ML20205E673

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 1-01 to Procedure 5000-ADM-7311.03, Project Reviews
ML20205E673
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek, Three Mile Island, 05000000
Issue date: 02/21/1986
From: Flynn J
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20205E603 List:
References
FOIA-86-293 5000-ADM-7311.0, NUDOCS 8608180463
Download: ML20205E673 (8)
v • d • e


Text

.

TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS Numon jw:  !

, '}

BIN,jiJMC4OSI DIVISION 5000 4 tt*-7311,03

( EW-O f 4)

T; tie Revesson No.

PRGIECT REVIEWS 1.nl AggNecaostety/ Scope , Responsible Office TechnicalFiinctionsDivision EP&S 5110 This document is important to safety Q Yes a No Effecove Oate Ust of Effective Pages 2-21-86

.m

? Page Revision

(,

, 1.0 2.0 1-01 70 N i 1-01 s'.' 3.0 1-00 7d> W M 4.0 1-01 p,F 2h-/fG

- 5.0 1-00

. , 6.0 1-0197 N 7.0 101 70P J/r/F.

O 10.0 t:n ma 1-00 11.0 1-00 12.0 1-00 El-1 1-00 E2-1 1-00 i

Signature I f Concurnng Organizational Element Date  ;

Onginator il h/d/, ((, //[/ l Engrg. Proc & Stds ! tanager l J/g / gr- t concurrec ey j lhh[d i Director-Engineering Projects 9/g/gf i

t l l l l  :

i

) i j

l l

f. '

5: l

~

i D

\ ), \ l g Accrcsec ::v :i (7 , ?. j -,, ,

iC2-r"!S - 9 0'.fi i C 3 ; .-'i"'C**0F.S jgg

]! l '

i 8608180463 860807 2 "- -' . p 3-

l PDR FOIA g -!

WEISS96-293 PDR 1.0 7T [ ,

hj bU Mf DVS N i OSNM-7311.03 Project Reviews

  • l -01 1

, 1.0 PURPOSE & SCOPE l' This procedure defines the process for the conduct of internal and multi-di' visional reviews of proposed plant modifications. Review and concurrence requirements for modifications and representation at specific review meetings (when called) are identified in this procedure. '

r

2.0 REFERENCES

2.1 1000-ADM-1215.02 " Technical Document Release" (EMP-008) 2.2 1000-ADM-1291.01 "GPU Nuclear Safety Review & Approval  ;

Proceoure" '

2.3 5000-ADM-1291.01 " Safety Evaluations" (EP-016) ,

, 2.4 5000-ADM-1291.02 " Independent Safety Reviews" (LP-009) 2.5 5000-ADM-7313.01 " Modification and System Design Descriptions" (EP-005)

, 2.6 1504-ADM-7350.01 " Plant Modifications Engineered by Plant Engineering" (EMP-019) 2.7 5000-ADM-7370.03 " Control, Evaluation and Resolution of '

Review Comments on Technical Documents" (EP-008) 3.0 DEFINITIONS 3.1 Preliminary Engineering Documents (Baseline) - Including, but not limitert to, safety evaluation, design criteria documents, flow charts, System Design Descriptions, general arrangement drawings, single-line diagrams, and logic diagrams which show or define basic plant parameters. For instance Control Panel Layout and Control Room arrangement drawings are baseline documents. These dccuments cannot be released or revised without ^PTIC approval.

3.2 Modification - A configuration change initiated on a ccmconent, structure, system or piece of equipment (including deletions, additions or substitutions).

3.3 Project Engineer (PE) - The GPUNC individual assigned

_ responsioility for monitoring a particular work effort. The effort may be totally within GPUNC or with an cutside contract
r.

The PE .nay be frem any department of the echnical Functions j

~

Divisicn.

i

-: :e: u 2.0

h a]ucJear  !=". = " " "' F5-73" .o  :

Project Reviews WT* ,

l is not called, the MEP shall designate a qualified Responsible Technical Reviewer to insure that all comments resulting from the

, review are resolved. Whether or not a meeting is called, the review group should include the organizations listed in paragraph ,

4.7.1 and the documents listed in paragraph 4.7.2. It is

anticipated this (PEDR) review will be conducted only once during a j project unless significant changes are made to the baseline '
engineering re, quiring a new multi-discipline review.

I 4.3.1 Suggested guidelines for holding a PEDR as a meeting:

Three or more technical disciplines involved. ,

Budget estimate of $100,000 or greater.

Schedule of 12 months or more. ,

Significant initial safety questions.

Significant plant operational impact or questions.

i Meetings should be considered as the review mechanism, for ,

any project having any one of the above criteria.

4.3.2 The Responsible Technical Review (RTR) shall be conducted as part of the PEDR process with the Chairperson serving as the t Responsible Technical Reviewer when a meeting is called or l through comment resolution as indicated in paragraph 4.3 when not conducted as a meeting. This review is a part of the safety review process as explained in 5000-ADM-1291.02 (LP-009). The purpose of the Responsible Technical Review (RTR) is to ensure that all the appropriate engineering concerns and safety considerations have been addressed during the design process. Generally the sco:e of tnis review shall folicw that for the ?EDR. The Independent Safety Reviewer and the Responsible Technical Reviewer signify approval by signing the Safety Evaluation /

Environmental Imcact Summary Sheet ::er ECCO ACM-1291.Cl

( EP-016) and SCCO- ACM-1291.02 (L?-CC9) .

5 i

!1 order to function as an RTR one must te :ertified

_' ( reference ICCO-ACM-1291.01) and assi:ned ne tas'< ov their management. The certification f:rm, wni:n assess botn RTR 3 ISR (reference L?-009 - 50CC 201-1291.02) is p

filed in EDICC I

=

l i

eZ' * !;

4.0

I

~

' dj b0)SSF D S l DD- -7311.03  !

  • ve Project Reviews , "*'"f'.Cd f
  • Technical progress since the previous review.

i Identification of technical or management issues needing l l' resolution. This should include major near term (three l or four months) decision points and data required to l l

effect a decision.

l In addition to the above, items from Section 4.5.2 should be addressed as appropriate.

4.5.2 Scope of PEDR - This review shall address the following basic questions as a minimum.

l Is' the work scope clearly defined and appropriate?

l l ,

Are the criteria and requirements clearly defined and will they result in an acceptable final design?

Will the proposed modification accomplish the intended li function?

l

  • Will the design adversely impact the operability or maintainability of any component, system, or the overall plant (i.e. adverse system interaction)?

Are there any design features which will increase the possibility of operator error?

Are there any design features which will adversely affect licensing of the modification?

Will the prooosed modification to include construction and installation adversely imoact tne environnent?

Does the System Design Description, Jivision : and Preliminary Division II accurately and idecuately address the criteria requirements of 50CC-ADM-7313.01?

Is additional loading on the batteries or diesel generator required?

2 Are there any scecial consideration to be scd-ess+i I -

during installation - special cermits, safety g precautions, pl ant tecn. soec requirscents e .c.'

i E

E v 8< c a 6.0

l TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS I A,eer

[r 4-); pyg7 DIVISION SC00-ACM-7311.03 Project Reviews l 'T[

l 4.7 Conduct of PEDR Meetings - PEDR meetings normally will be arranged by Project Engineering. The afanager Engineering Projects (MEP)

, shall appoint a chairperson usually fecm GPUN Management, but not necessarily from Technical Functions Division. A/Es are expected l . to assist in preparation for and to participate in PEDRs for which they prepare preliminary (baseline) engineering.

4.7.1 The MEP and the designated PEDR chairperson will jointly

select the organizations who should participate in the l PEDR. Required invitation to a PEDR meeting shall include as a minimum the following or their designated ,

representative: .

l Of rector, Engineering Assurance l .

Of rector, Engineering Projects Director, Engineering & Design Of rector, System Engineering Director, Startup & Test Manager, Engineering Projects i

Manager Licensing Plant Representatives Radiological & Environmental Control Representative (as required)

GPUNC Nuclear Assurance Representative (as required)

Maintenance and Construction Representative Manager of Security (for modification affecting Security Plan)

If the modification being reviewed is important to safety, the '.fcensing Manager or a designated etelegate who will perform the Independent Safety Review per 5000-ADM-!291.22 shall participate in the PEDR.

4.7.2 The review package for 2EJRs shall include coof es of t'e Safety Evaluation /Envirormental Im act Sumary S*r eet, i criteria (500 I), Preliminary 500 I*, flow diagrams, l elementary diagrams, and general arrangement drawings as l recuired to clearly define the scoce, functional require-l ments and conceptual design of the mcdification. Review

_ pacuges for PEDR meetings shall nor1 ally be issued in 2 sufficient time to allow a two-week review perted criar to i tne meeting.

! 1.7.3 -ce f:rmal mem:ers of tne ?E:R 3 card as definec i :3 3.

5 4.7.1 shdll not have been involvec in engineering :r

managi9g tre engineerf og of tne design
3ckage being y 'eviewed.

l-I a.: :s .

8.0

TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS l Nurr.cer

. (# L)]bMCMI DIVISION ;5000-A0f t-7311.03 i Title Revision No.

Project Reviews 1-00 F

4.8 Conduct of Ot1CR fleetings - The Project: Engineer shall schedule the l time and place for an onsite meeting and provide attendees with sufficient information, (f.e. 500-1, SDD-II (if avafiable)

Installation spec, etc.) to permit a meaningful review and to ,

conduct an informal presentation. The design engineering  ;

organization (internal or external) will normally assist the ,

Project Engineer with the presentation.

4.8.1 Mandatory participants in this review, in addition to Projects and Design Engineers, are Plant Operations, Plant itaintenance/ Material, f4aintenance and Construction, Start-up and Test, Radiological Engineering, and GPUf!C Quality Assurance representatives. Other participants are at the

! discretion of the Project Engineer.

4.8.2 The Project Engineer shall issue minutes of the meeting to I include problems identified and follow-up action assign-ments.

5.0 RESP 0tlSIBILITIES 5.1 Project Review fleeting (Refer to Procedure Ficw Chart, Exhibit 1) 5.1.1 PROJECT Review Preifminary (Baseline) Engineering EtlGIt1EER/ Docucents SECTI0tt

!%flAGEP, (PE/ Sit)

5.1.2 l "AlAGER Cetermine need, type and scheduie c# Project l E
:GI lEERI:lG Review neetings and the required PROJ ECTS/ attendees l SECTI0tl Select Chairperson for PECR who also acts as the

.A!!AGER Responsible Technical Reviewer

(.vEP / Sit ) Forward review package to '!anager Licensing ("L) for an Independent Safety Review (ISR) of :75 codifications (Ref. ECCO-ADM-1291.02) 5

=

i li m: . :,: .:

l 70,g

TECHNICA1. FUNCTIONS e %rreor ij (if- JT 1.,d

-m

  • ' NI DIVISION I

BCCO-ADM-73?'.:3 Title Revision No.

Project Reviews 1-00 I I

5.1.8  ;

ENGINEERING File meeting minutes DATA & CON-FIGURATION CONTROL (ED&CC) 6.0 EXHIBITS .

6.1 Exhibit 1 - Project Review Meeting Procedure F10w Chart 6.2 Exhibit 2 - PEDR Review Form i

l I

s a

I I .

i 1 5 1

2 3

2

'C00 ' 2 5 3 '

12 0

, s.

~ ~ ' , TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS jNume  :

C 'M /;'d C 3OI DIVISION :5000-ACit-7371.03 rice I Revision No.

Project Reviews 1 00

, EXHIBIT 2 PEDR Review I

t Project

Title:

I l Date of Review:

Indiv1 duals Participating in the Review:

thme Title l

I I

t I

I l

I

! Documents Reviewed:

E 2

acnnt:2i Ic :r:va !

4

?

, Chairperson Signature Cate 3

.: :5:  !

E2-1

. _ _ - .. .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20205E673&oldid=3060295"