ML20215J913
| ML20215J913 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1986 |
| From: | TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215J430 | List:
|
| References | |
| DAP-8, NUDOCS 8610270245 | |
| Download: ML20215J913 (21) | |
Text
o
[j l [ ~ ,,
.:[,}; - ~ a ut. j . - ._... .___ _. 2 " - E O N II,.. u l ,, , ? s .
,, I( f f
~ -- }
TITLE PREPARATION OF ENGIEERING EVALUATIONS NUMBER DAP-8 Revision Date Reviewed Date Approved Date o dd(bPreparAed A/uks 'i k L ( %M%Q i@lrf I G&pWLmv QL;1[*InfrQblQ iob1W 2
$q w/n gLg wrc g 2/93 3 12A t b 8/!+kc &Lk; %Iu. & Lg fli</g C)'
.% I NO.
9I - TN-85-6262/8 i PBA"I882R8868624s PDR A
e i a 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pooe Cove r S he e t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Tob le o f Con t en t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii 1.0 P URP O S E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 2.0 SCOPE..................................................... I 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESP ONSIBILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 4.0 I NS T R UC T I ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 e i 5.0 DOCUMENT AT ION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Q l ATTACHMENTS i l A ENGlEERING EVALUATION COVER SEET ................. A-l B REFERENCES / SOURCES OF INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-l C DISCIP LINE/ SUBJECT CODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 D ENGlEERING EV ALUATION LOG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-l E ISSUE RESOLUTION REP ORT FORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-l Q TN-85-4262/8 li
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 EVALUATIONS 1.0 PURPOSE This procedure establishes the requirements for the preparation and control of engineering evaluations that are developed as port of the Design Adequacy Program (DAP). 2.0 SCOPE This procedure is applicable to third party engineering evaluations developed under the DAP. This procedure does not opply to Discipline Specific Results Reports and the DAP Collective Evaluation Report which are subject to Procedure DAP-9. Other DAP procedures may provide guidance for particular types of engineering evaluations. In such cases, the other DAP procedure shall govern with respect to all requirements addressed by both procedures. 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES l 3.1 Definitions 3.1.1 Engineering Evoluotion I l l An Engineering Evaluation is a principal means of documenting conclusions of DAP review octivities performed in accordance with other DAP procedures (e.g., DAP-5, DAP-6). Their use includes, but is not limited to, the following: o Documentation of evaluation processes and conclusions i that connot be adequately documented on checklists o Development and documentation of conclusions that are reached through the collective evoluotion of checklists and other engineering evaluations O TN-85-6262/8 Page I of 12
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE p V Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREPARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 EVALUATIONS o Documentation of the completion of selected portions of the DAP (e.g., topics within a discipline), o Documentation and discussions of selected items that have been designated as Safety Significant in accordance with DAP 22. h Other types of evaluations (e.g., safety significance evoluotions, root cause and generic implication evoluotions, and corrective action evaluations) are governed by other DAP procedures that may reference DAP-8. Such references shall be deemed only to require compliance with DAP-8 when more specific guidance is not provided in the other DAP procedure. 3.1.2 Discrepancy Classification Terminology for discrepancy classification shall be as defined in DAP-2. b i - 3.2 Responsibilities l 3.2.1 Reviewers i l Third party design adequocy personnel shall prepare and check the engineering l evoluotions. Preparation and checking shall be performed by different indivi-duals. l 3.2.2 Discipline Coordinators l Discipline Coordinators shall have the following responsibilities: o Establish the scope of engineering evaluations to be performed within their respective disciplines o Ensure that qualified reviewers are assigned to prepare and check the engineering evaluation O TN-85-6262/8 Page 2 of 12
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS Revision: 3 o Approve engineering evoluotions prepared within their discipline. o Assign control identification numbers to each engineering evaluation and maintain an engineering evaluation log for the discipline. d 3.2.3 Design Adequacy Program Manager The DAP Monoger shall have the following responsibilities: o Establish the scope for engineering evaluations that cross discipline lines o Ensure that qualified reviewers are assigned to prepare and check multi-discipline evaluations o Approve multi-discipline engineering evaluations. o Assign control identification numbers to each multi-discipline engineering evoluotion and maintain on engi-neering evaluation log for multi-discipline evaluations. d 4.0 INSTRUCTIONS r 4.1 Preparation Engineering evoluotions are o principal means of documenting the bases of conclusions resulting from reviews at various levels within the DAP. Collec-tively, these evaluations provide the required documentation in support of the conclusions of the Design Adequacy Program. l Individually, these evoluotions shall, therefore, include sufficient information to I allow any technically qualified person who is not familiar with the work to understond it without extensive research and review. Collectively, these O TN-85-6262/8 Page 3 of 12
~
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TE AM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREPARATION OF ENGitEERING Revision: 3 V EVALUATIONS evaluations shall be sufficiently detailed to be used as the primary required inputs for the preparation of final results reports. Specific guidance for the preparation and content of engineering evoluotions is provided in the following subsections. 4.
1.1 Purpose and Scope
The purpose and scope of on engineering evaluation shall be specified at the time it is initiated. Within a specific discipline, this shall be done by the Discipline Coordinator. For evoluotions that cross discipline lines, this shall be done by the DAP Manager. The purpose shall consist of a concise statement of what the engineering evaluation is intended to accomplish. The scope shall precisely define the oreo(s) (i.e., discipline, task, subtask, etc.) which the evoluotion addresses. 4.I.2 Method and Extent of Review i Assigned reviewers shall develop and document on overview of the review l process within the scope of evaluation. This shall include on explanation of the methods of review, the extent of the review, and a chronology of the steps of the review process. It shall also include any useful background information that aids in understanding the purpose and scope of the specific evoluotion and how it fits in the overall context of the DAP. 4.1.3 Bases for Documentation Selection The bases for the scope of the review and the selection of specific documento-tion and design aspects for the review shall be documented in the evaluation. Where a choice exists for the selection of one or more items from o group (and any item or group of items could serve os verification of the design), assigned O TN-85-6262/8 Page 4 of 12
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS Revision: 3-reviewers shall thoroughly document the bases for selection. The bases may be documented in detail within each engineering evaluation or by reference to other engineering evaluations, DAP Procedures, or documents which specifically oddress appropriate selection bases. This documentation shall demonstrate that the purpose and scope of the engineering evoluotion (see paragraph 4.1.1, above)
- have been occomplished.
4.1.4 Source and Reference Documentation Assigned reviewers shall document all sources of information and references that are used in the engineering evoluotion. This includes all input data which may consist of procedures, DAP checklists, specifications, calculations, computer analyses and other related engineering evaluations. It also includes reference documents such as codes, standards and regulatory documents. It is not necessary to list documentation that received only cursory examination and was not relied upon to reach the conclusion in the evaluation. 4.1.5 Acceptance Criteria
, Assigned reviewers shall explicitly document the acceptance criteria upon which
! the engineering evoluotion is based. This shall include oppropriate reference to occeptance criteria used in the preparation of DAP checklists and to the criteria lists developed in accordance with DAP-l. 4.1.6 Evoluotion l Assigned reviewers shall document each step of the review process. This shall take the form of a point by point comparison of the scope being evaluated to the opplicable acceptance criteria. This may be accomplished using checklists developed in occordance with DAP-4 or directly in the text of the evaluation. Q ' O TN-85-6262/8 Page 5 of 12
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
'O Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREPARATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS Revision: 3 i Any assumptions used in the evaluation process shall be clearly documented as to the reason for making the assumption und the basis for its occeptobility. Any discrepancies noted in the process of performing the evoluotion shall be documented and processed in accordance with Procedure DAP-2. 4 l.7 Results and Conclusions Assigned reviewers shall document the results of the evoluotion, its conclusions and the bases for these conclusions. This shall include explicit identification of the following: o Any identified discrepancies and whether or not they have been determined to be a deviation I o Any deviations and whether they have been determined to j be deficiencies (i.e., results of safety significance evalua- /1 tions performed in accordance with DAP-22) (U o Corrective actions required i o Additional evoluotions that have been or must be performed to confirm or resolve all issues, oddress root cause and generic implications, or evaluate corrective Q 4 octions. , o Corrective action that must be token to resolve all issues o Any other open items o identification of issues that have been resolved. The engineering evaluation shall be finalized offer all discrepancies have been documented and submitted in the form of discrepancy reports in accordance with Procedure DAP-2. Engineering evolvations may be completed with corrective actions to be addressed in a revision or additional engineering evaluation. Such open corrective actions shall be clearly noted.
- TN-85-6262/8 Page 6 of 12
,_--.,,.-_,..-...._..-----_,.-__,,c...___,.- __. ,--,,,..m,_-,-._,.,,,,.--___,,__.___.,,.m. -
. . - . _ , - , , . . - . - - - , - . ~ , - _ - . - . _ , . _
^
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS Revision: 3 4.2 Review and Approval The review and opproval of engineering evaluations shall be performed as detailed in the following subsections. 4.2.1 Checking All engineering evaluations shall be checked by a qualified reviewer who did not participate in the preparation of the evoluotion. It is permissible for the checker to have prepared or checked other evaluations, checklists or calculations that support the evaluation. The evaluation shall be checked to ensure the following: o The content includes documentation as defined in Section 4.1 above o The assumptions, criteria and assessments are technically occurate and oppropriate for the evaluation performed o The evaluation complies with this procedure. The checker shall note any items of disagreement or questions on a review copy of the evoluotion and ottempt to resolve these items with the preparer. If resolution is achieved, the evaluation shall be finalized accordingly. If resolution is not achieved, the preparer and checker shall meet with the oppropriate Discipline Coordinator to resolve all items and finalize the evoluotion. The checker's signature indicates that he hos complied with the above requirements. No other documentation of the check shall be required. 4.2.2 Approval Upon completion of the checking process, engineering evoluotions shall be reviewed and opproved by the oppropriate Discipline Coordinator or the DAP Monoger in the case of multi-discipline evaluations. This review and opproval TN-85-6262/8 Page 7 of 12 t L _ _.__ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O V Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 i EVALUATIONS process shall ensure that the engineering evaluation meets the scope require-ments established for it and that it is consistent with the CPRT Program Plan (including appendices). 4.3 Format Documentation for all engineering evaluations shall consist of the following: o An Engineering Evoluotion Cover Sheet (Attachment A) that contains the following information: The title of the evaluation and unique identification number
- The DAP discipline area to which the evaluation A., applies.
U - The DAP Action Plan Number to which the evalua-tion opplies I - The identification of any supporting evaluations by title and identification number
- The purpose and scope of the evaluation A checklist of the contents of the evaluation A revision control block indicating originator, checker and opproval signatures and dates l o A one page obstract that summarizes the evaluation and
- its major results and conclusions i o The moln text of the evaluation that includes documento-tion of the activities described in Section 4.1 shall be organized in the following format unless otherwise di-rected by the DAP Monoger or the Discipline Coordinator
- Overview method, and extent of review
- Bases for sompte selection TN-85-6262/8 Page 8 of 12 I - - - - - - - ~ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP -8
Title:
PREPARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 V EVALUATIONS Source and reference documentation (Attachment B . may be used as a standard reference form)
- Acceptance criteria
- The evaluation Results and conclusions o Supporting information that is used directly in the evalua-tion (e.g., checklists).
4.4 Otner Types of Evaluations Other DAP procedures may require the preparation of evaluations similar to the engineering evoluotions described in subsections 4.1 through 4.3 (e.g., trending evoluotions). Additionally, the Review Team Leader, DAP Manager, Discipline Coordinator or other DAP personnel may identify the need for a specific evoluotion. In such cases the scope of the evaluation and other related information may be defined by memorandum. In both cases (i.e., the other procedure and the evaluation scope memorandum) reference may be made to DAP-8 for limited purposes. For example, another procedure may refer to DAP. 8 only for the purpose of obtaining a control identification number. In such cases the information contained in the other procedure or the evoluotion scope memorandum shall take precedence over comparable information in this pro-cedure. To the extent that the other document is silent with respect to matters controlled by this procedure, it shall be assumed that the requirements of DAP-8 shall opply. Issue Resolution Reports (IRRs) may be prepared to combine the evoluotion and corrective action of several related DIRs that have the potential for 'resulting in major corrective actions. The IRR is intended to provide the Project with on integrated summary of the concerns expressed in DIRs and to set forth the b
- criteria by which the DAP will evoluote any proposed corrective action. The O TN-85-6262/9 Page 9 of 12
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE G Number: DAP -8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 h EVALUATIONS IRR will allow efficient use of both DAP and Project resources because the collective concerns associated with multiple DIRs will be evaluated and resolved at one time. g Attachment E specifies the general format for IRRs which may be varied as deemed appropriate by the Discipline Coordinator to suit the specific IRR. 5.0 DOCUMENTATION 5.1 Cover Sheet Upon completion of the evoluotion, the originator and reviewer shall sign the Engineering Evaluation Cover Sheet (Attachment A) and submit the evoluation for opproval to the Discipline Coordinator or the Design Adequacy Program Q Manager, os oppropriate. The Engineering Evoluotion Cover Sheet shall also be used for IRRs. Q Approval shall be documented on the cover sheet. 5.2 Identification Engineering evoluotions shall be assigned a control identification number by the Discipline Coordinator. This identification number shall be of the following d format r DAP-E-X" X-Y{Y Sequence Code Discipline / Subject Code (see Attachment C) l O TN-85-6262/8 Page 10 of 12 l _. ._
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE o Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREP ARATION OF ENGINEERING Revision: 3 C EVALUATIONS The Discipline Cot.rdinator shall enter all assigned engineering evaluations on on Engineering Evaluation Log (Attachment D) for the Discipline. For multi-discipline evaluations, the number shall be assigned by the DAP Monoger. This d log shall include the identification number, title and revision level of all evaluations. IRRs shall be identified with sequence codes not less than 500. 5.3 Retention A copy of all final engineering evoluotions shall be maintained and filed by the DAP Manager or his designated representative in occordance with DAP 14, 5.4 Revisions Revisions to engineering evaluations may be required to provide additional information or clarify and correct misinformation (e.g., inputs). Revisions shall W be prepared, checked and opproved in the same manner as the original engineering evoluotion. The cpp' oval dote of the revision shall be entered in the Engineering Evaluation Log by the Discipline Coordinator under the appropriate revision numier. Previous opproved revisions in the DAP files shall be identified as superseded on each page or securely bound with at least the cover page so identified. i In the event that a final engineering evaluation is totally superseded by a A different evaluation, the superseded evaluation shall be retained in the DAP files for historical reference and the Discipline Coordinator shall record this i occurance in the Engineering Evoluotion Log. Superseded final evaluations retained in DAP files shall either be identified as such on each page or securely bound with of least the cover page so identified. In the event that a final engineering evaluation is simply voided (i.e., no longer needed or used to support DAP results), the voided evaluation shall be retained in O TN-85-6262/8 Page lI of 12
1 COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE i Number: DAP-8
Title:
PREPARATION OF ENGIMERING Revision: 3
, EVALUATIONS the DAP files for historical reference and the Discipline Coordinator shall record this occurrence by writing " VOID" across the " Revision Date" section of the Engineering Evaluation Log. Voided final evolvations retained in DAP files shall j either be identified as such on each page or securely boond with at least the cover page so identified.
l l i i i l i i O TN-85 4262/8 Page 12 of 12
ATTACHMENT A COMANCE PEAK DESIGN ADEGUACY PROGRAM ENGIEERING EVALUATION COVER SWET TITLE EVALUATION ID. NO. DAP-E __- NO. OF SHTS. DAP DISCIPLINE: DAP ACTION PLAN NO. SUPPORTING ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS: CONT.1D. NO. D AP-E- - TITLE: DAP-E- - TITLE: D AP-E __- TITLE: DAP-E- - TITLE: SUPERSEDES ENGINEERING EVALUATlON NO. DAP-E- - PURPOSE. SCOPE: CONTENTS (SEE SECTION 4.0, DAP-8) ABSTRACT h OVERVIEW OF REVIEW PROCESS BASES FOR SAMPLE SELECTION SOURCES OF INFORM ATION/ REFERENCES ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA EVALUATION RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING INFORMATION REVIEWED APPROVED REV. NO. REVISION ORIGINATOR DATE BY DATE BY DATE O FORM DAP-8 2 A-l TN-85-6262/8
,, - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - __ , _ _ .,_,u,_.
O O
~
O ... ATTAOWENT B i
! CORAANCDE PEAK DESIGN ADEGUACY PROGRAM REFERENCES / SOURCES OF KORA4ADON 1
i ENGIEERING EVALUATION CONT. ID. NO. REV. DATE ORIGINATING IDENTIFICATION / WHERE/HOW DOCUMEN1 ORG./ AUTHOR NUMBER REV. DATE TITLE LOCATED TYPE
! l l
4 4
\ T j
i i l 1 l l i l - i FORM DAP-8-2 j TN-85-6762/8 ikI *
/G ATTACHMENT C V
COMANCK PEAK DESIGN ADEOUACY PROGRAM DISCIPLIE/SUBKCT CODES Code Discipline C/S Civil / Structural P Piping and Supports M Mechanical ElC Electrical / Instrumentation PCI Programmatic /Ceneric implications E Electrical
- I instrumentation
- l PM Multi-discipline d
Note: Use of 'E" and "1" codes are optional alternatives to the "EIC" Code. EIC may be used for both Electrical and I&C. "E" may be used when the document is relevant only to the electrical disci-pline. "l" may be used when the document is relevant (.nly to I Instrumentation and Control. l l l FOFM DAP-8-2 TN-85 6262/8 C-1
, t-
~
~
6 _ _ O 5 E 4 T A D N 3 O I S I V E 2 R M A l R G O RG O P O YL CN A D UOO GT T EA N DU E ALA G t HV CE OT C I E A SG E L T T DNR I T A K A E EE PD G E F N CE N . A M _ O D _ C E _ D E SY RB - _ E P U E O N D I 3 L 88
/
O P2 R A 26 T D6 - N O M5 C R-8 ON _ O FT O. - _ I;
<4! !ll t;j1i ! il<l ,i i\ : 1i ii i !i l lij.
(] O ATTACHMENT E ISSUE RESOLUTION REPORT FORMAT COVER SHEET ABSTRACT l.0 ISSUE DEFINITION This section defines the issue (s) covered by the IRR. The description should provide o comprehensive summary to ensure that all ossociated components of the issue have been adequately addressed. The first paragraph of the description should be a concise statement of the issue (s). These statements must plac,e the bounds on the issue (s) identifying the scope of applicability. For example, if the IRR is limited to o single system or has other characteristics that limit its scope, the bounds should envelope all identified issues and should be clearly stated.
,. Subsequent paragraphs should describe related aspects, including the identification of overlapping aspects of other issue (s).
2.0 SCOPE
2.1 Background
This section provides background on the issues and other relevant information to put the issue into an oppropriate context. This may, for example, include o discussion of the applicable design criteria and the criteric actually used in the design of the plant. 2.2 Bases This section should explain why the DIRs (referenced in Section 3.0) are related, why on adverse trend is suspected / identified to exist and provide the bases for any bounds on the scope of the IRR. This section should contain any other explanatory material that defines the scope of the issue and puts the technical or TN-85-6262/8 E-l
U programmatic aspects of the issue into perspective. Key guidance of DAP-7 including trend recognition, trend evoluotion and determination of limiting boundaries of applicability should be considered and implemented as oppropriate os part of the documentation of this section. 2.3 Interfaces This section should describe the design interfaces offecting the scope of the IRR. The discussion should include those interfaces within the discipline as well as those with other disciplines. To the extent that the design activities that are the subject of the IRR ore of fected by other IRRs, open DIRs, or other ongoing work, oppropriate interface information should be provided.
3.0 REFERENCES
A This section should list the DIRs numbers and titles that are to be resolved h
'd' through the corrective action. The primary DIR(s) should be clearly identified.
Other oppropriate references should also be included. 4.0 RESOLUTION ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA This section should provide the criterio by which the DAP will evoluote the corrective action proposed by the Project. For example, o resolution acceptance criterion would be 'T3 ring the calculations into conformance with as built conditions." The resolution acceptance criteria should be oriented toward the end state of the plant rather than how the Project will achieve the end state. 5.0 EVALUATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION For Rev. O of the IRR, this section will be marked "loter". This section will be completed offer the project provides its description of the corrective action. This section will incorporate the requirements of DAP 20. l I O v TN-85-6262/8 E-2 t
l 6.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Acceptance of Corrective Action This section is marked "later" until the DAP is satisfied with the proposed corrective action (i.e., until the evaluation of the proposed corrective action against the acceptance criteria concludes that the proposed corrective action will resolve the DIRs within the scope of the IRR) 6.2 Definition of Overview Activities This section will define the scope of DAP overview of the corrective action. This section is marked "later" until on acceptable corrective action is defined. 6.3 Conclusions f When on acceptable corrective action is defined, this section will conclude that the corrective action as defined by the project, if correctly implemented with DAP overview, will provide reasonable assurance that there will be no unde-tected safety significant errors within the scope of the IRR. APPENDIX A DIRs (Appendix A contains copies of the DIRs referenced in Section 3.0) APPENDIX B CORRECTIVE ACTION (Appendix B will be added by the Project to define their corrective action program). TN-85-6262/8 E-3 _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _. .-}}