ML20141E566

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 0 to CK-MP3-04-05, Independent Corrective Action Verification Program (ICAVP) Programmatic Review Checklist, Mepl Determination
ML20141E566
Person / Time
Site: Millstone Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 06/24/1997
From: Tom Ryan, Wrona S
NORTHEAST UTILITIES
To:
Shared Package
ML20141E505 List:
References
CK-MP3-04-05, CK-MP3-4-5, NUDOCS 9707010103
Download: ML20141E566 (6)


Text

.

?*..

I f

l 1

l Northeast Utilities 1

Millstone - Unit 3 Independent Corrective Action Verification Program (ICAVP)

Programmatic Review Checklist CK-MP3-04-05, Rev. O l

MEPL Determination l

1 Prepared by:.$7dlYADMA Y

6-f)-V?

Name Signature Date Approved by:

T37 A

6/

7 Name

/

S t'

D/e /

IMPLEMENTATION System Document No/Rev.

Verified by:

Date:

i Concurrence by:

Date:

9707010103 970627 PDR ADOCK 05000423 p

PDR,,

N'ortheast Utiliti:s Millstone Unit 3 CK-MP3-04-05 System Document No.

Sheet of l

MEPL Determinations Checklist Instructions This checklist is used to document the review of changes to the Material, Equipment and Parts (MEPL). The checklist may be used to document the review ofmore than one change to shall be completed in accordance with the following instructions:

1. The Verifier shall review the MEPL Determination change against each attribute listed 4 of the checklist. Multiples ofPages 3 and 4 may be used when more than one change considered.
2. The Verifier shall indicate, for each attribute, whether the change is satisfactory (Y)

(N), or not applicable (NA).

l

3. The Verifier shall assign a sequential comment number to each response indicated on and shall use the Page 5 comment sheet to providejustification for the responses on Pagei Multiple Page 5's may be used. Thejustification shall reference the section of the MEP document reviewed for which the comment is applicable.

\\

4. Discrepancies shall be processed in accordance with PI-MP3-11.
5. The Verifier shall enter the Change Item numbei on each sheet, number the sheets se sign and date the cover sheet. The sheet numbers shall be sequentially numbered (

is acceptable to add insert pages (i.e., I A, IB. IC, etc.), ifneeded.

j j

6. The Verifier shall obtain the PRG Lead's concurrence on the cover sheet that the Chang been adequately completed.
7. The cover sheet and all applicable checklists and com:nent forms shall be included file copy.

1 i

i (CK-MPMM45. Rev. O, Page 2)

Northeast Utilities CK-MP3-04-05 i

Millstone Unit 3 System Document No.

Sheet of MEPL Determinations Checklist A. ChangeResponsibilities

1. Is the organization or person responsible for processing the change identified?

Yes O No N/A

2. Is the organization or person responsible for reviewing the change identified?

Yes O No N/A

3. Are the methods for performing the determination identified and documented to an extent t

consistent with safety, complexity, standardization, state of the art and similarity with proven designs?

Yes No N/A

4. Is the responsibility established for final approval of the change and, when applicable, its implementation?

t i

Yes O No O N/A O B. Process Specific Questions

1. Does the evaluation include a definition of the component in sufficient detail to support the MEPL Determination?

Yes No N/A O

2. Does the evaluation provide a safety classification analysis to determine whether the parent 1

system (s) in which the component resides perform (s)any safety-related functions?

Yes O No O N/A

3. In determining the safety classification of a component, has its function (s) within the system be determined, evaluated and documented against detailed criteria?

l Yes O No N/A

4. Does the evaluation provide a determination (for materials and consumables only) whether the item i

has the potential for impacting other MEPL classifications? And if so, is an appropriate

[

explanation provided?

i Yes No O N/A (CKN Rev.O Page 3)

l*.

rtheast Utilitiss 1

-Millstone Unit 3 CK-MP3-04-05 System i

Document No.

Sheet of MEPL Determinations Checklist j

i

5. Does the evaluation include the appropriate basis (UFSAR, Licensing Commitment, Tech Specification, Design Bases Document, etc.) for the safety related determination?

Yes O No N/A i

6. Does the evaluation identify applicable reference documents?

Yes No N/A

7. Does the evaluation consider if the item is in a system (or parent component for p Related Functions, and are those functions identified?

Yes O No N/A

8. Does the determination establish whether or not the item is required to support the Sys parent component for parts) Safety Function?

Yes O No O N/A

9. Does the determine. tion verify whether or not a credible failure of a non-safety related item will impact the system related function or the safety function of an interfacing system?

Yes No N/A O

' 10. Does the determination identify all the safety functions the item is required to per l

j Yes O No N/A O

11. If the item was determined to be non-safety related, was an evaluation performed (usin criteria) to determine whether special regulatory or utility requirements applied (Augmente Quality)?

Yes No N/A

12. If the evaluation resulted in an Augmented Quality determination, was the appropriate i

(FPQA, RWQA, ATWS QA, or SBO QA) identified, and the Augmented Quality function provided?

l Yes O No N/A O

13. If the determination resulted in a change to the existing classification, were appropriate d technical reviews performed?

Yes No O N/A O (CK AG440445.Rev. O.Page4) l

1 1

ortheast Utilities l

Millstone Unit 3 CK-MP3-04-05 System Document No.

Sheet of MEPL Determinations Checklist

14. If the determination resulted in a classification upgrade or downgrade, was an ad 10CFR50.59 screening performed?

Yes No N/A O

15. Did the determination evaluate the need for a Non-Conformance Report? And if r NCRinitiated?

Yes No O N/A O

~~

~~

t

16. Did the determination include an evaluation to determine if the reclassification bases documents? And if so, have these documents been identified?

Yes No O N/A O

17. Was a complete Safety Evaluation adequately performed for all USQ determinations?

Yes O No N/A

18. Did the determination evaluate potential changes to design basis documents and those changes initiated?

Yes No N/A l

l l

l 4

(CKMPM04 05, Rev 4 Page 5)

i q

l

,. ' N$rtheast Utilities i

Millstone Unit 3 CK-MP3-04-05 l

System l

Document No.

MEPL Determinations Checklist MEPL Determination Channe Com= =t Form Comment Number commeni l

l I

l I

(CKMP3-00445, Rev. O, Page 6)