~
pyn WWqsq f4f MW fp W %n % ym W A gg kh $6fNgh rejffhNbi YkNk i
- -. .~. - .- .. . . _ _ .- - - . .
I 1
1 45
Appendix - B: CIPIMS Tutorial User Installation Guide
\ l General:
1 I
The CIPIMS database / forms and tutorial are two separate entities. This allows the user )
.i to access the tutorial where ever it is installed. This scheme also allows the tutorial to be modified without affecting the database or run-time application. The recommended connection fer the tutorial is on a share.. since it is believed that after initial use it will not be accessed often. !
Snecific: Setting Up the Tutorial on a network share:
There are three files: 1) Viewer.exe,2) DLLfiles.exe, and 3)CioTutor.exe. These are self-
expanding compressed executable files. Viewer is the " Royalty Free" run time application )
of ABC Flowcharter. It is intended to be installed on the share, but can tra installed on the ,
workstation if desired. DLL Files.exe installs certain DLL files (Dynamic Linked Library I files) to the Windows system directory. Some computer systems seem to be missing l certain of these DLL Files, so it is recommended that they are installeo on the individual workstations. Ciptutor.exe are the files that can be viewed with the viewer. Ciptutor, when it is expanded, constitutes about 50 meg of file space. If Ciptutor is installed en a share, than a Tutor administrator can control all changes and updates at a single point, allowing all users to be automatically updated.
BACK
~WBM M@' V ,
@%MESEstuunsMs2natur RaisiWas sneiosNan~ AmeuW fj W"+ ..; ~# 2 y+ l s _., , .
e.:g
~
^~
V;g - ...........~...A....~~.._.a:J s W j{ EDUS$1@%i4Q)$$$$ M eg MM : ' . . '
+ .
3
i!R .;, R= 5 "fis s + ~V -- F . %f.N
%]f1
. f f( ;
y Q[ [ e&wmmmeg i , ,# j ;-. .
y % ~ly '
M 451 asemeshme y g -
y -..
my ,
NIMbeas$gg$iB$
p5
46 Operation of the Tutorial:
Operation of the tutorialis all Point-and-Click. Once the tutorialis launched, from the run-time-application, the user is effectively in and operating the viewing program so all view, and print functions operate.
I Navigation within the tutorial is by means of following the foreword and back navigation *
(Double-Click on the OK Buttons or Pointing Fingers) aids. The tutorial contains actual images of the run-time application that contain representative inspechon data for examples.
The tutorial attempts to display all of the options and error messages that the user will encounter during operation and navigation of the run-time application.
The Title page for Appendix- C is an excerpt from the CIPIMS Tutor. Again, Tutorial screens are annotated screens of the run-time application with navigational aids added.
i e
f 9
4
s 7:t
I' b^*
S
,.J.S
'. 7:
4
$[h fi$
} a kf I ?){, e m .,
pg y
="
e uag%.
, ; hi?
G ! ia , l:ht$h "l Y l%
,k '
gs ~
& Q
- fm w$N $ i-
~
m # # ?" &
ff i f s.
?
g h
??h
% 8 g f 1 a
^-
gg g fW gg ga .n i*i ?y i f =
gg y ! r we 2 E pk cgy
/ s
,+
syd n.
f, r
g .'
v
g s I
o W
g L
l 7;
p 4 y- $= g l
=. 4 I hh
_' t w j y
,bd ; ?. agy$ & : is 8
.~ M
'd
$ ON
.hl q
f -- .
jp i
.! E (G W a - - .- g n
w,?,y yp w ,
- ,, r f kN5Nki
.a gg . yt 1 a. l y
?
i
- A4pm'mr ng , , 1m ;w#
g va ,
b.
a 9
ffy
,1k
.2
^}
Il e :ssy-e 2 y F.
ll h [ i$
d w
W% ; re ?
y I
l ! r; .:
y pJ n Mc.mff Tfgj7fj%@
,! jy 39:
[ ;
< l W C [O n > E .. '
~
,$ g g' 2 <fMkS i i m '4 g 8 e *( . %nf .; e j uy a1 y tj f]
8 y w. i . nge pf [ ? ; : i y
's :( p o u n J .J
Qf if f, l
l 4 :i === - s m i
3 :
h 4spya h$hY w(
bn l;:k lvbY g g u
du y,,glll
.f wmom%ar, e, y
kgW ~ 48Q y Q. g.
~~.--~~
jg acga gl
1 l l
s ,
j 48 l 4
l Appendix C
{ CIPIMS Initial Data Setup 1
l. Introduction I l His document provides instructions for initially setting up CIPIMS for a specific project. This i
1
document is relevant to CIPIMS database administrators. Note: nis document assumes that CIPIMS is installed and operating.
i i
j , There are three types of CIPIMS user nues with regard to managing CIPIMS data: Inspectors, j Supervisors, and Database Administrators. He CIPIMS interface (i.e., menus) are designed around i these three roles. Inspectors and Supervisors are responsible for creating and updating data directly 4
related to the inspection process (i.e., inspection-related recoeds, findings, and inspection reports). .
Database Administrators are responsible for managing data that is not directly part of the inspection
process (e.g., inspection procedure information, plant and plant systems identification, etc.). Before l Inspectors and Supervisors can start working with CIPIMS, data needs to be entered into CIPIMS. This l j document describes the process of entering a minimum set of data to get up and running. l l
i
11. Clearing CIPIMS Test Data i
j When first installed, CIPIMS will contain test data. This data allows CIPIMS to be experimented with j on initial installation, but must be deleted prior to putting CIPIMS into production. The following i i
outlinea the process for clearing test data from CIPIMS. .
i j Note: The following step requires the use of a full version of Microsoft Access @, Version 2.0. He run- )
. time module version of CIPIMS does not provide access to the CIPIMS features described below. l
)I i 1. Open the CIPIMS user database (INSP_USR.MDB) Hold the shift key down while i
opening to prevent starting the CIPIMS cpplication.
j 2. Make sure the user database is attached to the appropriate CIPIMS data file (INSP_DAT.MDB) using the Attachment Manager (Menu: File / Add ins / Attachment
. Manager).
l
49
3. From the database window, open the ClearInspectionData form. This form was not incorporated in the CIPIMS user interface since using the features of this form will irretrievably delete allinspection data from the database. The following form should be displayed:
u
.'. i..
l l
.)
i wwg;;;;%,pra$ir swww; . , w.,
w; g96 qR ,i a.me w c nu o..au ni '
h
~ _- x . - -
~.
-- n -
^
w n. ., l sswamassmawaemW esenvgp- !
sa s 1
1
m. .. . . . . .1 .. . . IAcemw&E
4. Starting with the top button, press each button in series to delete allinspection data from I the data base. (Note: Due to referentialintegrity enforcement, pressing the buttons out-of-sequence will generate an error message.)
s
5. Press the Exit button when done. l 1
a Note: The balance of this instruction can be completed from either from the run-time version of the l CIPIMS application or under a full version of Microsoft Access @.
l 6 Start the CIPIMS application by opening the Startup form and log-in as database admtmstrator.
4 7. Press Database Maintenance on the main . menu.
8. Press Inspector Information on the database maintenance menu.
o Use the Delete button to delete each of the inspector records.
l
50
10. Press ITAAc button on the database maintenance menu.
I 1. Use the Delete button to delete each of the ITAAC records.
12. Press sys tems button on the d*taha- maintenance menu.
13. < Use the Delete button to delete each of the System records.
l lil. Initializing CIPIMS Lookup Tables s .
The following tables provide look-up values for completing various CIPIMS forms and should be !
completed prior to starting a project.
Inspection' Typer - are attributes attached to Inspection Procedures and Inspectors as this data is entered in CIPIMS. Inspection Types (e.g., " welding" or " electrical") are used to indicate the type ofinspection associated with an inspection procedure and the i qualifications of an inspector. Inspections Types are used to match appropriate inspectors to specific inspection activities. '
Exception and17sding Type Coder - these codes are used to define a " severity" scale for exceptions identified during inspections and for inspection findings identified in inspection reports.
Nuclear Plant Data - This table is used to record information about the specific project being documented with CIPIMS.
The following identifies that data that must be entered and describes considerations involved in completing each of these tables. Each of the tables is edited by accessing the database administrator meuu as follows:
1. Start the CIPIMS application and log-in as database administrator.
2. Press Database Maintenance on the main menu.
51 Inspection Types The following is the Inspection Types form-a g--
iaa m-- -
w._, - .- --g -
g i Aw '=- N-r n
.". '"=r_Jzescr _ _4r _:"_A.
I"/; h"$1.- -
& >4 ? % $ n S % k EdQ s s a m m v ie
~'
[$) KL,Tf5fM " "i k y=seu=m;=+#ME
~3 R$
R im e w w M m.;
4- ,. m o 72
@g , ,- .-gg #y,.
f s$~- ma -_ .,
weidnd awwwww
-- -: .:- ~
E
.y; 5_
J structurai ;;.
,gg . n =.m=..=
m usg Ag
~
"i4AWR~~~ n u
m.r,-m---, , s 4 --w- B h A$awasewswrew< f RNABNM MMEM#!
, -w - - . - -
- t
igij(sif]I[fgfRI ffh
/ w a a mic q @ % i A .s d+
H(14l Record l4 ld 5 fflMI J 4
The Inspection Types shown in the Description column will be available when entering Inspector or Inspection Procedure records in CIPIMS. Add, edit and/or delete inspection types as necessary. )
Although long descriptioris can be entered (up to 50 characters) it is suggested that the descriptions be l kept short so that they will display on CIPIMS forms without being truncated. The string " Instr &
Cntrs" is the longest that will appear on all forms and reports without being truncated. The type codes are assigned by the database and are not displayed in any forms or reports.
l l
l l
1
52 Exception and Finding Type Codes The following is the Exception and Findings Type Codes form:
~ '
__Grd!&p!;gg
]IMTM
--er g
. _ RMGRiMMfNat
~
l(%- $Wymen.:qu.umwmw M._EM-h! .ms j.%*J-I
[n. ;scs

:F: low p tamua.w :
auw IFl wa,mg h%$3 wsaw; gg
_M r URI l>@? .. Urvesdveditem h! $rm =uunmmmmuareta$ MsA n.uA@em:f*3E 4y hff 1Non{tedVidabon am - vn ,z v m :: h [h] E i
-- a $hghy h ju.censeeidentinedinuemm wwu.w.nu wm @ UI
$${g_y; B q
% D.:ewumnw ~ wu w ave.u M _.
- L M~ - OEVM$ 1 w :%
%, w?$.v$.4, fn... ,margen.n = iQpne Qh vs lsWh?ifit .w m y RRBREMEBRE
, , _ . _ , .. -m , ..
7 i?? M E f fe de W !i
,a a. ? v WW ae . * ,
B HE 41Recordl1 ld 6 IMMI The types shown in the description column will be available when entering Exception or Finding records in CIPIMS. Add. edit and/or delete types as necessary. When assigning Item Acronyms. consider the following:
The acronym is limited to three characters.
The acronym is used by CIPIMS to generate finding identifict. tion numbers in inspection reports. CIPIMS generates finding identification numbers as follows: Finding type acronym + Docket + Report Number + Sequential Number (e.g. VIO 52-001/94-01-01).
The acronym is used by CIPIMS when sorting based on finding type.
Nuclear Plant Data Complete the Project Data form (one record). The docket number is needed to generate Finding and Inspection Report numbers. The balance of the information isn't strictly necessary (CIPIMS will work without it), but is used to create a header for inspection report documents (header will be blank if data is not entered)
53 IV. Identify inspectors and Supervisors At least one person designated as Supervisor must be entered in CIPIMS to allow completing an inspection proce.ss. Superybors cic act as Inspectors in CIPIMS, so the designation ofInspectors is optional. The form for identifying penans in CIPIMS is as follows:
. 6 '
g g igg g t " pyg lt;" Q " i '~ m ' '
vs g *E - p '
V8
") adjh%
b?)W%gd hk M hr u. n$hl?h
> n&grewnwwh<a v n ms:F m .manmxw
? - T$nL $. g h;;gSlimT4Whpj43EirLF TT18egirMjs58P;}&pg_lg41}_ y ny ' ^ ' ~
ggfg
, t j y P^~~gginggggyh ij f[f..
j Superwsor, John heg
[f[$.
e- %.~[SUPV zwauasuu.g. .;uw,w;nwquaw_ _ , =[g%, a.wg"!?h. -
f 5 au;ow ;w_ycz)?'TiA%,u$a4fyl[ wy IW h
& Njm upw.uxs.a!,~N wcunaans;p.rayagu;zuguay pdn w [,NN n 4;pu,;uuupam MN3/jE n +$_g m yp dII r& 9W "'fg" %p , W" Mg p qwg
%gWhp% Min T ' 'd;' ; M t
~gm* F=m r a}?:R 1 u,gbplxWk 4)%ns;%f *I "Q,,n , % pp. .,y, . k%2n 9,
en_..
3,^
& .,_a
~ # s%g . '
Qy.!
W,Wy mn ≥,M, &%
'~.
Q ~ ' M: mjy ,g '
y ^
_.y
. m&
{ -Q
%ys.a ; _ ? ar v $dn p 2
~
tf w
is,y#e <
~~3:
w' li {G :p 4
TCWQ$$"1 MM n%4A*'1 6 ' '
W gypppg ^8l y G d, \ k:6 & .c
~
y4 ~ d, hh
^
+b
~
M hdAM$selsk agg;
, i>?
- Alh*MsA[hhds1. .
^ ' Y+&h
[y$$$
. , < . . - , nn - ~~ -a,. ,- ? ,, y: , s.,, x;
{if sr Q iiT&l#IIDWhi&T igiliiliisii%iiisMGiBMWeniGGis*if, ,[F"T$$
hDD@N@hh6%$idEnh&$$M$sMDicMGWMy%Q$?sM$h6%gsgEk['l , J $ fS NE 4_IRecerd;l2 l of 2 l DEW The " Data Admin", " Supervisor", and " Inspector" designations control access to various portions of CIPIMS. The implications of these designations is a follows:
Designation Access Type Data Admin Supervisor Inspector View Menu Yes Yes Yes Inspector Tasks Menu Limited - Can only Yes - The supervisor is Limited - Can only modify data created by a " Super-Inspector" modify data created by currentlylogged user. and can modify all cunently logged user.
inspection data.
Supervisor Tasks Menu Yes Yes No
]
Data Admuustration Yes No No Menu
N If none of the " Data Admin", " Supervisor", or " Inspector" designations is specified, the identified person can only access the View Menu.
The " Inactive?" switch is used to disable user access to CIPIMS without having to delete the users record. Database referential integrity enforcement will not allow these records to be deleted if there are inspection records referencing an inspector records. '
The user designation and access scheme described above is a CIPIMS managed, application level, security process. System level security must be established using the Microsoft A: cess @ security management facility to protect against unauthorized access to CIPIMS data from outside the CIPIMS .
application.
VI. Enter inspection Procedures and Identify Critical Attributes In order to create inspection records, there must be at least one Inspection Procedure record and one Critical Attribute record entered in CIPIMS. Data is entered using the forms loaded firom the database l administrator menu. There are four forms that make up the data entry screen for Inspection Procedures l and Critical Attributes. When the data base is empty, only the forms associated with Inspection l Procedures will open when the Procedures and Attributes button is pressed on the database administrator menu. Enter the first Inspection Procedure number and Title using the Add button. Close the Inspection Procedures data entry screen and then reopen with the Procedures and Attributes button. The forms for adding additional procedures information and Critical Attributes records will now be available.
VI. Enter Systems Data 1
In order to create inspection records, there must be at least one Systems record. Data is entered using the Systems form loaded from the database administrator menu.
CIPIMS is Now Ready. j 1
i e - % - ,,, - m - -

ML20137M675

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

1.0 Purpose

Background:

3.0 Guidance

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Title:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Background:

Background:

Introduction:

Introduction:

Navigation menu

ML20137M675

Text

SUMMARY

1.0 Purpose

Background:

3.0 Guidance

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Title:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Background:

Background:

Introduction:

Introduction:

Navigation menu

Search