ML20215J948
| ML20215J948 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/19/1986 |
| From: | TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215J430 | List:
|
| References | |
| DAP-20, NUDOCS 8610270261 | |
| Download: ML20215J948 (19) | |
Text
..
I
--___ \
.I' k_b ; 1
, , [ _ ) []i)O\' ;
- o, , _ l TITLE DAP OVERVEW OF ACTIVITES PERf0RMED BY TE CPSES PROECT OR OTER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS NUMBER DAP-20 Revision Prepared Date R_eviewed Date Approved Date O ny er #*b 3f'I i
$4 34r/a M4 34r/g Mlda 35 4 2
gQ g, 4tg wg g(f,A 4/~p 3 g/yh r/<f/s $Lt; % $Ly r/va.
O C0 4TROLLCD COP-NO . 9I -
.g O TN-85-6262/20 i 8610270261 PDR 861010
^ ADOCK 05000445 PDR l
r
\
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Co v e r S he e t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I To b l e o f Co n t e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii 1.0 P URP O S E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 2.0 SCOPE..................................................... I 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4.0 I NS T R U CT I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Q
5.0 D O C U ME NT A T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 ATTACHMENT A CORRECTIVE ACTION EV ALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 B COMANCHE PEAK ADEQUACY PROGRAM CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION ......................... B-l l .
l l
~
1 TN-85-6262/20 li
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY O THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 E
I.0 PURPOSE This procedure defines the extent to which the Design Adequocy 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 I by DAP personnel in performing the overview function.
2.0 SCOPE This procedure opplies to all activities where DAP third-party personnel have the responsibility of overviewing significant design activities that are performed under the monogement and control of project organizations. In particular, this procedure opplies to the situations where DAP overview is required by i
Appendix H to the CPRT Program Plan. Other examples of such octivities include Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation's (SWEC) work on ASME piping and supports and Ebascolimpell work on cable troy 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 Q o Final product review of final procedures; implementing calculations, and other final documents o Review and follow-up of specific corrective actions re-quired as a result of design-related deviations and defic- A iencies identified by DAP or QOC. 4.h O TN-85-6262/20 Page i of 17
9 .
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEGUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITES 3.1 Definitions 3.1.1 In Process Review "In-Process Review" is defined as the review of any Project document or other A
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 activities (e.g.,
engineering walkdowns) by third-party personnel is included in this definition.
3.1.2 Final Produet Review
" Final Product Review" is defined as the review of any document or design-related information that has been finalized, opproved, and issued by the Project for use without restrictions, including portions of interim use, draft, or other documentation where it is clear that those portions are approved for use without ld restrictions.
l 3.l.3 Corrective Action l
For the purpose of this procedure, " Corrective Action" is defined as on action required to correct design-related deviations, deficiencies or adverse 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 Design Adequacy Program and will take the form of documentation or hardware modifications.
Corrective Actions will be implemented by the Project and, to the extent d
l TN-85-6262/20 Page 2 of 17 I
e COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE V Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 necessary, followed by the DAP to ensure that corrective actions will prevent recurrence. One Corrective Action may be developed to resolve multiple DIRs (see DAP-2 and DAP-8).
d 3.1.4 Project
' Project" refers to TUCCO ond other organizations under the direction of the TUGCO.
3.1.5 OOC
" OOC" refers to the third-party Ovality of Construction Program.
. 3.1.6 Deviation, Deficiency, and Programmatic Deficiency Refer to DAP 2 for definition of terms such as deviation, deficiency and progrommotic deficiency.
3.2 Responsibilities 1
3.2.1 Review Team Leader The Review Team Leoder (RTL) is responsible for determining and approving the odequacy of corrective actions defined by the Project tc resolve each DAP-identified or OOC-identified deviation, deficiency, or odverse trend having l design significance. When permitted by this procedure, he may delegate this responsibility to the DAP Monoger or the Construction Quality Interface Monager. The RTL may recommend corrective action to the Project subject to -
SRT opproval when required by this procedure. He may permit the DAP Manager a
TN-85-6262/20 Page 3 of 17 l
i
i 9
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 or the Construction Quality Interface Manager to make such recommendations to the Project when SRT opproval is not required.
3.2.2 DAP Monoger and Construction Quality Interface Monoger The DAP Manager and the Construction Quality Interface Manager determine the odequocy of corrective actions and make recommendations for corrective actions when delegated this responsibility by the Review Team Leader.
3.2.3 Discipline Coordinators Discipline Coordinators are responsible for opproving the method of review for oli overview activities within their discipline and ensuring that those reviews are
, O conducted in occordance with this procedure. For specific corrective actions, the Discipline Coordinators are responsible for obtaining descriptions of the corrective actions from the Project and ensuring that corrective action evoluo-tions are performed and documented in accordance 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 accordonce with this procedure, developing the oppropriate documentation, and designating the appropriate file distribution for the documentation.
l O
TN-85-6262/20 Page 4 of 17 l
1 COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 4.0 INSTRUCTION 4.1 Sources of Overview Requirements Overview of Project octivities by DAP personnel results from the following sources:
o CPRT commitments in the CPRT program plan to have third-party overview of specific project activities o Project activities conducted to resolve external source issues o Corrective action resulting from deviations, deficiencies and adverse trends having design significance that are identified by the DAP or OOC.
4.2 Review Methods l
The review methods to be employed in DAP third-party overview activities are l
described in this section. For o particular overview activity, the appropriate Discipline Coordinator shall determine the opplicability 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 O
TN-85-6262/20 Page 5 of 17
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 oction activities. Typical activities that are included in this review category are os follows:
o Review of draft action plans that define the scope and general approach of significant work activities to be performed by the Project.
o Review of draft procedures and instructions that are being formulated to define the precise methods of imple-mentation and control of significont work activities 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 s the early implementation phases of significont work oc-
) tivities.
In Process Reviews are initiated upon mutual agreement 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 the desires of the requesting organization. ,
in Process Reviews are not performed to formalized checklists but shall assess conformance to the following basic occeptance criteria:
o items reviewed are in compliance with CPSES licensing commitments, o items reviewed are occurately presented and are in com-pliance with the criteria and iment of the DAP.
o Scopes are sufficiently defined to justify the desired conclusions.
O TN-85-6262/20 Page 6 of.17
l COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 3
o Sampling opproaches and methods, where utilized, are odequate to justify the desired conclusions.
o Methods are technically sound and conform to good engin-eering practice.
o Procedures are sufficiently detailed to achieve their in-tended 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 becomes effective on the opproval 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 activity 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 occordance with Procedures DAP-4 and DAP-8. Implementing and output 1
document reviews shall be performed following the DAP review procedures defined in Procedures DAP-S and DAP-6, os 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 details of implementation.
o Selected implementing documents (e.g., calculations, de-signs) prepared in occordance with the above procedures.
The bases for selection (i.e., number, type and method of selection) shall be documented by the oppropriate Disci-pline Coordinator. As a minimum selection criterion, a sufficient number and variety of implementing documents O. shall be selected to assess the full breadth of the as-sociated procedures.
TN-85-6262/20 Poge 7 of 17
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
(
s Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 o All documents related to the specific resolution of signifi-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 Adequacy of the work performed in terms of technical methods and occurocy, control and interface.
Items found not to be in compliance with applicable criteria and commitments shall be indicated as "UNSAT" on checklists, and DIR forms shall be prepared in accordance with DAP 2.
d 4.3 Corrective Actions 4.3.I Defining Corrective Actions The Project is responsible for defining corrective oction for deviations, deficien-1 l cies and adverse trends having design significance. The Discipline Coordinator responsible for the DIR (see DAP-2) that identifies a deviation, deficiency or odverse trend shall obtain from the Project a proposed corrective oction for that DIR or multiple DIRs which are addressed by the some corrective action. The proposed corrective oction 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 wish to propose o corrective action, the Discipline Coordinator shall cause the proposed corrective oction to be documented in a comparable level of detail, in either case the proposed corrective action shall be evoluoted in occordance with Section 4.3.2 of this pro'cedure.
TN-85-6262/20 Page 8 of 17
i l
COMANCFE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 4.3.2 Evoluotion of Corrective Actions Definition -
The oppropriate 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 o DIR, one evoluotion may be used to cover multiple proposed octions. It is also occeptable to perform one evoluotion for o proposed corrective action that oddresses multiple DIR's. If an adverse trend is identified, the corrective action shall include those actions required to preclude recurrence of the problem. A Corrective Action Evoluotion (CAE) cover sheet and form (Attachments A and B, respectively) shall be completed for each evoluotion.
When on issue Resolution Report (IRR) has been prepared, Section 5.0 (see DAP 8, Attachment E) of the IRR shall replace the Corrective Action Evoluotion form
! N (Attochment B).
l
! The identification number assigned to each Corrective Action Evoluotion shall l
l consist of "DAP-CAE" plus the specific DIR number to which the proposed corrective action opplies, or "DAP-CAE" plus the engineering evoluotion Number for the IRR. This number shall be placed on both the cover sheet and the evoluotion form.
The following guidance is provided for completing the form:
1.0 Description The description of the deviation, deficiency or adverse trend shall be provided using the description contained in the DIR. The description shall also include a statement as to whether the deviation or discreponey is programmatic.
l 2.0 Description of Corrective Action 1
) A summary of the proposed corrective oction shall be l provided. The source of the proposed corrective action (i.e., DAP or Project) shall be stated.
TN-85-6262/20 Page 9 of 17 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: 3 1 3.0 Acceptance Criteria The minimum conditions necessary for the proposed cor-rective oction to be found acceptable shall be listed.
4.0 Evoluotion A statement shall be made on whether the proposed corrective action will correct (or hos 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).
5.0 Conclusion A conclusion shall be drawn as to whether the proposed corrective action is occeptable.
6.0 Attochments Attachments shall be used as necessary if the corrective action evoluotion form does not provide odequate room to meet the above requirements.
Upon completion of the corrective action evoluotion, the Discipline Coordinator shall sign and ottoch a corrective action evoluotion cover sheet (Atrochment A) which identifies the Corrective Action Evoluotion or IRR by number, and forward the evoluotion to the DAP Monoger (or Construction Quality Interfoce Q
Monoger, where appropriate). The DAP Monoger or Construction Quelity Interfoce Monoger shall review the evoluotion to determine whether he concurs in the conclusion. He shall resolve his comments with the Discipline Coordinator
~
ond 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 Interfoce Monoger) shall forward the evoluotion or IRR to the oppropriate Project personnel.
O TN-85-6262/20 Page 10 of 17
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: 3 Note: The DAP evoluotion of a corrective action definition is not required when the corrective action 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 oction is due to one of the following conditions:
o Safety significant deficiencies identified by the DAP o Unclassified deviations, IRR's or programmatic deficiencies identified by the DAP ld o Design deviations identified by the DAP that involve a 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).
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 Corrective Action Evoluotion or IRR to appropriate Project personnel.
4.3.4 SRT Approval SRT opproval is required where on opproved corrective action consists of a corrective oction originally proposed by the DAP that involves one of the following:
o Programmatic corrective actions -
TN-85-6262/20 Page iI of 17
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE
""*' ^"-'
(J ' ^" " " " " ' " " ' ^ ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' " " " ' " " " "'
THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 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 the evoluotion cover sheet and submit the Corrective Action Evoluotion to the SRT and provide o copy of the Corrective Action Evoluotion or IRR to oppropriate Project personnel.
b 4.3.5 Interaction Between DAP and Project Personnel The Project may obtain clorification of a DlR from DAP personnel at any time and DAP personnel may obtain clarification of proposed corrective actions at any time. Such clarifications may be oral and need not be documented unless it is required by DAP 12 or is material to understanding the odequacy of the Q
corrective action. In any case, the exchange of such clarifications shall not offect whether o proposed corrective action is considered to be Project-originated or DAP-recommended.
4.3.6 Overview of Corrective Action implenientation Third-party overview of Project corrective action implementation is intended to accomplish the following objectives:
o To ensure that the corrective actions for each unclassified deviation, IRR and programmatic deficiency have been effectively 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 TN-85-6262/20 Page 12 of 17 l - . _ _ . , . - , _ _ . - - -
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 licensing commitments have been effectively imple-mented.
o To ensure that the corrective actions for each specific deviation that meets the reportability criterio 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 actions in the opplicable 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 accomplish this will vary depending upon the nature of the corrective action 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 technical 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 adequacy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for each DAP-identified design deficiency. Such confirm-otion shall be accomplished by review of the design documentation that reflects the implementation of the corrective action, and, if opplicable, the documentation that demonstrates that the as-constructed condition of the plant is in conformance with the revised design documentation.
o The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the odequocy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for each specific DAP-identified design deviation that in.
volves a failure to meet FSAR criteria or commitments, other licensing commitments, or NRC regulations (i.e.,
O' IOCFR). The nature and extent of the confirmatory .
I TN-85-6262/20 Pogo 13 of 17 1
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 octivities will vary depending upon the nature of the corrective oction defined for each design deviation. In this regard, the following considerations shall apply:
- The extent to which the defined corrective action is specific (i.e., not subject to interpretation with respect to implementation).
- 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 action is, of itself, dispositive of the underlying design deviation (i.e., not dependent upon additional analyses or evoluo-tions).
The confirmatory activities will include, at 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 as-constructed condition of the plant is in conformance with the revised design documentation.
If the SRT has concurred with a defined corrective action A that resolves o deviation through a justifiable change to 4.au existing FSAR or licensing commitments and if such i
' change does not involve o redesign or reonalysis, DAP confirmatory overview shall not opply.
o The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the odequocy of the Project's implementation of corrective actions for any other design deviations that meet the reportability criterio set forth in IOCFR50.55(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 criteria or commitments, o The Discipline Coordinator shall confirm the adequacy of the Project's implementation of corrective octions for each DAP-identified unclassified deviation, IRR or programmatic deficiency. Such corrective octions are expected to be defined in the form of revisions to Project d l
policies, programs, and implementing procedures or instructions related to design activitie,s, including but not TN-85-6262/20 Page 14 of 17
4 COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 limited to design control. DAP confirmatory activities will be accomplished through reviews of the revised documents that reflect such changes, o The Discipline Coordinator shall determine the need for and extent of corrective oction overviews for any other deviations using the some considerations described above for the case of a failure to meet FSAR criteria.
o The above general requirements shall also be applied by the DAP to deviations and deficiencies with design sig-nificance identified by the QOC.
As a minimum, on engineering evaluation shall be prepared to document the completion of the DAP overview octivity for the scope of each corrective action. The engineering evoluotion shall describe the sope, 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 format is specified by memorandum by the Discipline Coordinator. The DAP overview octivities may be documented within related DAP topical engineering evaluations or within specific engineering evaluations initiated for the sole purpose of documenting the evaluation of CPSES project corrective action implementation. The engineering evaluation shall describe the DAP overview activities os well 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 opplied by the Civil / Structural /Mechonical (CSM) Review Team Leader to design deviations and deficiencies (including programmatic deficiencies) identified by CSM personnel in the course of implementing the TN-85-6262/20 Poge 15 of 17
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 Action Plans associated with CSM TRT issues. The RTL election to use this procedure may be in the form of a memorandum to appropriate personnel advising them of the opplicability 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 Monoger (or Construction Ovality Interface Monoger) 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 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 meet this requirement. This documentation shall be placed in the DAP Files in occordance with DAP-14.
5.2 Final Product Reviews g.
Final Product Reviews shall be documented by engineering evaluations and, where appropriate, formalized checklists. Calculations or inspection reoorts
! may also be originated to support the engineering evoluotion conclusions.
! Discrepancies identified in the course of final product reviews shall be docu-mented on DIR forms in accordance with DAP-2. Documentation resulting from
. final product reviews shall be placed in the DAP Files in occordance with DAP-l 14.
l TN-85-6262/20 Page 16 of 17 i
i t
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE O Number: DAP-20
Title:
DAP OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES PERFORMED BY THE CPSES PROJECT OR OTHER EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS Revision: 3 5.3 Corrective Action Definition Evoluotions Corrective Action Evoluotions shall be documented and given identification numbers os required by this procedure. This documentation shall be placed in the DAP Files in accordance with DAP-14.
5.4 Corrective Action Overview Corrective action reviews shall be documented by formal checklists and/or engineering evoluotions. 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. Results of confirming overview of
) corrective action activities shall be reported by the Discipline Coordinator as part of the Discipline-Specific Results Report or in a supplement to that report.
l
\
l l
l O
TN-85-6262/20 Page 17 of 17
ATTACHMENT A CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION ;
NUMBER: DAP-CAE-(Enter DIR Number) or DAP-E-(Enter Engineering Evoluotion Number for IRR)
Revision A
Proposed Corrective Action is:
] Accepted
[ Not Accepted Date Discipline Coordinator Approved: Date DAP Monoger/ Construction Quality Interface Monoger 1
RTL APPROVAL REQUIRED? Yes No Approved: Date Review Team Leoder
~
SRT APPROVAL REQUIRED? ]Yes No O
TNT-85-6262/20 A-l
ATTACHMENT 0 Evoluotion Number: D AP-C AE-
, COMANCIE PEAK ADEQUACY PROGRAM Rev:
CORRECTIVE ACTION EVALUATION Number of Sheets:
Issue /Discreponey
Title:
l Description of luue/Discreponey:
Structure (s), System (s), or Component (s) Affected:
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING. USE ATTACHMENTS AS PECESSARY.
Description of Corrective Action:
Acceptonce Criterio:
N
References:
Evoluotion:
i l
l l
l l
l
Conclusion:
( 0 Acceptable D Not Acceptoble Prepored By/Date / Checked By/Date /
FORM DAP.20 2
. _ . - . ._.