ML20202J149
| ML20202J149 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 06/23/1986 |
| From: | TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20202J051 | List:
|
| References | |
| DAP-6, NUDOCS 8607170032 | |
| Download: ML20202J149 (10) | |
Text
.
4 TITLE REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECFICATIONS Af0 OT}ER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS NUMBER DAP-4 Revision Repared Date Flaylewed Date Approyed Date k%
sivkc QQ %ks'}}d icl@f oy 'ch4 '4jt hh </r/& C$824 %/e6 ss <_ SA 44< % % V O S$07*E000kOIObok45 A PlJIf CONTR0Lt 10 COPY fl0. 13 C O TN-85-6262/6 i n
s TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Cove r S k t...................................................... I Toble of Content s................................................. 11 1.0 P URP OS E................................................... I 2.0 SCOPE..................................................... I 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONS BILITIES......................... I 4.0 I NS T R UCT ION.............................................. 3 5.0 DO C UME NT AT ION.......................................... 7 TN 85 4262/6 11
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE i Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS t 1.0 PURPOSE l This procedure defines the methods to be used in the Design Adequocy Program for the review of Design Output Documents (i.e., design drawings, specifications, and vendor documents and drawings). 2.0 SCOPE 1 ] This procedure applies to the review of the Output Design Documents used in the l CPSES Design of the systems oddressed by the Design Adequacy Program. j The Design Output Documents will be reviewed ogainst the appropriate CPSES 1 design criteria to ensure that the output documents oddress all necesscry design j criterio. Additional Implementing documents are used to define attributes l ogainst which design output documents will be reviewed. This procedure does not oddress the review of Design implementing Documents. The review of implementing documents is oddressed in DAP-5. r 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES l 3.1 Definitions i l l 3.1.1 Criterion l i l A criterion is any statement of a performance, design feature, or design requirement which a system, structure, or component must meet in order to be j capable of performing its design function or to be in compflonce with a project requirement or commitment. l TN-85-4262/6 Page i of 7 i j
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS 3.1.2 Output Document Output documents are design documents (such as drowings and specifications) that define technical requirements of systems, structures, and components. Vendor documentation / drawings and ony design documentation that is not otherwise classified as design input or implementing documents are included in this definition. 3.2 Responsibilities 3.2.1 Discipline Coordinator The Discipline Coordinator is responsible for selecting the type and number of output documents to be reviewed in each area. The Discipline Coordinator is responsible for assigning Reviewers. 9 3.2.2 Reviewer The Reviewer is responsible for completing reviews of ossigned review topics in occordonce with this procedure, using oppropriate checklists, ensuring that the check is occurote, and checking that work done under his (or her) direction is correct. 3.2.3 Assigned Personnel Assigned personnel perform verificotton activities under the direction of the Reviewer. TN 85 4262/6 Page 2 of 7
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS d 3.2.4 Checker Checkers are responsible for verifying the occuracy of the Reviewers or i Assigned Personnel's work. 4.0 INSTRUCTION i 4.1 Identificotton of Reviewer For each review topic listed in the description of the DAP self-Initiated evoluotion contained in the CPRT Program Plon, the oppropriate Discipline i Coordinator shall select on Individual who shall function as the Reviewer for that topic and shall be responsible for the completion of the checklists associated with that topic (i.e., the Design Review Summary and Design Review Evoluotion described in DAP 4 as Attochments B ond C, respectively, or alternative checklists developed in occordance with DAP 4). The identified Reviewer shall j meet the qualification requirements of DAP-15. The Discipline Coordinator may oct as the Reviewer, provided that he meets the quollficotton requirements of DAP-15. Assigned personnel working under the direction of a Reviewer shall have been trained in this procedure and shall have received ony technical trotning deemed appropriate by the Reviewer, but need not meet the quellfico. tion requirements applicable to the Reviewer. If the Reviewer determines that j such technical training is necessary, the requirement of the trotning, its scope, l ond its completion shall be documented. 4.2 Customization of Checklist Forms and Identificotton of Speelfle Documents For Review l The Reviewer shall review the Design Review Evoluotion checklist forms I opplicable to the review topic that have been released for use by the Discipline i TN 85-6262/6 Page 3 of 7
- O 1
i
1 COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PRCCEDURE Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS Coordinator. The Reviewer shall determine whether the forms require supple-mentation or other modification as provided for in DAP-4 (including the supplementory review items contained in Attachments D and E of DAP-4). He may make whatever changes he deems appropriate to customize the checklist form for o particular review topic. i 1 The Reviewer shcIl select the items for review in occordance with DAP 21. The Discipline Coordinator may authorize others to complete the activities required 1 by DAP-21 under the direction of the Reviewer. Those specific items identified l to be reviewed shall be the latest revision of the applicable documents. If the l opplicable document revision has on opproval date prior to April I,1985, it shall be used for review. Otherwise, the current revision and the lotest revision with 1 on opproval date prior to April 1,1985, shall be used, if multiple revisions j occurred offer April I,1985, each of those revisions shall be used. The use of these previous revisions, however, shall be limited as described in Section 4.4. The Reviewer or Assigned Personnel under the direction of the Reviewer, shall enter the appropriate references for the selected documents in the " Reference" column of the checklist. The reference shall be sufficiently complete to allow f another person to identify the specific portion of the document being reviewed. For example, the identification number reviewed and page of the calculation, as l well os the revision number and date, should be used. The reference information j may be entered into the checklist form in the course of the review. l 4.'J Completion of Checklist l l Eoch review of output documents shall be conducted by using the checklists developed in occordonce with DAP-4 os customized in occordance with Section l TN-85-4262/6 Page 4 of 7 l O t l l -,,,.n,--.
i COMANCFE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS 4.2. The purpose of the review shall be to determine whether the individual I l design documents appropriately include the applicable design criteria and are consistent with implementing documents. The Reviewer or Assigned Personnel l shall examine all items on the checklist and indicate whether each item was j found to be satisfactory, unsatisfactory, not checked, or not applicable. "Not l Checked" or "NC" may be used when a standard checklist form is used to perform a limited review of a given subject such that an applicable area was i excluded from the review scope. "Not Applicable" or "NA" may be used when an Item on a standard checklist form is not applicable to the subject being reviewed. The Reviewer or Assigned Personnel shall also indicate the basis for determining the verification conclusion (e.g., visual Inspection of document, field walkdown, calculation review, and independent calculation), and the acceptance criteria applicable to the attribute being evaluated, if not otherwise included in i the checklist form. 1 As part of the Review, the Reviewer shall determine whether there are outstanding change notices to the document being reviewed. The review of the j output document shovid consider the change notices as well as the output j document itself. Review of these change notices shall be described as part of the " Description of Verification" and/or in the " Comments" column of the checklist. The Reviewer or Assigned Personnel shall indicate the Homogeneous Design j Activity number appilcable to each checklist item in the " Comments" column. Where all checklist items have the some HDA number a straight line may be i b' drawn through the " Comments" section to indicate a common HDA number. t l The " Comments" column may be used for any other comments on the attribute, its implementation or its verification. i l TN-85-6262/6 Page 5 of 7 4 i l I
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE m .. Numb'r: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 e \\ ^ AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS ~ .4.4. Current Document Revisions After March 3I,1985 s - As noted above, special review considerations are opplicable to documents for which the current revision of the document is dated later than March 31,1985. In such cases, the following steps shall be completed by the Reviewer or Assigned Personnel: The lost revision prior to April I,1985, shall be obtained. o All revisions between the revision obtained in the previous o step and the current revision shall be identified and obtained. o The Reviewer or Assigned Personnel shall determine the differences among the revisions and the causes for those revisions. o A review shall be conducted using the current revision of l the document and the oppropriate design review evoluo. tion checklist completed. Appropriate design review evoluotion checklists shall be o completed to document the review ogainst the review attributes of those aspects of the previous revisions of the document that were changed in the latest revision. The " Sat /Unsat/NA/NC" column shall be marked as oppro-priate. Items that are "Unsot" in the previous revisions shall be processed in occordance with 4.5 (below) in spite of any correction that may have been made in the current revision. 4.5 ' Processing of Unsatisfoetory items Items found to be unsatisfactory shall be so noted on the checklist, and shall also be separataly compiled and processed in occordance with the procedures outlined in DAP-2. The DIR number assigned to each unsatisfactory item shall be listed in the " Comments" column. TN-85-6262/6 Page 6 of 7
- O
.m. m . -,,, _ _, -, _ _ _.,... _,... -,, ~..,. _ _,,, _.. _, _. -,. _ _., - - _, -.. _,, -.,.
COMANCFE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-6
Title:
REVIEW OF DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS Revision: 2 AND OTHER DESIGN OUTPUT DOCUMENTS 4.6 Approval i If the checklist is completed by Assigned Personnel, the " Comments" column shall be annotated with the nome or initicis of the person who performed the verification. The Reviewer shall cssort himself cf the odequacy of the completed checklist and sign the " Reviewer" space. After o checklist is completed and signed by the Reviewer, the Discipline Coordinator shall designate o Che::k'er. The Checker shall verify the occurocy of the checklist by reviewing at least 10 percent of the checklist items or o minimum of 5 items. After all comments or questions are resolved with the Reviewer, the Checker shall sign the checklist in the " Checker" space and return to the Discipline Coordinator. The checklist shall be approved by the Discipline Coordinator, who shall sign the " Approved By" line of the checklist sheet, if the Discipline Coordinator is otso the Reviewer, he shall sign both spaces. 5.0 DOCUN.ENTATION Each completed checklist shall be forwarded to the DAP Monoger for filing in occordance with DAP-14. TN-85-6262/6 Page 7 of 7 O -}}