ML20202J402
| ML20202J402 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1986 |
| From: | Dougherty F TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20202J051 | List:
|
| References | |
| DAP-20, NUDOCS 8607170074 | |
| Download: ML20202J402 (21) | |
Text
_
TITLE DAP OVERVEW OF ACTNITES PERFORMED BY TE CPSES PROJECT OR OTFER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS NUMBER DAP-20 Revision Prepared Date R_eviewed Date Approved Date O nybe 3[I6/E J/947, 3p:/kt k4 3ddt h4 34r/g 132da slub .
2
% % Aq ve/o hd- +n .
O l
8607170074 860711
{DR ADOCK 05000445 PDR N-85-6262/20 i NO. M -
TABLE OF CON 1ENTS u./
Section Poae C ov e r S he e t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Tab le o f Con t en t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ii 1.0 P UR P OS E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2.0 SCOPE..................................................... I 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4.0 I NS TR U CT I ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5.0 DO CU ME NT AT I ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I5 ATTACHMENT A CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-!
B COMANCHE PEAK ADEQUACY PROGRAM CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION ......................... B-1
(
l li TN-85-6262/20 l
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number:' DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 v
I.0 PURPOSE This procedure defines the extent to which the Design Adequacy Program (DAP) third-party personnel will overview implementation and corrective action activi-ties that are performed by the Project (or other organizations under the direction of the Project). This procedure also specifies the methods to be used by DAP personnel in performing the overview function.
2.0 SCOPE i
This procedure opplies to all activities where DAP third-party personnel have the responsibility of overviewing significont design octivities that or performed '
under the monogement and control of project organizations. In particular, this procedure opplies to the situations where DAP overview is required by Appendix H to the CPRT Progrom Plan. Other examples of such octivities include Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation's (SWEC) work on ASME piping and supports and Ebosco/impell work on cable fray and conduit supports.
The overview octivities that are performed by DAP personnel fall into one of the following three categories:
o in process review of oction plans and procedures including implementation ,
o Final product review of final pr-edures, implementing calculations, and other final documents o Review of specific corrective actions required as a result of design-related deviations and deficiencies identifWi by DAP or OOC.
TN-85-6262/20 Page I of 16 l 1
-r-,y-,-----,,-.---,,,..--.,,-m . .w.,-ww-m-e--.,m..m..ww,.--..,v,--.w-- _ - - - - , . . . - - - - - . . - - - , - - . , - . . -
COMANCPE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL
) ORGAMlZATIONS Revision: 2
)
3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITES 3.I Definitions 3.1.1 In Process Review "In Process Review" is defined as the review of any Project document or other design-related information that is in a draft or non-finalized state. This is any
. document or design-related information that has not been formally approved and issued by the Project including any interim use, draft or other documentation ,
where restrictions specifically applicable to the use of the document (or portions thereof) are clearly stated. Direct observation of Project work octivities (e.g.,
engineering walkdowns) by third-party personnel is included in this definition.
i L
3.I.2 Final Product Review J
tinal Product Review" is defined as the review of any document or design-related information that has been finalized, approved, and issued by the Project
- i for use without restrictions including portions of interim use, draft, or other I
documentation where it is clear that those portions are opproved for use without ,
restrictions.
3.l.3 Corrective Action For the purpose of this procedure, " Corrective Action" is defined as on action required to correct design-related deviations, deficiencies or odverse trends (as defined in the CPRT Program Plan) that are within the scope of the DAP review.
Corrective Actions will be prescribed by the results of the DAP program and will take the form of documentation or hardware modifications. Corrective Actions will be implemented by the Project. One Corrective Action may be developed to resolve multiple DIRs (see DAP-2).
) TN-85-6262/20 Page 2 of 16
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 v
3.l.4 Project
" Project" refers to TUCCO ond other organizations under the direction of the TUGCO.
3.1.5 OOC
~
" OOC" refers to the third-party Ooolity of Construction Program.
3.2 Responsibilities 3.2.1 Review Team Leode- '
The Review Team Leader (RTL) is responsible for determining and approving the
) odequocy of corrective actions defined by the Project to resolve each DAP-identified or OOC-identified deviation deficiency, or adverse trend having design significance. When permitted by this procedure, he may delegate this responsibility to the DAP Manager or the Construction Quality Interface -
Monoger. The RTL may recommend corrective action to the Project subject to SRT opproval when required by this procedure. He may permit the DAP Monocer or the Construction Ovality Interface Manager to make such recommendations to the Project when SRT opproval is not required.
3.2.2 DAP Manager and Construction Quality Interfoce Monoger i
The DAP Monoger and the Construction Ooolity Interface Manager determine the odequocy of corrective actions and make recommendations for corrective actions when delegated this responsibility by the Review Team Leoder.
b\ TN-85-6262/20 Page 3 of 16
('{)
1
..._._,-.._______.-._-,_..,._._.___..-.__...__.._,,_..m..m.
COMANCIE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
- . Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL h ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 9
i
- 3.2.3 Discipline Coordinators Discipline Coordinators are responsible for opproving the method of review for all overview octivities within their discipline and ensuring that those reviews are conducted in occordonce with this procedure. For specific corrective Etions, the Discipline Coordinators are responsible for obtaining descriptions of the corrective octions from the Project and ensuring'tImt corrective action evoluo- ,
tions are performed or:d documented in occordance with this procedure. They .
may delegate responsibility for performing the reviews to others.
3.2.4 Reviewers Assigned reviewers are responsible for performing reviews in occordance with this procedure, developing the oppropriate documentation, and designating the j
appropriate file distribution for the documentation.
4.0 INSTRUCTION 4.I Sources of Overview Requirements Overview of Project activities by DAP personnel results from the following sources:
o CDRT commitments in the CPRT program plan to have third-party overview of specific project activities o Project octivities conducted to resolve external source issues o Corrective oction resulting from deviations, deficiencies
- and odverse trends having design significonce that are identified by the DAP or OOC.
TN-85-6262/20 Poge 4 of 16
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
, Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY c THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL
( ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2
(
4.2 Review Methods The review methods to be employed in DAP third-porty overview octivities are described in this section. For o porticular overview octivity, the oppropriate Discipline Coordinator shall determine the applicability of the following subsec-tions that describe these methods.
4.2.1 in Process Review In Process Reviews are optional and relatively informal overview octivities. The .
In Process Review is designed to provide beneficial involvement of third-party expertise during the formulation or early implementation of project corrective oction octivities. Typical activities that are included in this review category are os follows:
o Review of draft oction pions that define the scope and general opprooch of significont work octivities to be performed by the Project.
o Review of draf t procedures and instructions that are being formulated to define the precise methods of imple-mentation and control of significant work octivities to be performed by the Project.
o Review of draft technical documents and supporting in progress calculations, tests, etc., that are intended to define the resolution of specific technical issues, o Review of in progress calculations or inspections during the early implementation phases of significant work oc-tivities.
In Process Reviews are initiated upon mutual ogreement of the responsible Discipline Coordinator and the Project or the organization that is performing the work. This review con take the form of meetings or document reviews based on TN-85-6262/20 Page 5 of 16
COMANCtf PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL 1
ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 v
)
the desires of the requesting organization.
I in Process Reviews are not performed to formalized checklists but shall assess conformance to the following basic occeptonce criterio:
o items reviewed are in compliance with CPSES licensing commitments.
o items reviewed are occurately presented and are in
- compliance with the criterio and intent of the DAP.
4 o Scopes are sufficiently defined to justify the desired
- conclusions. '
o Sampling opprooches and methods, where utilized, are -
4 odequate to justify the desired conclusions.
o Methods are technically sound and conform to good engin-eering proctice.
i i
o Procedures are sufficiently detailed to achieve their
, intended purpose and are comprehensive in covering their intended scope.
The results of in Process Reviews will be documented in the form of written comments or summary descriptions of meeting discussions. This requirement j becomes effective on the approval date of Rev. O of this procedure. Further
- details on documentation are described in Section 5.0 below.
4.2.2 Final Product Review Final Product Review is the formal overview octivity of completed CPRT work products developed by the Project. This review shall be done by DAP third-party personnel using formalized checklists and/or engineering evoluotions developed in occordonce with Procedures DAP-4 and DAP-8. Implementing and output TN-85-6262/20 Page 6 of 16
'l l
COMANCFE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 V
document reviews shall be performed following the DAP review procedures defined in Procedures DAP-5 and DAP-6, as appropriate.
The final products that shall be subjected to this review are os follows:
o All procedures that define the scope, methods and tech-nical detoils of implementation, o Selected implementing documents (e.g., calculations, de-
- signs) prepored in accordance with the above procedures.
The bases for selection (i.e., number, type and method of selection) shall be documented by the appropriate Disci-pline Coordinator. As a minimum selection criterion, o -
sufficient number and variety of implementing documents shall be selected to assess the full breadth of the as- '
sociated procedures.
o All documents related to the specific resolution of signifi-f)g cant technical issues that are identified from external source issues or the internal conduct of the DAP.
The criteria to be applied in developing the formalized checklists and in performing the reviews are os follows: '
o Compliance with CPSES licensing commitments o Resolution of all external source issues and internally identified discrepancies o Adequocy of the work performed in terms of technical methods and occurocy, control and interfoce.
w TN-85-6262/20 Page 7 of 16
. .- . _ _ . _. . - -- _ . - . . . . _ = - - - . .
COMANClf PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
- Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY
- THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORCANIZATlONS Revision: 2 4.3 Corrective Actions 4.3.1 Defining Corrective Actions The Project is responsible for defining corrective oction for deviations, deficien-cies and adverse trends having design significance. The Discipline Coordinator responsible for the DIR (see DAP-2) that identifies a deviation, deficiency or adverse trend shall obtain from the Project a proposed corrective action for that ,
i . DIR or multiple DIRs which are oddressed by the some corrective action. Th'e proposed corrective action description shall be obtained in writing with details .
odequate to allow a determination of whether the proposed corrective action is' odequate to resolve the DIR. In the event that the Discipline Coordinator or other DAP personnel wishes to propose a corrective action, the Discipline
[ Coordinator shall cause the proposed corrective action to be documented in o
) comparable level of detail in either cose the proposed corrective action shall be evoluoted in occordance with Section 4.3.2 of this procedure.
4.3.2 Evoluotion of Corrective Actions Definition -
The appropriate Discipline Coordinator shall prepare or cause to be prepared a corrective action evoluotion for each formally proposed corrective action (i.e.,
each written corrective action description as defined in Section 4.3.1 of this ,
procedure). Where more than one proposed corrective action exists for a DIR, one evoluotion may be used to cover multiple proposed octions. A Corrective I
Action Evoluotion cover sheet and form (Attochments A and B, respectively) shall be completed for each DIR requiring corrective action. The identification
- number assigned to each Corrective Action Evoluotion shall consist of "DAP- ,
l CAE" plus the DIR number to which the proposed corrective action applies. This number shall be placed on both the cover sheet and the evoluotion form.
1 TN-85-6262/20 Page 8 of 16 1
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY
/3 THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL
! ) ORGANIZATIONS v Revision: 2 The following guidance is provided for completing the form:
1.0 Description The description of the deviation, deficiency or odverse trend shall be provided using the description contained in the DIR. The description shall also include o statement as to whether the deviation or discrepancy is programmatic.
2.0 Description of Corrective Action A summary of the proposed corrective action shall be provided. The source of the proposed corrective oction (i.e., DAP or Project) shall be stated. -
3.0 Acceptance Criteria The minimum conditions necessary for the proposed cor-rective action to be found acceptable shall be listed.
b/ 4.0 Evoluotion A statement shall be mode on whether the proposed corrective action will correct (or has reasonable assur-once of correcting) the noted deviations, deficiencies or '
odverse trends and that the acceptance criteria will be met. The bases for the statement shall be provided including on identification of the level of third-party overview required (see Section 4.3.6).
l 5.0 Conclusion l
A conclusion shall be drawn as to whether the proposed corrective action is occeptable.
6.0 Attachments Attachments shall be used as necessary if the corrective oction evoluotion form does not provide odequate room to meet the above requirements.
TN-85-6262/20 Page 9 of 16 l
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE 1
~
Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY g THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL j 1 ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 O
Upon completion of the corrective action evoluotion, the Discipline Coordinator shall sign and ottoch a corrective action evoluotion cover sheet (Attochment A) and forward the evoluotion to the DAP Monoger (or Construction Ovality interface Monoger, where oppropriate). The DAP Monoger or Construction Quality Interface Monocar shall review the evoluotion to determine whether he concurs in the conclusion. He shall resolve his comments with the Discipline Coordinator and sign the cover sheet. Where required by the next section of this procedure, the evoluotion shall be sent to the RTL; otherwise, the DAP Monoger
. (or Construction Quality Interface Monoger) shall forward the evoluotion to the TUGCO Project Monoger - Unit I. ,
Note: The DAP evoluotion of a corrective action definition is not required when the corrective oction is specifically defined in the CPRT Program Plan as opproved by the SRT.
4.3.3 RTL Approval of Evoluotions The RTL shall review and concur in the corrective action evoluotion when the
- corrective action is due to one of the following conditions:
o Safety significant deficiencies identified by the DAP o Programmatic deviations or programmatic deficiencies
! identified by the DAP o Design deviations identified by the DAP that involve o failure to meet FSAR criteria or commitments, other licensing commitments, or NRC regulations o Design deviations identified by the DAP that have been determined by the Project to meet the reportability criterio set forth in 10 CFR 50.55(e).
TN-85-6262/20 Page 10 of 16 l
COMANCtf PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 Except when SRT opproval is required as stated in Section 4.3.4 of this procedure, the RTL shall, upon resolution of any comments with the DAP Monoger (or Construction Quality Interface Manager), sign the cover sheet and forward the evoluotion to the Assistant Project General Monoger - Unit 1.
4.3.4 SRT Approval SRT opproval is required where on opproved corrective action consists of a
, corrective action originally proposed by the DAP that involves one of the following: ,
o Programmatic corrective actions '
o Resolution of specific safety-significant deficiencies o Resolution of deviations through a change to the FSAR or licensing commitments.
When SRT opproval is required, the RTL shall indicate that requirement on th<.
evoluotion cover sheet and submit the evoluotion to the SRT and provide a copy to the Assistant Project General Monoger - Unit I.
4.3.5 Interaction Between DAP and Project Personnel The Project may obtain clarification of a DIR from DAP personnel at any time and DAP personnel may obtain clarification of proposed corrective octions at any time. Such clarifications may be verbal and need not be documented unless it is required by DAP 12 or is material to understanding the edequocy of the corrective action, in any case, the exchange of such clarifications shall not offeet whether o proposed corrective action is considered to be Project-originated or DAP-recommended.
l
COMANCE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 4.3.6 Overview of Corrective Action implementation Third-party overview of Project corrective action implementation r , intended to accomplish the following objectives:
o To ensure that the corrective octions for each progrom-matic deviation and programmatic deficiency have been ef fectively implemented. ,
o To ensure that the corrective actions for each specific safety-significant deficiency have been effectively imple-mented.
o To ensure that the corrective actions for each specific design deviation that involves a failure to meet FSAR and '
licensing commitments have been effectively imple-rrented.
o To ensure that the corrective octions for each specific deviation that meets the reportability criteria of 10CFR50.55(e) have been effectively implemented.
The Discipline Coordinators are responsible for ensuring that the Project has '
demonstrated the ability to successfully implement the defined corrective octions in the applicable technical and programmatic areas and to resolve all aspects of the specific deficiency or deviation for which the corrective action is required and to preclude similar deviations and deficiencies from occurring in the future.
The level of overview required to occomplish this will vary depending upon the nature of the corrective oction required. As a minimum the corrective action evoluotion described in Section 4.3.2 is required. Very prescriptive and straight-forward corrective actions will obviously require less overview than complex O(j TN-85-6262/20 Page 12 of 16 i
1 COMANCPE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
- Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY !
THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATlONS Revision: 2 iechnical or programmatic corrections. General requirements for the level and method of overview to be employed are os follows:
o The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the adequocy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for each DAP-identified design deficiency. Such confirm-otion shall be occomplished by review of the design documentation that reflects the implementation of the corrective action, and, if applicable, the documentation ,
that demonstrates that the as-constructed condition of the plant is in conformance with the revised design documentation.
o The Discipline Coordinator sholi confirm the adequacy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for ,
each specific DAP-identified design deviation that involves a failure to meet FSAR criteria or commitments, other licensing commitments, or t,4RC regulations (i.e.,
10CFR). The nature and extent of the confirmatory activities will vary depending upon the nature of the corrective action defined for each design deviation. In this regard, the following considerations shall apply:
- The extent to which the defined corrective oction is specific (i.e., not subject to interpretation with respect '
.to implementation).
I
- The extent to which the defined corrective action is complex (i.e., involving a set of related octivities where interface considerations are of importance).
- The extent to which the defined corrective oction is, of itself, dispositive of th'e underlying design deviation (i.e., not dependent upon additional analyses or evalua-tions).
The confirmatory octivities will include, of a minimum,
- review of the design documentation that reflects the implementation of the corrective action, and, if appli-cable, the documentation that demonstrates that the os-constructed condition of the plant is in conformance with the revised design documentation.
TN-85-6262/20 Poge 13 of 16 I
COMANCFE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 If the SRT hos concurred in a defined corrective action ,
that resolves a deviation through a justifiable change to
, existing FSAR or licensing commitments and if such change does not involve o redesign or reonalysis, DAP confirmatory overview sho!! not apply.
- o. The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the adequacy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for any other design deviations that meet the reportability criteria set forth in 10CFR50.55(e). For such cases, the confirmatory octivities will be governed by the con-
- siderations and criterio described above for the cose of a failure to meet FSAR criterio or commitments.
o The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the odequocy of
- the Project's implementation of corrective octions for -
each DAP-identified programmatic deviation or defi-ciency. Such corrective actions are expected to be '
defined in the form of revisions to Project policies, progroms, and implementing procedures or instructions related to design activities, including but not limited to design control. DAP confirmatory activities will be
! occomplished through reviews of the revised documents j that reflect such changes.
1 .
o The Discipline Coordinator shall determine the need for and extent of corrective action overviews for any other -
deviations using the some considerations described above for the case of a failure to meet FSAR criterio.
o The above general requirements shall also be opplied by the DAP to deviations and deficiencies with design sig-nificance identified by the OOC.
As o minimum, on engineering evoluotion shall be prepared to document the l completion of the DAP overview octivity for the scope of each corrective action. The engineering evoluotion shall describe the scope, methods and results of the review. Particular emphasis is to be placed on describing the basis for the selected implementation reviews and the bases for confidence that all corrective actions will be effectively implemented. The format for the engineering evalua-tion shall follow the outline contained in Section 4.3.2, unless on alternative l
TN-85 6262/20 Page 14 of 16
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL
[b ,] ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 2 format is specified by memorandum by the Discipline Coordinator. The DAP overview octivities may be documented within related DAP topical engineering evoluotions or within specific engineering evoluotions initiated for the sole purpose of documenting the evoluotion of CPSES project corrective action implementation. The engineering evoluotion shall describe the DAP overview octivities as weh as the corrective action summary. When electing to follow the format specified in Section 4.3.2, this description shall be provided in Section 2.0, Description of Corrective Action.
4.4 Applicability to TRT issues This procedure may be applied by the Civil / Structural /Mechonical (CSM) Review Team Leader to design deviations and deficiencies (including programmatic deviations and deficiencies) identified by CSM personnel in the course of
) implementing the Action Plans ossociated with CSM TRT issues. The RTL election to use this procedure may be in the form of a memorondom to appropriate personnel odvising them of the opplicobility of this procedure, in such a cose the RTL shall designate specific individuals for each TRT issue to -
perform the responsibilities described in this procedure for the DAP Manager (or Construction Quality Interface Manager) and Discipline Coordinator. The designated individuals may be the some individuals that would perform these functions for DAP-identified deviations and deficiencies.
5.0 DOCUMENTATION i
5.1 In Process Reviews in Process Reviews shall be documented in the form of written comments or summary meeting descriptions. Contact log sheets (see DAP-12) may be used to TN-85-6262/20 Page 15 of 16
COMANCl-E PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEGUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY
. THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGAMlZATIONS Revision: 2 V
meet this requirement. This documentation shals be placed in the DAP Files in occordance with DAP-14.
5.2 Final Prodoct Reviews Final Product Reviews shall be docuniented by engineering evoluotions and, where appropriate, formalized checklists. Calculations or inspection reports may also be originated to support the engineering evoluotion cor.clusions. .
Discreponcles identified in the course of final product reviews shall be. .
documented on DIR forms in occordonce with DAP-2. Documentation resulting b from final product reviews shall be placed in the DAP Files in occordance with
- DAP-14. ,
5.3 Corrective Action Definition Evoluotions
+
Corrective Action Evoluotions shall be documented and given identification numbers as required by this procedure. This documentation shall be placed in the A DAP Files in accordance with DAP-14. ,
. 5.4 Corrective Action Overview Corrective action reviews shall be documented by formo! checklists and/or engineering e roluotions. Discrepancies identified during a corrective action overview shall be documented on DIR forms in accordance with DAP-2.
Documentation resulting from corrective action overviews shall be placed in the DAP Files in accordance with DAP-14.
I t
TN-85-6262/20 Page 16 of 16
ATTACHMENT A O
(yi CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION NUMBER: DAP-CAE-(Enter DlR Number) ld 1
Revision
[ Accepted
[ Not Accepted
- 1 0
Date Discipline Coordinator
! Approved: Date DAP Monoger/ Construction Quality Interface Manager RTL APPROVAL REQUIRED? [Yes [ No ,
Approved: Date Review Team Leader SRT APPROVAL REQUIRED? [Yes No i
TNT-85-6262/20 A-l
ATTACHMENTC -
COMANCIE PEAK ADEQUACY PROGRAM Evclustion Number: DAP-CAE-Rsv: Q CORRECTWE ACTION EVALUATION Number of Sheets:
DAP Discipline:
})m4e/Discreponey
Title:
ription of issue /Discreponey:
Structure (s), Systern(s), or Component (s) Affected:
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING. USE ATTACHMENTS AS tECESSARY.
Description of Corrective Action:
Acceptorce Criteria:
O('9rences:
Evoluotion:
D Acceptable O Not Acceptable Prepared By/Date / Checked By/Date /
FORM DAP.20 2
_ _ . . _ _ _ _