ML20138P259: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
StriderTol Bot insert
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 19: Line 19:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:_-
{{#Wiki_filter:_-
PROCEDURE     j REVISION                     PAGE TEXAS UTi!JTIES GENERATING CO NUMBER      (
PROCEDURE j
CPSES ry         ;
REVISION PAGE NUMBER
4                          1 of 2 CP-QP-17.0                     APR g 7 )g CJ n             .        I
(
                                                                  "        '          *-d v             4 CORRECTIVE ACTION                                                         '0 ATE APPROVED BY:       /         g/gv                 ///
TEXAS UTi!JTIES GENERATING CO CPSES ry 1 of 2 CP-QP-17.0 4
                                                                                                  'OATE
APR g 7 )g CJ I
n
*-d v 4
CORRECTIVE ACTION
'0 ATE APPROVED BY:
/
g/gv
///
'OATE


==1.0         REFERENCES==
==1.0 REFERENCES==
1-A CP-QP-15.7, " Tracking of Audi t Reports / Corrective Action Reports" C0\\TR0' _ED COPY 2.0 GENERAL CONTROL No. 48 604 2.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This procedure describes the me thods utilized by TUGC0 QA in reviewing construction deficiencies and nonconfonnances for the purpose of providing corrective action to preclude repetition of significant conditions Q
adverse to quality.
The scope of this procedure encmpasses safety-related construction activities at CPSES that are identified as deficient or nonconfonning and which nay require corrective action.
2.2 RESPONSIBILITY The Quality Assurance Supervisor and the Quality Engineering Supervisor are responsible for the evaluation of the need for corrective action in a systsatic, timely and ef fective
: manner, as described herein, wi.th in their area of responsibili ty 3'. 0 PROCEDURE 3.1 BASIC ACTIVITIES Quali ty Assu rance/Quali ty Engineering personnel are routinely involved in the following basic activities:
l 8511070023 851016 PDR FOIA GARDEBS-59 PDR ruccocA


1-A        CP-QP-15.7, " Tracking of Audi t Reports / Corrective Action Reports" 2.0        GENERAL C0\TR0' _ED COPY 2.1          PURPOSE AND SCOPE CONTROL No. 48 604 This procedure describes the me thods utilized by TUGC0 QA      in    reviewing    construction      deficiencies    and nonconfonnances for the purpose of providing corrective action to preclude repetition of significant conditions Q                            adverse to quality. The scope of this procedure encmpasses safety-related construction activities at CPSES that are identified as deficient or nonconfonning and which nay require corrective action.
~
2.2        RESPONSIBILITY The Quality Assurance Supervisor and the Quality Engineering Supervisor are responsible for the evaluation of the need for corrective action in a systsatic, timely and ef fective manner,    as    described herein, wi.th in their area of responsibili ty 3'. 0      PROCEDURE 3.1        BASIC ACTIVITIES Quali ty    Assu rance/Quali ty  Engineering    personnel    are routinely involved in the following basic activities:
PROCEDURE ISSUE REVISION PAGE NUMBER DATE TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
l    ,'.                      8511070023 851016 PDR  FOIA GARDEBS-59        PDR ruccocA                                          .
CPSES 2 of 2
 
(]
      ~             .
CP-Q P-17. 0 4
PROCEDURE         REVISION       ISSUE          PAGE NUMBER                           DATE TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.
,g a.
CPSES                                                                   2 of 2
Review of nonconfomances and unsatisfactory conditions documented on Nonconformance
(]                                                     CP-Q P-17. 0         4
: Reports, Inspection Reports, and QC Deficiency Reports.
                                                                                                ,g
b.
: a. Review of nonconfomances and unsatisfactory conditions documented     on   Nonconformance     Reports,   Inspection Reports, and QC Deficiency Reports.
Frequent discussions with cognizant personnel.
: b. Frequent discussions with cognizant personnel.
c.
: c. Monitoring / Surveillance     of     selected   Construction Activities.
Monitoring / Surveillance of selected Construction Activities.
: d. Review of Field Design Changes / Deviations.
d.
The results of these activities fonn the basic background data for evaluating conditions which may require corrective action. Where feasible, the evaluation results are tracked using trend analysis techniques as an objective method of ascertaining the need for corrective action.
Review of Field Design Changes / Deviations.
3.2       REPORTING 3.2.1     Quarterly Trend Analysis Reports
The results of these activities fonn the basic background data for evaluating conditions which may require corrective action.
'  O                                    Each calendar quarter a trend analysis report is prepared for the QE Supervi sor.         This trend analysis     is ba sed on the review of deficiencies reported on Inspection Reports, Deficiency Reports, and Nonconfomance Reports and certain field design changes and deviations. The Site QA Manager will issue Corrective Action Requests per Paragraph 3.2.2 for trends identified as adverse to quality.
Where feasible, the evaluation results are tracked using trend analysis techniques as an objective method of ascertaining the need for corrective action.
3.2.2     Corrective Action Request When conditions adverse to quality are identified through the   activities     in   Paragraph 3.1     that, due to       their significance and/or repeti tive na tu re, require immediate attention the Site QA Manager shall issue a Corrective Action Request (CAR)         in a fomal letter to appropriate management pe rsonnel .       The CAR shall specify a date by which written response is required from the addressee.
3.2 REPORTING 3.2.1 Quarterly Trend Analysis Reports O
Implementation of stated corrective action shall be verified by Site QA, this verification will be documented and the
Each calendar quarter a trend analysis report is prepared for the QE Supervi sor.
                                    . responsible manager notified as to the acceptability of corrective action by memo from the Site QA Manager.
This trend analysis is ba sed on the review of deficiencies reported on Inspection Reports, Deficiency Reports, and Nonconfomance Reports and certain field design changes and deviations.
Tracking of open         CAR's   will   be   in accordance with Reference 1-A.
The Site QA Manager will issue Corrective Action Requests per Paragraph 3.2.2 for trends identified as adverse to quality.
            }
3.2.2 Corrective Action Request When conditions adverse to quality are identified through the activities in Paragraph 3.1 that, due to their significance and/or repeti tive na tu re, require immediate attention the Site QA Manager shall issue a Corrective Action Request (CAR) in a fomal letter to appropriate management pe rsonnel.
TUCCO OA r                                                                                         -    .                    1}}
The CAR shall specify a date by which written response is required from the addressee.
Implementation of stated corrective action shall be verified by Site QA, this verification will be documented and the responsible manager notified as to the acceptability of corrective action by memo from the Site QA Manager.
Tracking of open CAR's will be in accordance with Reference 1-A.
}
TUCCO OA r
1}}

Latest revision as of 19:23, 11 December 2024

Rev 4 to Procedure CP-QP-17.0, Corrective Action
ML20138P259
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak, 05000000
Issue date: 04/27/1984
From: Vega A
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138M609 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-59 CP-QP-17.0, NUDOCS 8511070023
Download: ML20138P259 (2)


Text

_-

PROCEDURE j

REVISION PAGE NUMBER

(

TEXAS UTi!JTIES GENERATING CO CPSES ry 1 of 2 CP-QP-17.0 4

APR g 7 )g CJ I

n

  • -d v 4

CORRECTIVE ACTION

'0 ATE APPROVED BY:

/

g/gv

///

'OATE

1.0 REFERENCES

1-A CP-QP-15.7, " Tracking of Audi t Reports / Corrective Action Reports" C0\\TR0' _ED COPY 2.0 GENERAL CONTROL No. 48 604 2.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This procedure describes the me thods utilized by TUGC0 QA in reviewing construction deficiencies and nonconfonnances for the purpose of providing corrective action to preclude repetition of significant conditions Q

adverse to quality.

The scope of this procedure encmpasses safety-related construction activities at CPSES that are identified as deficient or nonconfonning and which nay require corrective action.

2.2 RESPONSIBILITY The Quality Assurance Supervisor and the Quality Engineering Supervisor are responsible for the evaluation of the need for corrective action in a systsatic, timely and ef fective

manner, as described herein, wi.th in their area of responsibili ty 3'. 0 PROCEDURE 3.1 BASIC ACTIVITIES Quali ty Assu rance/Quali ty Engineering personnel are routinely involved in the following basic activities:

l 8511070023 851016 PDR FOIA GARDEBS-59 PDR ruccocA

~

PROCEDURE ISSUE REVISION PAGE NUMBER DATE TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING CO.

CPSES 2 of 2

(]

CP-Q P-17. 0 4

,g a.

Review of nonconfomances and unsatisfactory conditions documented on Nonconformance

Reports, Inspection Reports, and QC Deficiency Reports.

b.

Frequent discussions with cognizant personnel.

c.

Monitoring / Surveillance of selected Construction Activities.

d.

Review of Field Design Changes / Deviations.

The results of these activities fonn the basic background data for evaluating conditions which may require corrective action.

Where feasible, the evaluation results are tracked using trend analysis techniques as an objective method of ascertaining the need for corrective action.

3.2 REPORTING 3.2.1 Quarterly Trend Analysis Reports O

Each calendar quarter a trend analysis report is prepared for the QE Supervi sor.

This trend analysis is ba sed on the review of deficiencies reported on Inspection Reports, Deficiency Reports, and Nonconfomance Reports and certain field design changes and deviations.

The Site QA Manager will issue Corrective Action Requests per Paragraph 3.2.2 for trends identified as adverse to quality.

3.2.2 Corrective Action Request When conditions adverse to quality are identified through the activities in Paragraph 3.1 that, due to their significance and/or repeti tive na tu re, require immediate attention the Site QA Manager shall issue a Corrective Action Request (CAR) in a fomal letter to appropriate management pe rsonnel.

The CAR shall specify a date by which written response is required from the addressee.

Implementation of stated corrective action shall be verified by Site QA, this verification will be documented and the responsible manager notified as to the acceptability of corrective action by memo from the Site QA Manager.

Tracking of open CAR's will be in accordance with Reference 1-A.

}

TUCCO OA r

1