CORR Guidelines - IAEA · CORR Guidelines. CORR Guidelines. AfGHAnistAn AlBAniA AlGeRiA AnGOlA...
106
CORR Guidelines Preparing and Conducting Review Missions of Construction Project Readiness for Nuclear Power Plants Vienna, December 2013 Services Series 24 @
Transcript of CORR Guidelines - IAEA · CORR Guidelines. CORR Guidelines. AfGHAnistAn AlBAniA AlGeRiA AnGOlA...
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCYVIENNA
ISSN 1816–9309
CORR GuidelinesPreparing and Conducting Review Missions of Construction Project Readiness for Nuclear Power Plants
Vienna, December 2013
Services Ser ies 24
@ CO
RR
Guidelines
CORR Guidelines
AfGHAnistAnAlBAniAAlGeRiAAnGOlAARGentinAARMeniAAustRAliAAustRiAAZeRBAijAnBAHRAinBAnGlAdesHBelARusBelGiuMBeliZeBeninBOliViABOsniA And HeRZeGOVinABOtswAnABRAZilBulGARiABuRKinA fAsOBuRundiCAMBOdiACAMeROOnCAnAdACentRAl AfRiCAn
RePuBliCCHAdCHileCHinACOlOMBiACOnGOCOstA RiCACÔte d’iVOiReCROAtiACuBACyPRusCZeCH RePuBliCdeMOCRAtiC RePuBliC
Of tHe COnGOdenMARKdOMiniCAdOMiniCAn RePuBliCeCuAdOReGyPtel sAlVAdOReRitReAestOniAetHiOPiAfijifinlAndfRAnCeGABOnGeORGiAGeRMAnyGHAnAGReeCe
GuAteMAlAHAitiHOly seeHOnduRAsHunGARyiCelAndindiAindOnesiAiRAn, islAMiC RePuBliC Of iRAQiRelAndisRAelitAlyjAMAiCAjAPAnjORdAnKAZAKHstAnKenyAKOReA, RePuBliC OfKuwAitKyRGyZstAnlAO PeOPle’s deMOCRAtiC
RePuBliClAtViAleBAnOnlesOtHOliBeRiAliByAlieCHtensteinlitHuAniAluXeMBOuRGMAdAGAsCARMAlAwiMAlAysiAMAliMAltAMARsHAll islAndsMAuRitAniAMAuRitiusMeXiCOMOnACOMOnGOliAMOnteneGROMOROCCOMOZAMBiQueMyAnMARnAMiBiAnePAlnetHeRlAndsnew ZeAlAndniCARAGuAniGeRniGeRiAnORwAyOMAnPAKistAnPAlAu
PAnAMAPAPuA new GuineAPARAGuAyPeRuPHiliPPinesPOlAndPORtuGAlQAtARRePuBliC Of MOldOVAROMAniARussiAn fedeRAtiOnRwAndAsAn MARinOsAudi ARABiAseneGAlseRBiAseyCHellessieRRA leOnesinGAPOReslOVAKiAslOVeniAsOutH AfRiCAsPAinsRi lAnKAsudAnswAZilAndswedenswitZeRlAndsyRiAn ARAB RePuBliCtAjiKistAntHAilAndtHe fORMeR yuGOslAV
RePuBliC Of MACedOniAtOGOtRinidAd And tOBAGOtunisiAtuRKeyuGAndAuKRAineunited ARAB eMiRAtesunited KinGdOM Of
GReAt BRitAin And nORtHeRn iRelAnd
united RePuBliCOf tAnZAniA
united stAtes Of AMeRiCAuRuGuAyuZBeKistAnVeneZuelAViet nAMyeMenZAMBiAZiMBABwe
the following states are Members of the international Atomic energy Agency:
the Agency’s statute was approved on 23 October 1956 by the Conference on the statute of the iAeA held at united nations Headquarters, new york; it entered into force on 29 july 1957. the Headquarters of the Agency are situated in Vienna. its principal objective is “to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world’’.
iAeA seRViCes seRies no. 24
CORR GuidelinesPRePARinG And COnduCtinG ReView MissiOns
Of COnstRuCtiOn PROjeCt ReAdiness fOR nuCleAR POweR PlAnts
inteRnAtiOnAl AtOMiC eneRGy AGenCyViennA, 2013
CoPYrIGHt notICe
All iAeA scientific and technical publications are protected by the terms of the universal Copyright Convention as adopted in 1952 (Berne) and as revised in 1972 (Paris). the copyright has since been extended by the world intellectual Property Organization (Geneva) to include electronic and virtual intellectual property. Permission to use whole or parts of texts contained in iAeA publications in printed or electronic form must be obtained and is usually subject to royalty agreements. Proposals for non-commercial reproductions and translations are welcomed and considered on a case-by-case basis. enquiries should be addressed to the iAeA Publishing section at:
Marketing and sales unit, Publishing sectioninternational Atomic energy AgencyVienna international CentrePO Box 1001400 Vienna, Austriafax: +43 1 2600 29302tel.: +43 1 2600 22417email: [email protected] http://www.iaea.org/books
for further information on this publication, please contact:
nuclear Power engineering sectioninternational Atomic energy Agency
Vienna international CentrePO Box 100
1400 Vienna, Austriaemail: [email protected]
© iAeA, 2013Printed by the iAeA in Austria
december 2013
CORR Guidelines — PRePARinG And COnduCtinG ReView MissiOns Of COnstRuCtiOn PROjeCt ReAdiness fOR nuCleAR POweR PlAnts
iAeA, ViennA, 2013iAeA/sVs/24
issn 1816–9309© iAeA, 2013
Printed by the iAeA in Austriadecember 2013
FOREWORD
The construction readiness review (CORR) mission for nuclear power plant projects has been established with the aim of conducting peer reviews of construction projects related to nuclear power plants. Such a mission provides a detailed assessment of readiness for construction, construction progress, readiness for turnover, as well as recommendations for improvement. Organizations in Member States, such as nuclear utilities, owners, regulators and technical support organizations, can benefit from such reviews. A team of international experts with complementing specialities will conduct the CORR mission. The review is based on appropriate IAEA publications, such as IAEA Safety Standards Series Guides and IAEA Nuclear Energy Series publications, as well as on internationally recognized project and construction management guides. Mission findings are summarized in a mission report, which includes a list of recommendations, suggestions and identified good practices. The review is not intended to be a regulatory inspection or an audit against international codes and standards. Rather, it is a peer review aimed at improving implementation processes and procedures through an exchange of technical experiences and practices at the working level. The mission is applicable at any stage of a nuclear power plant construction project, although two specific phases are targeted: (1) start of construction mission (Phase 1 mission) and (2) an in-progress mission (Phase 2 mission). Missions are initiated when official requests are submitted by Member States through the appropriate IAEA channels. The IAEA officer responsible for this publication was J.H. Moore of the Division of Nuclear Power.
EDITORIAL NOTE
This publication has been prepared from the original material as submitted by the authors. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the IAEA, the governments of the nominating Member States or the nominating organizations.
This publication has not been edited by the editorial staff of the IAEA. It does not address questions of responsibility, legal or otherwise, for acts or omissions on the part of any person.
The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries.
The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA.
The authors are responsible for having obtained the necessary permission for the IAEA to reproduce, translate or use material from sources already protected by copyrights.
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
1.1. PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION
GUIDELINES ................................................................................................. 1
1.2. CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION OBJECTIVES ............ 1
1.3. CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION SCOPE ....................... 2
1.4. ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT ..................................................... 2
2. ORGANIZATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW
MISSION .................................................................................................... 3
2.1. OVERVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW
(CORR) PROCESS ......................................................................................... 3
2.2. PREPARATORY PHASE AND PREPARATORY MEETING ....................... 4
2.2.1. Appointment of construction review team leader ................................ 6
2.2.2. Objectives and scope of specific construction readiness review
mission............................................................................................... 6
2.2.3. Review mission agenda ...................................................................... 8
2.2.4. Terms of reference ............................................................................. 9
2.2.5. Advance information package ............................................................ 9
2.2.6. Code of conduct ................................................................................. 9
2.2.7. Logistics .......................................................................................... 10
2.2.8. Non-disclosure agreements............................................................... 10
2.2.9. Language barriers ............................................................................. 11
2.2.10. Contact with construction review team during preparation ............... 11
2.2.11. Preparatory meeting ......................................................................... 11
2.2.12. Counterpart preparation .................................................................... 11
2.3. REVIEW MISSION ...................................................................................... 11
2.3.1. General guidelines for review mission .............................................. 11
2.3.2. Briefing meeting/conference call ...................................................... 12
2.3.3. Opening session ............................................................................... 13
2.3.4. Technical sessions ............................................................................ 14
2.3.5. Technical presentations .................................................................... 14
2.3.6. Technical visits ................................................................................ 15
2.3.7. Targeted reviews .............................................................................. 15
2.3.8. Construction review team meeting ................................................... 16
2.3.9. Closeout session ............................................................................... 16
2.3.10. Debriefing meeting/conference call .................................................. 17
2.4. FOLLOW-UP MISSION ............................................................................... 17
2.5. REPORTING AND DOCUMENTING .......................................................... 18
2.5.1. Mission report .................................................................................. 18
2.5.2. Issues and issue sheets ...................................................................... 18
2.5.3. Good practices and good performances ............................................ 19
3. REVIEW PRINCIPLES ..................................................................................... 20
3.1. REVIEW TECHNIQUES .............................................................................. 20
3.1.1. Use of review techniques.................................................................. 20
3.1.2. Review of written material ............................................................... 21
3.1.3. Presentations, discussion and interviews ........................................... 21
3.1.4. Direct observation of performance, status and activities ................... 22
3.2. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ................................................................... 23
3.2.1. Background information ................................................................... 23
3.2.2. Information provided by counterpart ................................................ 23
3.3. DEVELOPMENT OF FINDINGS ................................................................. 23
3.4. WORKING WITH COUNTERPART ............................................................ 24
APPENDIX I: SUGGESTED CONTENT OF ADVANCED INFORMATION
PACKAGE ............................................................................................... 25
APPENDIX II: SUBJECTS FOR CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW
MISSION, AND ASSOCIATED REFERENCES...................................... 27
APPENDIX III: MISSION REPORT TEMPLATE ............................................................. 58
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 85
DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................................... 91
CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW ............................................................ 93
1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION GUIDELINES
A construction readiness review (CORR) is an assessment of an NPP project’s construction
preparedness, based on counterpart requirements, interviews, analysis and observations. It
can be held at various project stages. Specific review stages may be prior to start of major
construction, major milestones, or as otherwise requested by the counterpart. The assessment
includes a review of planning of major milestones, preparedness for subsequent phases,
assessment of major risks and issues, and engineering and construction readiness.
These guidelines provide structure for a CORR mission. They are addressed principally to the
construction review team, but also provide guidance to the mission counterpart in preparing
for the mission. Publications referenced in these guidelines provide additional information.
These mission guidelines are designed to be applicable to both new construction and major
refurbishments. CORR missions are desirable for new NPP construction projects (e.g. first-
of-a-kind, first-in-a-country, first on a particular site etc.), and whenever a counterpart
desires independent feedback on NPP project readiness to proceed to its construction phase.
Subsequent projects (e.g. second or third unit, etc.) on a particular site constructed by an
established project team might benefit from a CORR mission targeted at lessons learned from
previous construction activities.
The guidelines are intended to assist construction review team and counterpart members in
performing the review. They are not exhaustive and should not limit reviewer investigations,
but rather should be considered as illustrative of typical requirements for successful
construction projects for which such reviews are carried out. Reviewers will apply judgement
and experience to decide what topics require more in-depth evaluation during the mission.
1.2. CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION OBJECTIVES
CORR missions are comprehensive reviews directly addressing strategic and key elements
associated with implementing NPP construction projects. They are conducted by a team of
international experts with direct experience applicable to the areas of review. Judgements of
compliance are made on the basis of IAEA publications (see references in this publication),
and on the combined judgement of the international review team.
The review is neither a regulatory inspection nor is it an audit against national or
international codes and standards. Rather, it is aimed at improving the implementation,
procedures and practices being followed through an exchange of technical experience and
practices (peer review).
Objectives of Construction Readiness review missions are to:
• Assess strategy, organization, leadership, management vision, goals, methods and
processes;
• Identify project management, engineering, procurement, quality management, human
resources, construction readiness, and construction completion assurance related issues
or concerns related to the project under review;
• Identify issues, make observations, and identify good practices related to the project
under review;
2
• Facilitate personal exchanges of experience.
To fulfil these objectives, the CORR mission aims to provide the counterpart with a mission
report providing:
• The team’s assessment of the state of construction readiness and processes related to
the project under review;
• Recommendations and suggestions for improvement in areas where performance may
appear to fall short of recognized international good practices;
• Good practices identified during the course of the review.
The process will provide counterpart experts, expert reviewers from Member States, and
IAEA staff with opportunities to broaden their experience and knowledge. It will also
provide key counterpart staff with an opportunity to discuss their practices with experts who
have experience in the same field.
1.3. CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION SCOPE
Construction Readiness review missions are focused on the project under review, and the
review basis and reference documents agreed to be used. They address project construction
readiness and associated aspects, unless there is a specific request from the counterpart to
include additional items. Such additional items might include, (1) specific design issues and
technologies (outside of design readiness), (2) project economic viability, (3) long term
investment strategies related to the NPP fleet (4) portions of other IAEA review services, or
others. Review missions typically do not discuss specific issues related to the choice of NPP
provider, or specific contract terms and conditions.
Scope definition occurs during the mission’s preparatory phase (see Section 2.2), and is
based upon mutual agreement of the construction readiness review team leader and
counterpart.
1.4. ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
Section 2 provides guidelines regarding overall CORR mission organization, from the
preparatory phase to follow-up missions.
Section 3 provides guidelines regarding principles and techniques to be applied during the
mission.
Appendix I provides suggested contents of an advance information package (AIP) to be
prepared by the counterpart.
Appendix II provides a list of potential subjects for scope definition of a specific CORR
mission. It is used as a discussion tool with the counterpart.
Appendix III provides a mission report template, including templates for issue sheets.
The above Appendixes are available in electronic form for preparation of specific mission
reports by the construction review team.
3
2. ORGANIZATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW MISSION
2.1. OVERVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW (CORR)
PROCESS
A construction readiness review mission is initiated based on a formal request through
official IAEA channels from an organization of a Member State (e.g. nuclear utility,
regulatory authority, technical support and design organization). Actions prior to this request
are not the object of, and are not discussed in, this guideline.
A construction readiness review mission is typically performed at one or both of the NPP
construction project phases shown in Table 1, with follow-ups as requested by the
counterpart.
TABLE 1. TYPICAL CORR MISSION PHASES AND TIMING
Phase Title Description/Timing
1 Construction Readiness Review
Phase I Mission Review
Prior to start of major construction activities (approx.
2 months prior). For new NPPs this would mean prior
to first concrete pour.
2 Construction Progress.
Phase II Mission Review
Done approx. at 30-50% construction stage (usually 2
months prior to first significant NPP system/area
handover)
Construction review related activities are based upon:
• Documentation describing processes applicable to the project under review including, but
not limited to, procedures and performance metrics in use or to be used during the
construction phase, corrective action processes, and documentation demonstrating how
they support the overall project;
• Interviews and discussions with counterpart staff and support organizations;
• Written procedures and methods associated with design, specification, procurement,
warehousing, installation, verification, validation, and testing of the project under review;
• Written documentation related to qualification of personnel, as well as systems, structures,
and components (SSCs) related to the project under review;
• Observations of planning, coordinating, and construction activities and associated
oversight processes
The review focuses on performance in technical areas, related regulatory requirements,
managerial aspects of policy implementation, control/coordination of related activities,
continuous review and improvement of activities, as well as document control.
The principles and guidance for the CORR mission service are those outlined in IAEA
publications and safety standards (see Refs [1] to [36]). In addition, other internationally
accepted project management or construction guides or standards (e.g. PMBOK,
4
Construction Industry Institute PDRI, PRINCE2, GAPPS, INPO etc.; see Refs [37] to [102])
may also be considered at the counterpart’s suggestion.
It is important to note that a CORR mission is a flexible service. The review areas, timing,
and review depth, can be tailored according to a counterpart’s request. Counterparts may
request for example reviews at different times during the construction project, or a review
towards the end of the construction project to assess completeness.
The CORR process is divided into three main phases, each with its own purpose and goals:
• Preparatory phase, which includes a formal meeting between IAEA staff members and
counterpart staff, called the preparatory meeting;
• Review phase, which consists of a review mission;
• Follow-up phase, which may include an optional follow-up mission, which focuses on
implementation of recommendations from the review mission.
Figure 1 provides an overview of the various tasks associated with a CORR mission.
2.2. PREPARATORY PHASE AND PREPARATORY MEETING
Preparation is key for CORR mission success. The preparatory phase addresses the following
topics (in approximate sequential order):
• Appointment of construction review team leader, and identification of counterpart
representative;
• Clarification of mission objectives and scope;
• Selection of construction review team;
• Establishment of review mission agenda;
• Provision of advance documents to the construction review team, i.e. terms of reference
and advance information package;
• Establishment of a code of conduct for adherence by the construction review team.
• Resolution of logistics issues (e.g. transportation, lodging, insurance, funding, fees, and
meeting rooms) for the review mission;
• Establishment and signature of non-disclosure agreements;
• Establishment of measures to be taken to address language barriers (i.e. translation of
review materials and/or translation services during the review mission).
Preparation should begin no later than six months prior to the review mission. This enables
each participant (from the construction review team and the counterpart) to plan for specific
activities and to conduct necessary research and study prior to the review mission.
5
FIG. 1. Overview of a Construction Readiness Review mission.
6
2.2.1. Appointment of construction review team leader
After a mission request for a CORR mission from a Member State has been received by the
IAEA, the IAEA designates a staff member as construction review team leader. The
counterpart nominates a contact person, the counterpart representative, with whom the
construction review team leader interfaces directly. All subsequent activities of the CORR
mission will be under the leadership and responsibility of these two individuals.
The construction review team leader is responsible for preparatory activities, acts as an
official liaison with the counterpart organization, chairs the review mission, prepares and
issues the mission report, and is responsible for follow-up activities. During the review
mission, the construction review team leader may delegate part of these tasks to a deputy, so
that he or she can concentrate on more strategic issues. In such cases, the delegation should
be made clear to all concerned participants.
2.2.2. Objectives and scope of specific construction readiness review mission
Exact objectives and scope of the specific CORR mission need to be stated precisely, based
on the construction readiness review mission request. These should clearly identify:
• Background information on why the CORR mission was requested and expectations;
• Project to be reviewed (designated as the project under review), including its scope of
work, boundaries, and interfaces;
• Project activities, functions, features to be assessed by the review, and those (if any) to
be specifically excluded;
• Review basis and reference documents against which the project under review will be
assessed. These should usually include any relevant IAEA Safety Guides, IAEA
Nuclear Energy Series Reports, and IAEA Technical Reports applicable to construction
and turnover. Other documents describing recognised international good practices, such
internationally accepted project management documents (e.g. PMBOK, Construction
Industry Institute PDRI, PRINCE2, GAPPS etc.) may be considered.
Potential IAEA references related to the review are listed as Refs [1] to [36]. Although
not the focus of this review, other published IAEA documents may also be referred to
if applicable.
Potential internationally recognized project management documents are listed as
Refs [37] to [102]. They may, with counterpart agreement, be utilized by the
construction review team in evaluating readiness of the project under review,
identifying potential best practices, or simply as background material. Identification of
such documents does not represent official IAEA endorsement or a complete list of
publications from the indicated organization. Other documents from other similar
organizations may also be utilized in the review.
The construction review team is composed of the construction review team leader and
typically eight to ten additional team members. A deputy team leader may be appointed if
necessary. Typical team composition includes a majority of external senior experts and one
or two IAEA staff members (the team leader and deputy team leader if applicable).
7
Composition and size of the team will usually depend on many factors, such as:
• Competencies needed for the review. Competencies may be identified based on project
characteristics (size, complexity etc.), on scope of work to be assessed, and on the
review basis and reference;
• Estimated volume of work for the review mission, based on a breakdown of work to be
performed during the review mission into well-defined technical sessions;
• Need to represent a wide scope of international practices. Team members should
represent a variety of national approaches to project management processes. Team
members should have, in addition to their particular area of expertise, knowledge of
some other national approaches and other relevant areas. Coupling this knowledge with
IAEA safety standards and other guidance publications allows good international
practices to be identified;
• Need to overcome possible language and/or cultural barriers. In such cases, a team
member familiar with the language and culture of the counterpart organization may be
of great benefit;
• Need to avoid conflicts of interest with the counterpart. Selection of team members
should consider their impartiality and relationship of team members’ organizations to
those of the counterpart. In particular, reviewers from the counterpart and dependent
organizations (e.g. suppliers) should not be included in the construction review team
without counterpart agreement. Also, reviewers from organizations considered to be
competitors of the counterpart’s organization or of major project suppliers should be
excluded from the review team unless specific counterpart agreement is obtained;
• Possible need of security vetting. Access to certain facilities and information may
require security vetting to be carried out on the construction review team. Responsibility
for identifying vetting requirements that allow such access to be granted lies with the
counterpart. Responsibility for providing information to satisfy these requirements lies
with the construction review team leader and team members. The counterpart is
subsequently responsible for handling the information provided and to ensure that the
vetting process is completed prior to the review mission.
Selection of team members is the responsibility of the construction review team leader;
however the team member list (with brief biographies) will be submitted to the counterpart
representative for acceptance.
Construction review team members are responsible for mission preparation by studying
relevant information provided by the counterpart in the advance information package,
preparing plans of their review, and formulating questions and comments prior to
commencing the mission.
If the construction review team leader and counterpart agree, observers can join the review
team. Normally an observer is either an IAEA staff member who needs to be trained for
subsequent construction readiness review missions, or a person from an organization that has
an upcoming construction readiness review mission. Observers may assist the construction
review team during the review mission. They are subject to the same rules and constraints
(e.g. code of conduct, non-disclosure agreement) as construction review team members.
Construction review team members should provide feedback on IAEA publications utilized
during the mission (e.g. which parts need to be updated, what issues could not be referenced
to standards), plus suggestions to help improve future missions.
8
2.2.3. Review mission agenda
The review mission should be conducted following a review mission agenda. The agenda
would typically make provision for and plan different types of work sessions:
• Briefing meeting for the construction review team, to make sure that all team members
have the required background information.
• A plenary opening session, where the construction review team and the counterpart
introduce each other and present the objectives and scope of the construction review
mission.
• Several technical sessions, where the construction review team and the counterpart
discuss technical aspects of the project under review. Different sub-types of technical
sessions may be identified, such as:
o Technical presentations, where the counterpart presents aspects of the project to
the construction review team;
o Technical visits that allow the construction review team to collect facts that may
be otherwise difficult to determine from documentation and/or presentations.
This activity includes one on one or group interviews with applicable project
personnel;
o Targeted reviews that allow the construction review team to study selected topics
in more detail.
• Construction review team meetings (involving only construction review team
members) allow team members to share information and understanding, to compare
points of view, and to reach a team consensus on questions and findings.
• A plenary closeout session, where the construction review team presents findings, the
counterpart expresses their point of view, and the construction review team adjusts its
findings as appropriate.
• Debriefing meeting (involving only construction review team members), where the
team develops a quasi-final state for the mission report, and members provide feedback
and lessons learned to the team leader to help improve future missions.
Section 2.3 provides specific guidelines for each of these work session types. The following
are suggestions pertaining to the review mission agenda:
• Development and modification of the review mission agenda needs close cooperation
between, and the agreement of, the construction review team leader and the
counterpart representative, as both sides will need to do extensive preparation prior to
the mission;
• Technical sessions may be a plenary session (i.e. involving the complete construction
review team) or a breakout session (i.e. involving only a part of the construction review
team). Plenary sessions facilitate sharing of information within the team. Breakout
sessions optimise the use of team resources when many subjects need to be covered, or
when team members have very different and exclusive competencies. It is usually the
responsibility of the construction review team leader to decide which subjects will
need to be covered by plenary sessions, and which by breakout sessions;
• Enough time needs to be devoted to construction review team meetings, so that
findings and conclusions are those of the team, and not only of individual team
members. Such meetings should be held at the end of each day. They may be short on
the first days, but as the review mission gets closer to the closeout session, more time is
necessary to harmonise viewpoints and finalise the findings list;
9
• Enough time should be given to the counterpart to provide adequate answers, however
the counterpart should anticipate that issues will arise and should have adequate
resources and competencies available to respond rapidly.
2.2.4. Terms of reference
During the preparatory phase, the construction review team leader should prepare draft terms
of reference for the CORR mission. This should be discussed with the counterpart during the
preparatory meeting. The terms of reference should contain the following items:
• Background information;
• Objectives and scope of the review;
• Date and place for the review;
• Names and resumes of construction review team leader and counterpart
representative;
• Names and resumes of construction review team members;
• Review basis and reference. This includes selection of specific codes, guides and
standards to be applied during the review mission (defined by counterpart);
• Review subjects (i.e. project under review and targeted areas);
• Work scope of each construction review team member (if applicable);
• Provisional review mission agenda;
• Reporting structure;
• Contents of advance information package (AIP).
2.2.5. Advance information package
The advance information package is the set of documents that the counterpart makes
available to construction review team members during the preparatory phase. It should, as a
minimum, contain programmatic type information for each reviewed area and should be
written in English. Suggested contents of an AIP are given in Appendix I.
The counterpart should start preparing the AIP early enough to be submitted at least two
months prior to the review mission in electronic format. Hard copies should be available at
the mission location for construction review team member reference.
The construction review team leader should supplement the AIP with additional resources
and administrative information, such as electronic templates for the mission report, issue
sheet template, and a code of conduct for the review mission.
2.2.6. Code of conduct
The counterpart should have a set of procedures covering expectations for code of conduct
appropriate to the facilities being visited by the construction review team. Compliance with
these procedures must be adhered to in order to ensure that the review is carried out
appropriately. The counterpart is responsible to provide these procedures as part of the AIP
to ensure construction review team member understanding and agreement prior to the initial
review visit.
10
Types of procedures likely to apply are as follows:
• Handling of sensitive information;
• Facility health and safety rules, including those for radiation protection and emergency
response;
• Policies, procedures, and training requirements for working at the facility.
In addition, there may be circumstances where IAEA expectations for code of conduct are
applicable. In this case these must be discussed and agreed with construction review team
members before starting the review mission.
The code of conduct may also include rules or suggestions pertaining to cultural codes of the
counterpart, and to cooperation within the construction review team.
2.2.7. Logistics
Finalization of logistical support for the review mission should be completed well in advance
and documented by the counterpart representative. This includes, but may be not limited to:
• Accommodation for the construction review team during the review mission;
• Transportation of construction review team members to and from this location and
counterpart facilities;
• Meeting facilities during the review mission, including for internal construction review
team meetings (at site and potentially at accommodation location);
• Availability of necessary counterpart staff and documentation during technical
sessions;
• Contact information so that colleagues and family of construction review team
members can contact them during the mission;
• Contingency plans and mobile phone contact numbers to be used in the event that any
team member encounters delays or other problems during travel;
• Arrangements for reimbursement of construction review team members and/or any
review mission fee.
2.2.8. Non-disclosure agreements
Portions of review material may be deemed as proprietary information, and contents of the
mission report itself will be proprietary information. Members of the construction review
team are expected to sign non-disclosure agreements prior to mission start and to manage
proprietary information in an appropriate manner.
The counterpart needs to provide reasonable access to proprietary material prior to and
during the review process. It is expected that after the closeout session, any printed
proprietary information provided to the construction review team is returned to the
counterpart (or appropriately disposed of), and any electronic files associated with the
review on team members’ electronic media are deleted after the draft copy of the mission
report has been submitted to the counterpart. Only the construction review team leader
retains a master copy for future reference.
11
2.2.9. Language barriers
The working language of a construction readiness review mission is English. Where
required, the counterpart is expected to provide translation services during the mission. In
cases where original project documentation is in a language other than English, a summary
of its contents can be provided to the construction review team as part of presentations or
discussions. For key documents, the construction review team may need a translation of the
full table of contents, and even a translation of selected (significant) portions of the
document. It is preferred that at least one construction review team member be a native
speaker of the working language of the project under review.
2.2.10. Contact with construction review team during preparation
To ensure good communications between construction review team members, regular contact
should be maintained with the construction review team leader. This will help to minimise
the risk that the team is not fully mobilised at the start of the review, and avoid the need to
initiate contingency plans.
2.2.11. Preparatory meeting
The preparatory meeting’s purpose is to facilitate preparation of the review mission, and to
minimise risks of misunderstanding between the construction review team leader and
counterpart representative. This may be a two or three day meeting at the location of the
CORR mission where the construction review team leader and possibly some team members
meet face to face the counterpart representative and management in order to:
• Finalise objectives and scope of the CORR mission;
• Resolve any difficulties related to the mission;
• Agree on a provisional review mission agenda;
• Resolve issues related to logistics, security, need for translation, code of conduct, end
of meeting reports, press releases, political meetings, etc.
2.2.12. Counterpart preparation
The counterpart should ensure that key project personnel are briefed on the scope and
purpose of the review mission, the need for cooperation with construction review team
members, and are familiar with applicable reference material pertinent to the areas under
evaluation.
2.3. REVIEW MISSION
2.3.1. General guidelines for review mission
The following guidelines pertain to the review mission:
• It is essential for review success to set and maintain a cooperative, professional, and
courteous atmosphere, both within the construction review team and between the
construction review team and counterpart;
• The review mission should be conducted following the review mission agenda.
However, flexibility is necessary to take into account observed findings (which could
12
require specific investigation) and contingencies inherent in any activity involving a
large number of contributors;
• Throughout the mission, damaging misunderstandings could arise from different
interpretations of technical terms, abbreviations and expressions. It is thus necessary
for both the construction review team and the counterpart to maintain a glossary
explicitly defining terms, abbreviations, and expressions that could be misunderstood;
• Examination of documents provided by the counterpart must be performed under
procedural requirements of the counterpart. Agreement should be obtained from the
counterpart to take documentation away from the facility if required as part of the
review. Documentation taken away from the facility should be handled as required by
the counterpart;
• Frequent communication between the construction review team leader and the
counterpart representative and management is necessary, e.g. to agree on agenda
modifications, to clarify misunderstandings etc. In particular, the counterpart
representative should have daily meetings with the construction review team and
should be invited to advise the construction review team when information may not be
complete or correct. In cases of misunderstanding or where issues need further
clarification, the counterpart representative should direct the construction review team
to the responsible or knowledgeable counterpart staff, vendor, or contractor who can
provide clarification.
2.3.2. Briefing meeting/conference call
The objective of the briefing meeting or conference call is to ensure the construction review
team has all necessary information regarding:
• Objectives, scope and background of the review and the review mission from the IAEA
standpoint; this includes a clear identification of the project under review and of the
review basis and reference documents;
• Code of conduct to be applied by the construction review team members during the
review mission;
• Name, background, domains of competence and role of each construction review team
member. In particular, the construction review team leader may choose to delegate
specific parts of their role to designated team members;
• Review mission agenda;
• Review and discussion of issues or questions rose from review of the AIP, and
potential areas for further investigation during the mission. An initial construction
review questions list resulting from this discussion should be prepared and submitted to
the counterpart;
• Logistics for review mission.
The briefing meeting/conference call is an opportunity to finalise any pending formalities,
such as signing of the non-disclosure agreement forms, or addressing last minute changes.
Suggestions:
• Meeting/conference call may be one week preceding the review mission or earlier, and
typically lasts one to two hours. Additional meetings/conference calls may be
necessary;
• Meeting is normally chaired by the construction review team leader;
13
• Meeting should involve all construction review team members as far as practical;
• Construction review team leader should ensure each construction review team member
has a copy of terms of reference and is fully aware of its contents;
• In order to ensure that a quasi-final state of the mission report can be reached at the
debriefing meeting, responsibilities within the team for different sections of the mission
report should be allocated and agreed upon during the briefing;
• Counterpart representative may participate in the meeting/conference call as an
observer, or to convey information that would be difficult or awkward to address in the
plenary opening session.
2.3.3. Opening session
The opening session’s objective is to ensure all review mission participants (construction
review team and counterpart) have necessary information regarding:
• Objectives, scope and background of the review mission, from both counterpart and
IAEA standpoints;
• Counterpart’s organization and background;
• Precise description of the project under review, including its scope of work and
boundaries;
• Review basis and reference;
• Name, background and role of each participant;
• Review mission agenda;
• Review mission logistics;
• Constraints pertaining to confidentiality of information, security and safety of
participants.
The opening session may also be the opportunity for a:
• Welcome address and opening remarks by the counterpart;
• Presentation of initial questions from the construction review team based on review of
the AIP.
Suggestions:
• Session is typically held at the beginning of the review mission (excluding the briefing
meeting);
• Session is normally chaired by the construction review team leader;
• All participants in the review should be involved as far as practical in the briefing
meeting;
• Construction review team members should describe their area of expertise and
experience;
• Counterpart should introduce their staff in a similar fashion; construction review team
members should note counterpart staff members corresponding to their review area(s);
• Counterpart should provide a project overview, showing overall organization structure,
history, schedule, current status, and major issues being dealt with;
• An AIP, summarising topics that will be presented and discussed during the review,
should have been provided electronically in advance by the counterpart. At this point
each construction review team member should be given access to a hard copy of the
package for use during the review unless otherwise agreed to;
14
• Construction review team members should make notes during the overview, but leave
detailed questioning for the technical sessions.
2.3.4. Technical sessions
The technical sessions’ objective is to allow for more in depth study of an issue with the
counterpart. They may include simple one-on-one or small group discussions (breakout
sessions), technical presentations, technical visits, or may be part of a specific targeted
review.
Suggestions:
• Construction review team and counterpart should each designate a co-chair for a
session; the role of the co-chairs is to keep the session focused, maintain session
schedule, and ensure discussions remain courteous and cooperative;
• Focus should remain on session objectives, i.e. compliance to elements of the review
basis and reference;
• At end of the session, a discussion with the counterpart should take place to clarify any
remaining questions from the construction review team. A list of pending questions
that need more time to be answered (i.e. requests for clarification or more information)
should be established and agreed by the co-chairs, and a tentative time for resolution
should be set;
• During the session, participating construction review team members should note
possible issues and good practices;
• In case of a breakout session, participating construction review team members should
prepare a brief report to inform other team members.
2.3.5. Technical presentations
In a technical presentation, the counterpart has the lead role and presents a specific aspect of
the project under review, at a level of detail that allows the construction review team to
assess project compliance with the review basis and reference. A typical technical
presentation has three main phases:
• Introductory phase: aspect(s) of the project to be discussed, and pertinent elements of
the review basis and reference, are clearly identified;
• Presentation phase: counterpart presents necessary information, either via presentation
slides or in written documentation;
• Discussion phase: construction review team asks for clarification or additional details,
and counterpart provides prompt answers where possible.
Suggestions:
• Whether interruptions can be made during the presentations should be agreed upon at
the beginning of the session by the co-chairs, but interruptions should not prevent
presenters from completing their presentation;
• Presentation slides, if any, should be included in the AIP or otherwise provided to
construction review team members.
15
2.3.6. Technical visits
Technical visits are usually optional but are very desirable. They may help the construction
review team to obtain information that would be difficult to gather from documentation or
technical presentations. Visits may be performed at various locations, such as construction
sites, prefabrication facilities, warehouses, staging areas, calibration facilities, planning
areas, engineering buildings, etc.
Technical visits are usually less structured, and their objectives more open, than technical
presentations and targeted reviews, but a few general suggestions apply:
• Technical visits are usually proposed by the counterpart, but the construction review
team leader may make suggestions, based on review objectives and scope;
• Technical visits usually begin with a short counterpart presentation of what is to be
seen, what specific rules and constraints may apply, who accompanying counterpart
staff are, and their areas of responsibility;
• Participating construction review team members may decide prior to the visit or at the
end of the counterpart’s presentation to allocate different aspects to be examined
during the visit to specific team members;
• “Surprising” observations during the visit should be shared with participating
construction review team members, so that possible implications may be assessed more
thoroughly.
2.3.7. Targeted reviews
A targeted review follows a specific subject through the counterpart’s documentation at a
deep level of detail. Topics that are the object of a targeted review are usually selected
because of their importance with respect to review objectives, or because they are
representative of large parts of the project.
A targeted review is usually under the leadership of the construction review team. It is
typically composed of three phases:
• Definition phase: construction review team explains review session subject and
objectives;
• Presentation phase: counterpart explains how the subject is handled in the project
under review, in related work processes, or in documentation;
• “Thread analysis” phase: construction review team interviews and examines specific
documents or parts of documents and further questions the counterpart. Where a
complete analysis cannot be completed during the mission then findings and follow-up
recommendations should be provided in the mission report.
Examples of such reviews might include:
• Project front end planning processes and adequacy;
• Review of measures in place to control material and related non-conformances;
• Engineering completeness/readiness prior to construction;
• Review of processes in place to plan, manage, and report on project activities;
• Construction progress reporting methodology;
• Construction turnover/handover processes;
16
• Quality surveillance processes and adequacy;
• Review of training, experience and qualification of project staff;
• Safety and human performance programmes and/or practices;
• Material receipt, storage, control and logistics;
• Status of issues or recommendations from previous IAEA missions or project stages.
Suggestions:
• List of targeted reviews and their scopes are usually determined by the construction
review team leader, and agreed upon by the counterpart representative. Though it is
preferable to plan them ahead of the review mission, some may be decided during the
mission based on questions raised. Enough preparation time should be given to the
counterpart so that they can make staff and documentation available;
• Construction review team members should dig deep enough to get a clear
understanding of the subject, but should also guard against wasting time on less
important technical details.
2.3.8. Construction review team meeting
These meetings involve only construction review team members. The objective is for team
members to share information and understanding, compare points of view, maintain a list of
questions and clarification items, and reach a consensus on findings. Another essential
objective is to develop the mission report.
Suggestions:
• One session should be held at the end of each day, while impressions and information
are still fresh;
• Meetings are particularly necessary in the case of breakout sessions, so that the whole
team shares information;
• During the first few days, meetings will usually tend to be short (typically one hour or
less), but as the review mission nears closeout, more time will be necessary to merge
individual findings into a consistent, well-organised list;
• Progress regarding the mission report should be checked at each meeting. In order to
ensure that a quasi-final state of the report can be reached at the debriefing meeting,
relevant information should be inserted in the draft report as soon as it is available.
2.3.9. Closeout session
During the closeout session the construction review team presents their findings (issues,
recommendations, suggestions and good practices) to the counterpart, and the counterpart
provides feedback on the findings.
The meeting is an opportunity for the construction review team to take leave of counterpart
staff and consider follow-up actions.
Suggestions:
• Session is typically held at the end of the review mission (excluding the debriefing
meeting);
17
• Session is normally chaired by the construction review team leader;
• Session should involve all participants in the review, as far as practical;
• A written list of findings should be provided to the counterpart prior to the session
(typically, the day before), so that the counterpart has time to prepare a provisional
response or feedback;
• Any adjustment from written findings should be made clear during the session, in such
a way that the counterpart is not “surprised” by final findings.
2.3.10. Debriefing meeting/conference call
The debriefing meeting or conference call is for the construction review team to develop a
quasi-final mission report, and to allocate any remaining work.
Suggestions:
• Meeting is typically held the day following the review mission, and typically lasts a
few hours;
• Meeting is chaired by the construction review team leader;
• Meeting should involve all construction review team members, as far as practical;
• The IAEA line manager of the construction review team leader should be invited to
participate;
• Responsibilities within the team for finalization of the mission report should be
allocated and agreed upon;
• Lessons learned and suggestions from construction review team members for future
missions should be documented.
2.4. FOLLOW-UP MISSION
The objective of a follow-up mission is to assess progress made in resolution of issues
identified, and in particular in the implementation of recommendations and possibly of
suggestions. This follow–up mission is at the discretion of the counterpart, and may be
combined with a Phase 2 CORR mission if desired (where the follow-up is to a Phase 1
mission).
General guidelines:
• Decision, scope and timing are based on a mutual agreement between the construction
review team leader and counterpart;
• Follow-up mission team should be composed of the team leader and preferably one or
more members of the original review team;
• Should be performed typically 12 to 18 months after the main mission;
• Should last typically three days, depending on volume and complexity of issues;
• Should have a preparation phase similar to the main review mission. Counterpart sends
in advance to IAEA all issue sheets from the main mission, having updated the recent
status of issues, indicating also whether or not they believe the issue closed;
• Guidelines for the main review mission also apply.
18
2.5. REPORTING AND DOCUMENTING
2.5.1. Mission report
The mission report is the main deliverable of the construction review team. It presents the
background, objective and scope of the mission, the project under review, the review basis
and reference, and findings made by the team during the review. A suggested report format
is provided in Appendix III of this document.
Findings may be classified into two categories: issues and good practices, and are discussed
in more details in the following sections. Figure 2 provides an overview of how mission
findings will be resolved and documented in the mission report.
FIG. 2. Resolution of Mission Findings.
The counterpart will have an opportunity to comment on the draft report and will
acknowledge receipt of the final report (Figure 1).
2.5.2. Issues and issue sheets
An issue is an identified concern or an area of improvement, which has been identified on the
basis of documents listed in the review basis and reference and/or internationally recognized
good practices in the subject area. Each issue is presented in an issue sheet which provides
the following:
1. Issue identification, with issue number and title, mission name, reviewed area;
2. Issue clarification, with description of the fundamental overall problem, and the
basis for the issue (observations and relevant documents);
3. Assessment by construction review team, with facts, consequences,
recommendations/suggestions, and documents reviewed;
4. Counterpart’s actions taken after mission and prior to follow-up assessment;
5. Follow-up assessment by construction review team, with possibly new facts, and
documents reviewed, and an assessment of the resolution degree.
19
An issue sheet template is given in Annex III of the mission report template (Appendix III of
this document).
2.5.2.1. Sub-Section 3.3 of Issue Sheet: Recommendations and suggestions
Recommendations and suggestions are numbered in sequential order for further reference.
Reviewed documents (corresponding specifically to the issue under consideration) are also
listed.
As much as possible, each recommendation and suggestion should be referenced to the
relevant requirement/recommendation of respective review basis and reference documents.
Recommendations and suggestions may also be based on good practices or lessons learned
from other international NPP projects.
2.5.2.2. Sub-Section 5 of Issue Sheet: Resolution degree and status of issue
The status of an issue is assessed and a respective resolution degree is assigned to reflect the
judgment of the IAEA review team. The degree is either “withdrawn”, “insufficient progress
to date”, “satisfactory progress to date”, or “issue resolved” as indicated in the issue sheet
template.
2.5.3. Good practices and good performances
Good practices and good performances observed should be documented in the text of the
report. It should be confirmed that good practices are:
• Novel;
• Have proven benefits;
• Can be used on other projects; and
• Do not contradict an issue.
20
3. REVIEW PRINCIPLES
The CORR mission is intended to conduct a review of a major NPP construction project,
such as a new build or refurbishment, to improve project performance. The mission is based
on appropriate IAEA documents, such as the Safety Guides and the Nuclear Energy Series
Reports(Refs [1] to [36]). In addition, other internationally accepted project management
documents (e.g. PMBOK, Construction Industry Institute PDRI, PRINCE2, GAPPS etc.; see
Refs [37] to [102]) will also be considered with counterpart concurrence.
The main documents from an IAEA perspective related to construction project management
are IAEA Nuclear Energy Series documents Project Management in Nuclear Power Plant
Construction: Guidelines and Experience NP-T-2.7 [16], and Construction Technologies for
Nuclear Power Plants NP-T-2.5 [17].
3.1. REVIEW TECHNIQUES
Information utilized for the review should be based on observations, interviews, document
reviews, and site walk downs.
The construction review team uses five steps to acquire the information needed to develop
their recommendations/suggestions. The five steps are:
1. Review of written material and/or presentations;
2. Discussion and interviews;
3. Direct observation of programme implementation and project status;
4. Discussions among the review team;
5. Discussion of evaluations/tentative conclusions with counterpart.
3.1.1. Use of review techniques
The use of review techniques mentioned above should be planned in advance. Arrangements
should be made with the counterpart as to how to perform discussions, interviews, and
observations.
The IAEA review team has meetings in which experts present their findings, summarize
concerns, and discuss actual issues. This allows other team members to contribute their
views, further strengthening the experience base of the evaluation. It is important that each
expert comes prepared to make a concise statement of findings, in order to allow all review
areas to be discussed at the same meeting. These meetings will determine those issues to be
presented to the counterpart for consideration by the counterpart’s organization. A template
for the issue sheets is shown in Annex III of the mission report template (Appendix III of this
document).
Formulation of recommendations and suggestions should be based on identified issues.
Good practices and good performances discovered during the review process that should be
documented for the benefit of other Member States are described in the text of the mission
report.
21
Based upon discussions and observations, reviewers can, if necessary, modify their
preliminary view. Multiple cycles of document review, discussions, interviews, and
observations may be required to clarify and resolve complex issues and/or findings.
3.1.2. Review of written material
Reviewers should use the AIP in both the preparatory and implementation phases of the
CORR mission.
Other than the AIP, the construction review team may gain access or request more detailed
documentation during the mission. This is in support of a deeper investigation of more
complex topics. Such documentation may include:
• Project metrics/reporting packages;
• Engineering metrics/reporting packages;
• Construction metrics/reporting packages (including safety metrics);
• Detailed procedures and other project governance;
• Contracts, legal documents;
• Regulatory submissions;
• Preliminary or final safety analysis report ;
• Equipment/material history dockets;
• Engineering modification information (modification packages, modification processes
etc.);
• Work execution packages (released to trades for installation);
• Quality surveillance packages;
• Project charters, scope documents, work breakdown structures, explanation of how
work is planned to be divided between organizations etc.;
• Risk management plans;
• Training and qualification records;
• Description of pertinent events relating to the construction project and corrective
actions ;
• Databases and information repositories associated with the project:
o Engineering/plant configuration databases ;
o Calibration databases;
o Work management databases;
o Project schedules.
Appendix II of this document provides a broad range of topics that the construction review
team should consider during the CORR mission. It should be noted however that the review
mission scope will dictate which portions of the Appendix are relevant (and within the scope
of the review mission).
3.1.3. Presentations, discussion and interviews
The construction review team will conduct discussions/interviews with the counterpart with
the aim to:
• Provide additional information not covered by the AIP;
• Answer questions, and satisfy concerns arising out of the documentation review;
22
• Obtain an in-depth understanding of :
o Important project characteristics;
o Associated work procedures and activities;
o Form a joint judgment on findings.
These discussions/interviews are also used to provide an opportunity for exchanging
important information between construction review team members and their counterparts.
These interviews provide opportunities for individuals to listen and share experiences, and
not be an interrogation by team members. Properly conducted, these discussions/interviews
are possibly the most important part of the CORR mission. Use precise questions that call for
specific or exact answers where possible, and attempt to obtain corroboration from multiple
sources of key facts or details.
Presentations by counterparts (both formal and informal) can be used as a means of
obtaining further information and to fill in information gaps identified as a result of the
review of the AIP.
Technical visits may be held where possible to provide the review team with a deeper
understanding of the project. This may include demonstrations with mock-up or prototype
hardware/systems or simulators.
3.1.4. Direct observation of performance, status and activities
Direct observation of activities related to the project under review means on-site observation
of:
• Implementation of procedures and programmes related to the project, such as:
o Project approval and oversight meetings;
o Field construction and/or check/test/calibration activities;
o Warehouse incoming material inspections ;
o Project status/planning meetings;
o Pre-job and post job briefings;
o Constructability reviews;
o Engineering review meetings;
o Safety inspections;
o Management meetings;
• Where appropriate, physical conditions related to the selected project within the scope
of the review, such as:
o General site walk-downs;
o Specific sub-project field inspection(s).
From these observations, reviewers will form a position on:
• Quality of processes supporting the project;
• Staff level of commitment;
• Overall safety culture;
• Staff capability in terms of resources, technical knowledge and skills;
• Overall condition of facilities and project.
23
3.2. SOURCES OF INFORMATION
3.2.1. Background information
Background information will be required to achieve a common understanding. In particular,
the following should form the basis of this common understanding:
• Position and role of the counterpart within the project;
• History of development and changes in the project under review;
• Previous assessments by other organizations (e.g. regulatory assessments, third party
qualification, audits, etc.);
• Boundaries and constraints impacting the project.
3.2.2. Information provided by counterpart
Examples of information sources to be provided by the counterpart are:
• AIP;
• Written documentation as described in Section 3.1.2 above;
• Description of already identified problems areas based on a self-assessment by the
counterpart; A pre-mission self-assessment could specifically be based on the subjects
to be reviewed under this CORR mission (i.e. Appendix II Tables);
The scope of information sources should be defined and agreed in the terms of reference.
3.3. DEVELOPMENT OF FINDINGS
During the course of the review, the construction review team will hold internal consultation
sessions (construction review team meetings) to develop a common set of findings. The team
will complete issue sheets and record good practices, update them as necessary after
discussion with the counterpart, and modify them as required as the review progresses. The
following should be noted for issue sheets:
• Emphasis should be given to reviewers’ observations, with minimal description. Clear
conclusions should be documented;
• Wherever possible, reference to IAEA or other reference documents should be
provided;
• Language should be clear, concise, objective and impersonal;
• Short, direct sentences are preferred;
• Issues should be defined in terms of a fundamental overall problem that leads to or can
have a significant consequence for the project under review;
• Official names should be used to designate organizational units, positions and systems;
• Abbreviations or acronyms shall be introduced upon their first use and compiled in a
list;
• Sheets should be written in English.
Templates for issue sheets are provided in Annex III of the mission report template (in
Appendix III of this document).
24
3.4. WORKING WITH COUNTERPART
Besides interviews and meetings with the counterpart as described in section 3.1, work with
the counterpart on site involves the following activities:
• Opening session;
• Regular meetings (meeting with the counterpart, summary team meetings, etc.); and
• Closeout session.
During the opening session, the organization and schedule of the mission should be
presented. Focused working teams for specific areas may be established at that time.
Working teams in each area consist of designated construction review team members,
counterpart experts, and site technical support as required. It is advisable to have a short
meeting each day of all participants to discuss organizational issues related to that day’s
activities.
Construction review team members will plan their schedules such that a primary and an
alternate objective are always scheduled. A schedule of activities should be updated daily
and discussed with the counterpart.
The counterpart should be informed on a regular basis of preliminary findings and
recommendations being made by the review team. Whenever possible, agreement should be
reached between the construction review team and the counterpart on the facts supporting
each findings and recommendation, and on the recommendation itself. Representatives of the
counterpart may attend the daily team meeting, as necessary.
The day before the closeout session, construction review team experts should deliver their
section of the mission report. The facts as documented in these sections should have been
reviewed and agreed with by the counterpart.
A formal closeout session is held the last day of the review mission. At this session, all
construction review team members will provide short statements summarizing findings,
recommendations and suggestions related their reviewed area(s).
25
APPENDIX I: SUGGESTED CONTENT OF ADVANCED INFORMATION
PACKAGE
I.1. General
• Site description;
• Code of conduct requirements (refer to Section 2.2.6);
• Review mission logistics (refer to Section 2.2.7);
• Any useful background information, such as:
o Reason construction readiness review mission was requested;
o Development history of the project under review, and roles of project
organizations, including the counterpart. Include any major project delays and
local infrastructure improvements related to the project.
I.2. Project
• Project description, including an overview of specific activities that are to be reviewed;
• Project organizational structure and staffing within given functional areas;
• Project execution plan;
• Key performance metrics;
• Risk management processes and reports;
• Current key licensing issues and commitments.
I.3. Management system
• Major management system processes (engineering, modifications, procurement,
warehousing, on-site material logistics/movement, design, installation, quality
surveillance, records management, calibration, configuration management, training and
qualification, human resources, work planning, corrective action etc.) and applicable
organization charts;
• Front end planning and project management processes;
• Engineering change control and non-conformance procedures;
• Description of key management system and engineering databases maintained by the
project.
I.4. Engineering
• Engineering work management/planning processes/progress metrics.
I.5. Procurement and material readiness
• Procurement/materials management processes;
• Material status/availability.
I.6. Quality management and records
• Previous assessments by other organizations (e.g. regulatory assessments, third party
qualification, audits etc.);
• Key corrective actions underway addressing known project problem areas;
• Records and controlled document management processes.
I.7. Human resources and training
• Staffing plans;
• Training and qualification governance.
26
I.8. Construction management
• Construction work management processes/planning processes/regular coordination
meetings held;
• Safety programme and metrics.
I.9. Construction completion assurance
• Construction completion assurance/system turnover process.
I.10. Targeted reviews
• Background information supporting any requested targeted area reviews.
I.11. Technical presentations
• Planned presentation slides from technical presentations (if available).
27
APPENDIX II: SUBJECTS FOR CONSTRUCTION READINESS REVIEW
MISSION, AND ASSOCIATED REFERENCES
The objective of this appendix is to help the construction review team leader and the
counterpart clarify the scope and the basis and reference of the construction readiness
review mission. It suggests a list of subjects that could be considered and discussed. Where
applicable, it identifies related IAEA documents, and possibly other documents, that could be
used as reference for the mission. The list of subjects may also be used by the construction
review team leader and the counterpart to determine which technical sessions should be
included in the construction readiness review mission agenda.
Note the construction review team leader and counterpart are free to discuss any other
subject that might be relevant to the mission.
The proposed subjects are organised into 9 main themes:
1. Project management;
2. Engineering readiness (engineering deliverables required to support construction);
3. Procurement/material/supply chain readiness (material available to support
construction activities);
4. Quality management and records;
5. Human resources and training;
6. Construction readiness;
7. Construction installation completion assurance/system turnover process;
8. Targeted area reviews (including project delays and corrective actions);
9. Technical visits.
For each theme, a table (Tables II.1 to II.9) lists associated subjects. Each table has four
columns:
• “ID” column associating a short identification for further reference;
• “Subject and description” column explaining what the subject is about;
• “Specific references” column suggesting some possible reference documents;
• “Conclusion” column for construction review team leader and counterpart to note
decisions regarding the subject.
This appendix is available in editable electronic form. The construction review team leader
and counterpart would typically:
• Adjust the “Specific references” column as applicable and necessary. Agreement
should be made as to what if any international project management references would
be formally included in the review;
• Note in the conclusion column whether the subject is to be addressed by the mission,
and if so, add any necessary precision or alteration to the “Subject and description”
column;
• Add new lines for any subject that needs addressing and is not in the tables.
28 28 28
II.1
. P
roje
ct m
an
agem
ent
rev
iew
Th
e pro
ject
ma
nag
emen
t re
view
ob
ject
ive i
s to
det
erm
ine
if o
vera
ll p
roje
ct m
an
agem
ent
pro
ces
ses
bei
ng a
ppli
ed p
rovi
de a
deq
uate
ass
ura
nce
of
a s
ucc
essf
ul
pro
ject
ou
tco
me.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
the
stat
us
of
pro
cess
es
surr
ou
nd
ing p
roje
ct m
anag
em
ent
for
the
app
lica
ble
pro
ject
. P
roper
sco
pe
contr
ol, f
ront
end
pla
nnin
g,
contr
ol
met
rics
, ri
sk m
an
agem
ent,
and c
hang
e co
ntr
ol
pro
cess
es
are
impo
rtan
t fo
r any p
roje
ct’s
succ
ess
. T
his
evalu
atio
n w
ill
asse
ss
ho
w t
he
pro
ject
man
agem
ent
org
an
izat
ion a
lig
ns
wit
h i
nte
rnat
ional
best
pra
ctis
es.
NP
P p
roje
cts
have
man
y u
niq
ue
asp
ects
(su
ch a
s th
e nee
d f
or
extr
em
ely
str
ong
pla
nt
con
fig
ura
tio
n m
anagem
ent
pro
cess
es
in p
lace)
, but
over
all
pro
ject
m
anagem
ent
pri
ncip
les
and best
pra
ctis
es
can be
der
ived
fro
m m
an
y o
rgan
izat
ions
and i
ndu
stri
es.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
];
•
Ris
k M
an
agem
ent,
a T
oo
l F
or
Impro
vin
g N
PP
Per
form
ance
, I
AE
A T
EC
DO
C-1
209
[28];
•
Gu
ideli
nes
for
Inte
gra
ted
Ris
k A
sses
sment
and M
anag
em
ent
in L
arg
e In
du
stri
al
Are
as,
IAE
A T
EC
DO
C-9
94 [
29].
29
TA
BL
E I
I.1
. P
OS
SIB
LE
PR
OJE
CT
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
SU
BJE
CT
S F
OR
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
N R
EA
DIN
ES
S R
EV
IEW
MIS
SIO
N
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PM
1
Scop
e c
on
trol
•
Pro
ject
an
d C
on
stru
ctio
n S
cop
e w
ell
def
ined
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
PM
2
Fron
t en
d p
lan
nin
g
•
Wel
l-d
efin
ed f
ron
t en
d p
lan
nin
g p
roce
ss i
n e
ffec
t (s
om
e as
pec
ts m
igh
t in
clu
de
gat
ed p
lan
nin
g/a
pp
roval
s, i
nte
gra
tion
o
f sc
hed
ule
s, e
val
uat
ing r
esou
rces
, re
adin
ess
asse
ssm
ents
,
risk
ass
essm
ents
, ac
tion
ite
ms,
an
d s
enio
r m
anag
emen
t o
ver
sigh
t et
c.).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
Ris
k M
anag
emen
t, a
Tool
For
Imp
rovin
g N
PP
P
erfo
rman
ce,
IAE
A T
EC
DO
C-1
20
9 [
28
].
Gu
idel
ines
for
Inte
gra
ted
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t an
d
Man
agem
ent
in L
arge
Ind
ust
rial
Are
as,
IAE
A
TE
CD
OC
-99
4 [
29
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.1
2 t
o V
.14
[5].
PM
3
Proje
ct
est
ima
tin
g
•
Fu
nd
ing a
uth
ori
zati
on
est
imat
es p
erfo
rmed
at
appro
pri
ate
level
of
det
ail;
•
Rea
son
able
pro
ject
cost
an
d s
ched
ule
con
tin
gen
cy i
ncl
ud
ed i
n
esti
mat
es.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.5
8 [
5].
30 30 30
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PM
4
Proje
ct
sch
ed
uli
ng
•
Inte
gra
ted
, re
sou
rced
, p
roje
ct s
ched
ule
avai
lab
le f
or
all
pro
ject
work
, in
clu
din
g e
ngin
eeri
ng,
pro
cure
men
t,
man
ufa
ctu
rin
g,
fab
rica
tion
, co
nst
ruct
ion
an
d s
tart
-up
;
•
Mil
esto
nes
an
d c
riti
cal
pat
h a
ctiv
itie
s id
enti
fied
an
d w
idel
y
kn
ow
n;
•
Sch
edu
le i
nte
gra
ted a
nd
con
sist
ent
wit
h p
rote
ct f
inan
cin
g a
nd
paym
ent
sch
edu
les;
•
All
res
ou
rces
id
enti
fied
in
th
e sc
hed
ule
(co
nst
ruct
or,
des
ign
org
aniz
atio
n,
sup
pli
ers,
sub
-con
trac
tors
, in
clu
din
g s
pec
ialt
y st
aff
etc.
);
•
Sch
edu
le u
pd
ated
reg
ula
rly
wit
h b
est
avai
lable
in
form
atio
n.
Sch
edu
le r
evie
w m
eeti
ngs
hel
d r
egu
larl
y w
ith
key
staf
f (c
on
stru
ctor,
des
ign
org
aniz
atio
n,
sup
pli
ers,
sub
-con
trac
tors
et
c.);
•
Sch
edu
le a
llow
s fo
r w
ork
er o
rien
tati
on
, tr
ain
ing a
nd s
kil
ls
ver
ific
atio
n;
•
Hig
h-r
isk
act
ivit
ies
iden
tifi
ed i
n s
ched
ule
wit
h a
dd
itio
nal
over
sigh
t ap
pli
ed;
•
Pro
ject
tea
m c
on
fid
ent
in a
ccu
racy
an
d v
alid
ity
of
sch
edu
le;
•
Pro
ject
con
tin
gen
cy/f
loat
usa
ge
reas
on
able
/not
at a
hig
h r
ate.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
Sec
tion
11
.2
[17
].
Ris
k M
anag
emen
t, a
Tool
For
Imp
rovin
g N
PP
Per
form
ance
, IA
EA
TE
CD
OC
-12
09
[2
8].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.1
2 t
o V
.14
[5
].
PM
5
Proje
ct
metr
ics
•
Tra
ckin
g a
nd
fore
cast
ing m
etri
cs a
vai
lab
le (
e.g.
key
m
iles
ton
es d
efin
ed,
earn
ed v
alu
e def
init
ion
s in
pla
ce w
ith
trac
kin
g a
nd
fore
cast
ing m
ech
anis
ms,
cost
over
sigh
t an
d
pro
ject
fore
cast
ing m
etri
cs i
n p
lace
);
•
Goal
s an
d r
esult
s co
mm
un
icat
ed t
o s
taff
. W
ork
forc
e in
volv
ed
wit
h d
evel
op
ing c
orr
ecti
ve
mea
sure
s;
•
Pro
ject
mil
esto
nes
an
d c
om
mit
men
ts c
on
sist
entl
y b
ein
g m
et.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
Sec
tion
11
.2
[17
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.49
(b
), 5
.55
[5].
31
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PM
6
Sta
keh
old
er a
lig
nm
en
t
•
Key
stak
ehold
ers,
in
clu
din
g o
wn
er,
con
trac
tor,
un
ion
s,
tech
nic
al s
up
port
org
aniz
atio
ns,
an
d r
egu
lato
r p
erso
nn
el,
alig
ned
wit
h r
esp
ect
to e
xp
ecta
tion
s an
d r
equ
ired
in
terf
aces
;
•
Bu
sin
ess
goal
s, p
roje
ct o
bje
ctiv
es,
pri
ori
ties
, in
cen
tive
sch
emes
, an
d c
riti
cal
succ
ess
fact
ors
wid
ely
kn
ow
n a
nd
use
d
to g
uid
e p
roje
ct d
ecis
ion
s;
•
No e
vid
ence
of
un
reas
on
able
req
ues
ts f
rom
pro
ject
ow
ner
and
/or
up
per
man
agem
ent,
No e
vid
ence
of
hid
den
agen
das
an
d/o
r p
oor
rela
tion
ship
s bet
wee
n p
roje
ct t
eam
mem
ber
s;
•
Rea
list
ic/t
ruth
ful
rep
ort
ing o
f u
nfa
vou
rab
le c
ircu
mst
ance
s
occ
urr
ing.
Sta
keh
old
er I
nv
olv
emen
t T
hro
ugh
ou
t th
e L
ife
Cyc
le
of
Nu
clea
r F
acil
itie
s, I
AE
A N
ucl
ear
En
ergy
Ser
ies
NG
-T-1
.4 [
21
].
Man
agem
ent
Sys
tem
for
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A
Saf
ety
Gu
ide
GS
-G-3
.5 S
ecti
on
V.1
5 [
5].
PM
7
Ma
inte
na
nce
of
com
mu
nit
y e
ng
ag
em
en
t a
nd
su
pp
ort
•
Pro
cess
in
pla
ce t
o a
dd
ress
loca
l co
mm
un
ity
issu
es/c
on
cern
s
to e
xte
nt
pra
ctic
al;
•
Co
mm
un
ity
ou
trea
ch a
nd
pub
lic
info
rmat
ion
pro
gra
mm
es
exis
t.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.38
, 5.3
9 [
5].
PM
8
Role
s a
nd
resp
on
sib
ilit
ies
•
Pro
ject
org
aniz
atio
n,
pro
ject
ex
ecu
tion
pla
n i
n p
lace
wit
h
role
s cl
earl
y d
efin
ed a
nd
ass
ign
ed.
Org
aniz
atio
nal
ch
ange
con
trol
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
. P
roje
ct c
om
mu
nic
atio
ns
pro
toco
ls
def
ined
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.2
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.38
, 5.3
9,
5.4
0 t
o 5
.47,
5.4
9,
5.5
1,
5.5
2,
5.5
3,
5.1
75,
and V
.2 t
o
V.6
[5
].
PM
9
Proje
ct
oversi
gh
t
•
Sen
ior
Ow
ner
an
d T
hir
d P
arty
in
dep
end
ent
over
sigh
t
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
wit
h c
on
tin
ual
ass
essm
ent
of
const
ruct
ion
org
aniz
atio
n a
ctiv
itie
s.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.5
9,
5.6
0,
and
6
.3 [
5].
32 32 32
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PM
10
Ris
k m
an
ag
em
en
t R
isk
man
agem
ent
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
. T
ypic
al e
xam
ple
s m
igh
t in
clu
de:
•
Act
ivel
y m
anag
ed r
isk
reg
iste
rs a
vai
lable
at
pro
ject
an
d s
ub
-
pro
ject
lev
els;
•
Pro
cess
es a
nd
sta
ff i
n p
lace
to i
nd
epen
den
tly
seek
ou
t p
roje
ct
risk
s;
•
Ris
ks
regar
din
g p
hys
ical
sit
e k
now
n a
nd
min
imiz
ed
(geo
logic
al,
envir
on
men
tal,
arc
hae
olo
gic
al,
bu
ried
ser
vic
es,
etc.
);
•
Ris
ks
regar
din
g h
um
an/k
now
led
ge
man
agem
ent
kn
ow
n a
nd
min
imiz
ed (
exp
erie
nce
of
work
forc
e, t
rain
ing,
firs
t ti
me
pro
ject
/use
of
op
erat
ing e
xp
erie
nce
etc
.);
•
Ris
ks
exte
rnal
to O
wn
er k
now
n,
docu
men
ted
, an
d m
inim
ized
(e.g
. re
gu
lato
ry a
nd
lic
ensi
ng,
fin
anci
al,
cost
esc
alat
ion
, co
ntr
acto
rs (
incl
ud
ing c
on
trac
tor
fin
anci
al s
tabil
ity)
, su
pp
ly
chai
n,
go
ver
nm
ents
, et
c.);
•
Su
itab
le C
orr
ecti
ve
Act
ion
s fo
r m
ajor
risk
s.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lant
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
and
Exp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on
2.6
an
d 3
.9
[16
].
Fin
anci
ng o
f N
ew N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NG
-T-4
.2 S
ecti
on
3.3
[2
0].
Ris
k M
anag
emen
t, a
Tool
For
Imp
rovin
g N
PP
Per
form
ance
, IA
EA
TE
CD
OC
-12
09
[2
8].
Gu
idel
ines
for
Inte
gra
ted
Ris
k A
sses
smen
t an
d
Man
agem
ent
in L
arge
Ind
ust
rial
Are
as,
IAE
A
TE
CD
OC
-99
4 [
29
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.5
6 a
nd
5.5
7
[5].
Con
stru
ctio
n a
nd
Co
mm
issi
on
ing E
xp
erie
nce
of
Ev
olu
tion
ary
Wat
er C
oole
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A T
EC
DO
C-1
39
0 [
25
].
PM
11
P
roje
ct
con
tra
ct
an
d p
rocu
rem
en
t st
ra
tegie
s
•
Pro
ject
Con
trac
tin
g a
nd
Pro
cure
men
t P
lan
s in
Pla
ce.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on 2
.4 [
16
].
PM
12
P
roje
ct
ch
an
ge c
on
trol
•
Pro
ject
ch
ange
con
trol
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
(co
st a
nd s
ched
ule
imp
acts
);
•
Pro
ject
ch
anges
pro
cess
ed i
n a
tim
ely
man
ner
to a
llow
for
effe
ctiv
e d
ecis
ion
mak
ing.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.5
3 a
nd
5.5
6
[5].
PM
13
P
roje
ct
dela
y/s
usp
en
sion
provis
ion
s
•
Pro
cess
es a
nd
com
mer
cial
agre
emen
ts e
xis
t to
sec
ure
an
d
pre
serv
e p
roje
ct d
ocu
men
tati
on
(en
gin
eeri
ng,
qu
alit
y et
c.),
in
clu
din
g w
ork
in
pro
gre
ss,
in e
ven
t of
pro
ject
del
ay o
r su
spen
sion
.
Res
tart
ing o
f D
elaye
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
cts,
IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-3
.4 [
18
].
Man
agem
ent
of
Del
aye
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
cts,
IA
EA
- T
EC
DO
C-1
11
0 [
24
].
33
II.2
. E
ng
ineer
ing
rea
din
ess
Th
e en
gin
eeri
ng
rea
din
ess
obje
ctiv
e is
to a
ssess
ava
ilabil
ity
of
engin
eeri
ng r
elate
d d
ocu
men
tati
on
, pro
cess
es
an
d p
erso
nn
el t
o s
upp
ort
th
e
con
stru
cti
on
pro
cess
.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
over
all
co
mp
lete
ness
of
eng
ineer
ing d
esig
n w
ork
nee
ded
to
co
mm
ence
co
nst
ruct
ion a
ctiv
itie
s. T
his
rev
iew
is
to
asse
ss w
het
her
do
cum
ents
are
bein
g d
eli
ver
ed o
n t
ime,
whet
her
ther
e i
s an i
nte
gra
ted s
ched
ule
, and w
het
her
co
nfi
gura
tio
n c
ontr
ol
is b
ein
g
main
tain
ed.
Exp
erie
nce
has
sho
wn t
hat
NP
P p
roje
cts
are
mo
st s
ucce
ssfu
l w
hen d
etail
ed d
esi
gn w
ork
is
full
y o
r nea
r co
mp
lete
, a
repea
t des
ign i
s
uti
lized (
no
t fi
rst-
of-
a-k
ind
co
nst
ruct
ion),
and
when t
rades
and i
nte
rdis
cip
linar
y e
ng
ineer
ing
feed
bac
k p
roce
sses
have
bee
n r
obu
stly
ap
pli
ed.
To
help
save
tim
e d
uri
ng
co
nst
ruct
ion r
obust
fie
ld c
hange p
roce
sses
are
requ
ired t
o b
e es
tabli
shed i
n a
dvance
, and
su
ffic
ient
eng
ineer
ing s
taff
is
nee
ded
to
su
pp
ort
fi
eld
ac
tiv
itie
s. E
ng
inee
ring
pro
gra
mm
es
nee
d to
be develo
ped
to
th
e po
int
wher
e key
init
ial
dat
a can be
captu
red as
const
ruct
ion p
rog
ress
es.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
].
34 34 34
TA
BL
E I
I.2
PO
SS
IBL
E E
NG
INE
ER
ING
SU
BJE
CT
S F
OR
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
N R
EA
DIN
ES
S R
EV
IEW
MIS
SIO
N
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
EN
1
En
gin
eerin
g
docu
men
tati
on
•
Des
ign
do
cum
enta
tion
, d
raw
ings,
sp
ecif
icat
ion
s, d
esig
n
man
ual
s, f
low
sh
eets
, op
erat
ing i
nst
ruct
ion
s, m
ain
ten
ance
in
stru
ctio
ns,
cal
cula
tion
s, e
tc.
avai
lable
or
wit
h d
eliv
ery
dat
es
exp
lici
tly
inco
rpora
ted
in
to p
roje
ct s
ched
ule
;
•
Do
cum
ent
con
trol
syst
ems
use
d b
y var
iou
s org
aniz
atio
ns
(ow
ner
, ven
dor,
con
stru
ctor
etc.
) w
ell
inte
gra
ted.;
•
Sta
nd
ard
s, c
od
es,
and
reg
ula
tion
s ap
pli
cab
le t
o p
roje
ct c
lear
ly
def
ined
. E
qu
ival
ence
or
adap
tati
on
docu
men
ts w
ritt
en w
her
e co
des
in
terf
ace
(e.g
. A
SM
E a
nd
RC
C-M
etc
.);
•
Ou
tsta
nd
ing d
esig
n w
ork
eval
uat
ed t
o p
ose
min
imal
pro
ject
risk
;
•
Ow
ner
an
d/o
r re
gu
lato
r ac
cep
tan
ce p
roce
sses
, ro
les,
an
d
tim
elin
es d
efin
ed;
•
En
gin
eeri
ng v
end
or
over
sigh
t p
roce
sses
an
d r
ole
s d
efin
ed.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.3
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.1
2,
5.7
9 t
o
5.8
3 [
5].
EN
2
Feed
ba
ck
in
corp
ora
ted
•
Con
trac
tor
trad
es/c
raft
, co
mm
issi
on
ing s
taff
, m
ain
ten
ance
sta
ff,
and
in
ter-
dis
cip
lin
ary
engin
eeri
ng f
eedb
ack
on
en
gin
eeri
ng
do
cum
enta
tion
in
corp
ora
ted
in
to i
ssued
docu
men
ts a
t th
e ap
pro
pri
ate
tim
e (e
.g.
con
stru
ctab
ilit
y p
roce
ss i
n p
lace
an
d
asse
ssm
ents
com
ple
ted
; co
mp
lete
ass
essm
ents
are
of
hig
her
val
ue
than
par
tial
ass
essm
ents
);
•
Inp
uts
fro
m 3
D m
od
elli
ng,
lase
r sc
ann
ing,
and
/or
sim
ula
tor
inco
rpora
ted
wh
ere
avai
lab
le;
•
Wal
kd
ow
n d
ata
inco
rpora
ted
wh
ere
app
lica
ble
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.3
[1
6].
EN
3
En
gin
eerin
g p
lan
nin
g
•
Pla
ns
and s
ched
ule
s is
sued
, bei
ng u
tili
zed
at
a w
ork
ing l
evel
,
and
lin
ked
to c
on
stru
ctio
n s
ched
ule
. A
bil
ity
to p
roje
ct
engin
eeri
ng w
ork
load
avai
lab
le a
nd
in
pla
ce;
•
En
gin
eeri
ng p
rogre
ss m
easu
res
in p
lace
;
•
Ven
dor
do
cum
enta
tion
sub
mit
tal
sch
edu
le i
nco
rpora
ted
in
to
engin
eeri
ng p
lan
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on
2.3
[1
6].
35
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
EN
4
Desi
gn
ch
an
ge
process
•
Des
ign
ch
ange
imp
lem
enta
tion
pro
cess
pro
ced
ure
s is
sued
to
con
stru
ctio
n a
nd
bei
ng f
oll
ow
ed (
e.g.
fiel
d c
han
ge,
non
-co
nfo
rman
ce,
as-b
uil
t p
roce
sses
etc
.);
•
Sta
ff d
edic
ated
to s
up
port
con
stru
ctio
n a
ctiv
itie
s av
aila
ble
wit
h
req
uir
ed a
uth
ori
ty;
•
Pro
cess
es a
nd
role
s d
efin
ed f
or
app
roval
s of
fiel
d c
han
ges
an
d
to r
esp
on
d t
o s
up
pli
er e
nq
uir
ies.
Mod
ific
atio
ns
to N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e;
IAE
A S
afe
ty S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
NS
-G-2
.3 [
8].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.3
[1
6].
Eq
uip
men
t Q
ual
ific
atio
n i
n O
per
atio
nal
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts:
Up
gra
din
g,
Pre
serv
ing a
nd
Rev
iew
ing;
Saf
ety
Rep
ort
s S
erie
s N
o.
3 [
31
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.13
5 t
o
5.1
40
, 5.1
48
, V
.16 t
o V
.18
[5
].
EN
5
Con
fig
ura
tion
ma
na
gem
en
t,
en
gin
eer
ing
con
troll
ed
docu
men
ts
an
d r
ecord
s
•
Iden
tifi
cati
on
an
d d
ocu
men
tati
on
of
syst
em,
stru
cture
an
d
com
pon
ent
char
acte
rist
ics,
an
d e
nsu
rin
g t
hat
ch
anges
to t
hes
e ch
arac
teri
stic
s ar
e p
rop
erly
dev
elop
ed,
asse
ssed
, ap
pro
ved
, is
sued
, im
ple
men
ted
, ver
ifie
d,
reco
rded
an
d i
nco
rpora
ted
in
to
syst
em d
ocu
men
tati
on
;
•
For
item
s b
elow
, en
sure
con
trol
pro
cess
es/p
roce
du
res
are
issu
ed
and
bei
ng f
oll
ow
ed:
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.1
0,
5.1
1,
5.3
1,
5.3
2,
5.1
41 t
o 5
.14
7,
V.1
8 [
5].
EN
5a
•
Eq
uip
men
t an
d c
om
pon
ent
dat
a.
EN
5b
•
Sp
are
par
ts d
ata.
EN
5c
•
Cal
ibra
tion
set
-poin
ts (
and
tole
ran
ces)
.
EN
5d
•
Des
ign
do
cum
enta
tion
.
EN
5e
•
Mod
els
(e.g
. C
AD
D,
soft
war
e et
c.)
and
soft
war
e co
de.
EN
5f
•
En
gin
eeri
ng c
orr
esp
on
den
ce.
EN
5g
•
Oth
er e
ngin
eeri
ng r
ecord
s.
36 36 36
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
EN
6
Co
mp
ute
r/c
yb
er s
ecu
rit
y
•
Mea
sure
s to
en
sure
com
pu
ter/
cyb
er s
ecu
rity
sta
nd
ards
are
in
pla
ce (
engin
eeri
ng,
pro
ject
an
d N
PP
com
pu
ter
syst
ems)
;
•
Man
agem
ent
syst
ems
app
rop
riat
e to
in
form
atio
n t
ech
nolo
gy
and
pla
nt
con
trol
soft
war
e in
pla
ce.
Co
mp
ute
r S
ecu
rity
at
Nu
clea
r F
acil
itie
s
Ref
eren
ce M
anu
al;
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
Sec
uri
ty S
erie
s N
o.
17
, T
ech
nic
al G
uid
ance
[3
4].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.17
6 t
o 5
.17
9
[5].
EN
7
Dela
yed
Proje
ct
(if
ap
pli
cab
le)
•
If p
roje
ct h
as e
xp
erie
nce
d a
sig
nif
ican
t d
elay
(m
ult
i-ye
ar h
old
),
pro
cess
es e
xis
t fo
r re
vie
w o
f p
revio
us
engin
eeri
ng w
ork
an
d
mat
eria
ls t
o c
urr
ent
cod
es/s
tan
dar
ds,
an
d t
o v
alid
ate
site
co
nd
itio
ns/
con
figu
rati
on
man
agem
ent.
Res
tart
ing o
f D
elaye
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
cts,
IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-3
.4 [
18
].
Man
agem
ent
of
Del
aye
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
cts,
IA
EA
TE
CD
OC
-11
10
[2
4].
EN
8
En
gin
eerin
g p
rog
ra
mm
es
•
En
gin
eeri
ng p
rogra
mm
es d
evel
op
ed t
o s
up
port
con
stru
ctio
n
acti
vit
ies
such
as
inst
alla
tion
or
chec
k a
nd
tes
t re
quir
emen
ts.
Key
acti
vit
ies
not
com
ple
ted
are
in
tegra
ted
into
pro
ject
sc
hed
ule
. P
roce
sses
in p
lace
for
reco
rdin
g i
nit
ial
“as
left
” d
ata
(bas
elin
e re
cord
s) a
s re
quir
ed f
or
com
pon
ent
mon
itori
ng a
nd
/or
per
iod
ic i
nsp
ecti
on
pro
gra
mm
es.
Note
: th
is i
tem
is
typ
ical
ly n
ot
app
lica
ble
for
Ph
ase
1 m
issi
on
s.
o
Agei
ng m
anag
emen
t;
o
En
vir
on
men
tal
qu
alif
icat
ion
; o
F
ire
pro
tect
ion
; o
V
alve
pro
gra
mm
e;
o
Per
iod
ic i
nsp
ecti
on
; o
P
red
icti
ve
mai
nte
nan
ce;
o
Pre
ven
tati
ve
mai
nte
nan
ce;
o
Ch
emis
try
pro
gra
mm
e.
Agei
ng M
anag
emen
t of
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts N
S-G
-2
.12
Sec
tion
3 [
12
].
Eq
uip
men
t Q
ual
ific
atio
n i
n O
per
atio
nal
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts,
Up
gra
din
g,
Pre
serv
ing,
and
Ren
ewin
g,
Saf
ety
Rep
ort
Ser
ies
No.
3 [
31
].
Fir
e S
afet
y in
th
e O
per
atio
n o
f N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts
NS
-G-2
.1 [
7].
Mai
nte
nan
ce,
Su
rvei
llan
ce a
nd
In
-ser
vic
e In
spect
ion
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lants
NS
-G-2
.6 [
9].
Ch
emis
try
Pro
gra
mm
e fo
r W
ater
Coole
d N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts S
SG
-13
[1
4].
EN
9
En
gin
eerin
g q
uali
ty (
Ph
ase
2 m
issi
on
)
•
Low
nu
mb
ers
of
engin
eeri
ng/d
esig
n/s
pec
ific
atio
n e
rrors
an
d
scop
e ch
anges
. T
imel
y an
d c
om
ple
te r
esp
on
ses
rece
ived
for
in
pro
gre
ss w
ork
.
Mod
ific
atio
ns
to N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e;
IAE
A S
afe
ty S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
NS
-G-2
.3 [
8].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.3
[1
6].
37
II.3
. P
rocu
rem
ent/
mat
eria
l/su
pp
ly c
hain
rea
din
ess
Th
e pro
cure
men
t/m
ate
ria
l/su
pp
ly
chain
re
adin
ess
obje
ctiv
e is
to
a
sses
s ava
ilabil
ity
of
key
m
ate
rial
an
d
rela
ted
pro
cess
es
to
supp
ort
con
stru
cti
on
act
ivit
ies.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
over
all
avail
abil
ity o
f eng
ineer
ed a
nd c
om
mo
dit
y m
ater
ial
requ
ired
to
co
nst
ruct
the
pro
ject
, as
well
as
suppo
rtin
g
pro
cess
es.
It f
ocu
ses
on m
easu
res
to i
denti
fy,
trac
k,
and e
xp
edit
e m
ater
ial
deli
veri
es,
what
mat
eria
l is
on s
ite
ver
sus
pla
nned
to
be
ship
ped
, and i
f
ther
e ar
e an
y m
ater
ial
rela
ted
ris
ks
stem
min
g f
rom
no
t-yet
-co
mp
lete
d d
esig
n,
supp
lier
avail
abil
ity a
nd q
uali
ty,
and m
acr
o-e
cono
mic
co
nd
itio
ns.
Sit
e m
ater
ial
hand
lin
g a
nd
lo
gis
tics
pro
cess
es
sho
uld
als
o b
e re
vie
wed
.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
].
38 38 38
TA
BL
E I
I.3
. P
OS
SIB
LE
PR
OC
UR
EM
EN
T S
UB
JEC
TS
FO
R C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ION
RE
AD
INE
SS
RE
VIE
W M
ISS
ION
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PR
1
Eq
uip
men
t, a
nd
ma
teri
al
ava
ila
bil
ity
•
Eq
uip
men
t an
d b
ulk
mat
eria
l on
sit
e or
wit
h k
now
n d
eliv
ery;
•
Mat
eria
l tr
ack
ing p
roce
sses
in
pla
ce (
ord
er /
del
iver
y d
ate
trac
kin
g);
•
Mat
eria
l u
sage
trac
kin
g p
roce
ss i
n p
lace
(b
ulk
mat
eria
l use
d
ver
sus
fore
cast
e.g
. st
eel,
con
cret
e, p
ipe,
wir
e et
c.);
•
Del
iver
y d
ates
tie
d t
o c
on
stru
ctio
n e
xec
uti
on
sch
edu
le;
•
Key
sup
pli
er c
on
trac
ts i
n p
lace
;
•
Lin
kag
es t
o p
lan
t co
nfi
gu
rati
on
man
agem
ent
dat
a in
pla
ce
(sp
are
par
ts d
atab
ases
, se
rial
nu
mb
er t
rack
ing,
etc.
).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.2
[1
6].
PR
2
Procu
rem
en
t p
roced
ures
an
d p
lan
s
•
Pro
cure
men
t p
lan
s an
d r
equ
irem
ents
in
pla
ce;
•
Sit
e w
areh
ou
sin
g p
lan
s in
pla
ce;
•
Mat
eria
l tr
ack
ing,
exp
edit
ing,
and
han
dover
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
;
•
Pro
cess
es a
nd
tra
inin
g i
n p
lace
to r
eco
gn
ize
frau
dule
nt
mat
eria
ls;
•
Pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
to e
nsu
re c
lean
lin
ess
req
uir
emen
ts i
n
pro
cure
men
t sp
ecif
icat
ion
s;
•
Lin
kag
es t
o p
lan
t co
nfi
gu
rati
on
man
agem
ent
dat
a in
pla
ce
(sp
are
par
ts d
atab
ases
, se
rial
nu
mb
er t
rack
ing,
etc.
);
•
Sp
are
par
ts a
vai
lab
le t
o s
up
port
con
stru
ctio
n;
•
War
ran
tees
con
sist
ent
wit
h c
on
stru
ctio
n s
ched
ule
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.2
[1
6].
IAE
A-T
EC
DO
C-1
16
9 M
anag
ing S
usp
ect
and
C
ou
nte
rfei
t It
ems
in t
he
Nu
clea
r In
du
stry
, S
ecti
on
3
[30
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e N
o.
GS
-G-3
.5,
Sec
tion
5.3
3 t
o
5.3
7,
5.5
4,
5.1
51 t
o 5
.16
2,
and V
.21
[5
].
PR
3
Pa
ck
ag
ing
, w
areh
ou
sin
g a
nd
tra
nsp
orta
tion
•
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n,
han
dli
ng,
and s
afe
pre
serv
atio
n o
f m
ajor
pla
nt
com
pon
ents
or
mod
ule
s ar
ran
ged
fro
m p
lace
/cou
ntr
y of
fab
rica
tion
to j
ob
sit
e;
•
Role
s an
d r
esp
on
sib
ilit
ies
for
tran
sport
atio
n d
efin
ed a
nd
ag
reem
ents
in
pla
ce;
•
Sit
e w
areh
ou
sin
g f
aci
liti
es a
vai
lable
;
•
In-w
areh
ou
se m
ain
ten
ance
an
d s
tora
ge
req
uir
emen
ts d
efin
ed
and
fac
ilit
ies
and p
roce
sses
to p
erfo
rm r
equ
ired
act
ivit
ies
avai
lab
le;
•
Pro
cess
es f
or
in p
lant
mat
eria
l h
andli
ng a
nd
sta
gin
g i
n p
lace
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.2
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.1
51
to 5
.15
9,
V.2
3,
and V
.25
to V
.30
[5
].
39
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
PR
4
Ma
teria
l in
specti
on
•
Insp
ecti
on
pro
gra
mm
e in
pla
ce f
or
inco
min
g e
qu
ipm
ent,
com
pon
ents
, an
d b
ulk
mat
eria
l; r
ejec
tion
, q
uar
anti
ne
and
ac
cep
tan
ce p
roce
sses
in p
lace
;
•
Fac
ilit
ies
for
mat
eria
l re
ceip
t in
spec
tion
avai
lab
le.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.6
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.5 S
ecti
on
10
.6
[17
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.2
4 [
5].
PR
5
Ma
teria
l ri
sk m
an
ag
em
en
t
•
Key
mat
eria
l ri
sks
un
der
stood
;
•
Cri
tica
l eq
uip
men
t li
st/t
rack
ing m
ech
anis
m m
ain
tain
ed;
•
Pote
nti
al i
mp
act
of
mat
eria
l/eq
uip
men
t pri
ce i
ncr
ease
s as
sess
ed
wit
h n
o a
dver
se t
ren
ds;
•
Ris
k m
itig
atio
n/c
on
tin
gen
cy p
lan
s in
eff
ect.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.2
[1
6].
PR
6
Qu
ali
ty a
ssu
ra
nce a
nd
q
ua
lity
su
rveil
lan
ce
•
Sup
pli
er a
nd
sub
-sup
pli
er q
ual
ific
atio
n a
nd
au
dit
ing p
rogra
mm
e
in p
lace
;
•
Sou
rce
and
rec
eip
t in
spec
tion
pro
gra
mm
es i
n p
lace
;
•
Non
-con
form
ance
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Fac
ilit
ies
and
Act
ivit
ies,
G
S-R
-3 S
ecti
on
s 5
.23
to 5
.25
[3
].
Ap
pli
cati
on
of
the
Man
agem
ent
Sys
tem
for
Fac
ilit
ies
and
Act
ivit
ies,
GS
-G-3
.1 A
pp
end
ix I
II [
4].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
GS
-G-3
.5 S
ecti
on
s 4
.5,
5.3
3 t
o 5
.37,
5.4
9 (
d)
[5].
40 40 40
II.4
. Q
uality
man
ag
em
ent
and
reco
rds
pro
gra
mm
e re
vie
w
Th
e qu
ali
ty m
an
ag
emen
t a
nd
reco
rds
pro
gra
mm
e re
view
obje
ctiv
e is
to d
eterm
ine
wh
eth
er
qu
ali
ty p
rocess
es a
ppli
ed b
y th
e co
un
terp
art
du
rin
g
the
pro
ject
co
mp
ly w
ith
th
e re
view
ba
sis
an
d r
efere
nce
an
d b
est
in
tern
ati
on
al
pra
ctic
es.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
th
e st
atus
of
pro
cess
es s
urr
ound
ing q
uali
ty a
nd m
ater
ial
surv
eil
lance
and o
ver
sig
ht
for
the
app
licable
pro
ject
, as
well
as
pro
cess
ed r
ela
ted
to
rec
ord
s an
d d
ocu
menta
tio
n c
ontr
ol. N
PP
s have
a hig
h n
eed f
or
accura
te,
det
aile
d c
onst
ruct
ion s
urv
eil
lance
and
over
sig
ht,
and
a s
tro
ng
rec
ord
s m
an
agem
ent
funct
ion.
No
n-c
onfo
rmance
pro
cess
es
for
obse
rved
quali
ty p
roble
ms
need
to
be
well
defi
ned
and
uti
lized b
y p
roje
ct s
taff
. T
hir
d p
art
aud
itin
g a
nd
over
sig
ht
role
s need
to
be
in p
lace
. N
ote
that
so
me
org
aniz
atio
ns
may h
ave
a st
and-a
lone
quali
ty
manual
wh
ile o
ther
s m
ay i
mp
lem
ent
their
pro
ject
quali
ty p
rogra
mm
e v
ia a
ser
ies
of
go
ver
nin
g d
ocu
ments
or
pro
cedure
s det
ail
ing
ro
les
and
resp
onsi
bil
itie
s an
d p
roje
ct i
nte
rface
s.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r F
acil
itie
s and A
ctiv
itie
s S
afe
ty R
equ
irem
ents
; IA
EA
GS
-R-3
[3];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
];
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17].
41
TA
BL
E I
I.4
. P
OS
SIB
LE
QU
AL
ITY
AS
SU
RA
NC
E S
UB
JEC
TS
FO
R C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ION
RE
AD
INE
SS
RE
VIE
W M
ISS
ION
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
QA
1
Qu
ali
ty a
ssu
ra
nce a
nd
con
trols
•
Str
on
g q
ual
ity
pro
gra
mm
e an
d p
roce
du
res
def
ined
an
d
imp
lem
ente
d w
ith
man
dat
ory
co
mp
lian
ce;
•
QA
man
ager
s h
ave
dir
ect
acce
ss t
o c
om
pan
y e
xec
uti
ves
;
•
Reg
ula
r p
rogra
mm
e re
vie
ws
con
du
cted
.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Fac
ilit
ies
and
Act
ivit
ies
Saf
ety
Req
uir
emen
ts;
IAE
A G
S-R
-3 [
3].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
GS
-G-3
.5 (
incl
ud
ing S
ecti
on
s 6
.1,
6.2
, 6
.40
an
d 6
.41
) [5
].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.6
[1
6].
QA
2
Ind
ep
en
den
t a
ssess
men
ts
•
Pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
for
ind
epen
den
t an
alys
is a
nd
au
dit
ing o
f
pro
ject
(sc
op
e, f
ind
ings,
corr
ecti
ve
acti
on
s, p
erfo
rman
ce e
tc.)
;
•
Qu
alif
ied
, ex
per
ien
ced
per
son
nel
in
pla
ce t
o p
erfo
rm
asse
ssm
ents
.
Saf
ety
Ass
essm
ent
for
Fac
ilit
ies
and
Act
ivit
ies;
IA
EA
S
afet
y S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
GS
R P
art
4 [
1].
Ass
essm
ent
of
Defe
nce
in
Dep
th f
or
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er
Pla
nts
; S
afet
y R
eport
s S
erie
s N
o.
46
[3
2].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.50
, 6.2
4 t
o
6.3
4 [
5].
QA
3
Non
-con
form
an
ce a
nd
correcti
ve a
cti
on
prog
ra
mm
es
•
Non
-con
form
ance
/corr
ecti
ve
acti
on
/sel
f-as
sess
men
t an
d
emp
loyee
con
cern
s p
rogra
mm
es i
n p
lace
an
d v
alu
ed f
or
mat
eria
ls,
equ
ipm
ent,
pro
cess
es a
nd
hu
man
per
form
ance
iss
ues
;
•
Evid
ence
of
pro
ble
m t
ren
din
g a
nd
of
less
on
s le
arn
ed b
ein
g
inco
rpora
ted
;
•
Rep
eat
pro
ble
ms
not
tole
rate
d;
•
Man
agem
ent
over
sigh
t o
f p
rogra
mm
e ex
ists
.
Saf
ety
Ass
essm
ent
for
Fac
ilit
ies
and
Act
ivit
ies;
IA
EA
S
afet
y S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
GS
R P
art
4 [
1].
Ass
essm
ent
of
Defe
nce
in
Dep
th f
or
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er
Pla
nts
; S
afet
y R
eport
s S
erie
s N
o.
46
[3
2].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 6
.3 t
o 6
.23
, 6
.42
to 6
.69 [
5].
42 42 42
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
QA
4
Con
stru
cti
on
ex
perie
nce
•
Les
son
s le
arn
ed f
rom
pas
t an
d c
urr
ent
dom
esti
c an
d
inte
rnat
ion
al p
roje
cts
inco
rpora
ted
;
•
Sit
e pro
ble
ms
read
ily
shar
ed e
xte
rnal
ly w
ith
in
du
stry
.
Mod
ific
atio
ns
to N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e;
IAE
A S
afe
ty S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
NS
-G-2
.3 [
8].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.3
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.48
an
d 5
.61
[5].
QA
5
Qu
ali
ty s
urveil
lan
ce a
nd
con
stru
cti
on
in
spect
ion
•
Qu
alit
y su
rvei
llan
ce a
nd
con
stru
ctio
n i
nsp
ecti
on
pro
gra
mm
es
esta
bli
shed
an
d b
ein
g f
oll
ow
ed;
•
Cri
tica
l ch
arac
teri
stic
s fo
r co
nst
ruct
ion
s in
spec
tion
s d
efin
ed
(e.g
. p
roje
ct-s
pec
ific
con
stru
ctio
n i
nsp
ecti
on
ch
eck
list
s b
ased
on
ap
pli
cab
le c
od
es);
•
Insp
ecti
on
an
d t
esti
ng i
s p
lan
ned
an
d i
mp
lem
ente
d a
ccord
ing t
o
issu
ed p
roce
du
res;
•
Reg
ula
tory
in
terf
aces
an
d h
old
poin
ts d
efin
ed;
•
Rew
ork
an
d e
qu
ipm
ent/
mat
eria
l re
ject
ion
met
rics
est
abli
shed
an
d a
dver
se t
ren
ds
iden
tifi
ed;
•
Con
trac
tor
over
sigh
t p
roce
sses
est
abli
shed
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.6
an
d 3
.7
[16
].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
Sec
tion
10
[1
7].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.14
to 5
.23,
5.7
9 t
o 5
.83,
V.6
, V
.31 t
o V
.35
[5
].
QA
6
Con
troll
ed
docu
men
tati
on
an
d
record
s
•
Pro
cess
docu
men
ted
an
d s
yste
ms
in p
lace
for
acce
pta
nce
, st
ora
ge,
an
d r
evis
ion
con
trol
of
con
troll
ed d
ocu
men
tati
on
an
d
reco
rds
rela
ted t
o p
rocu
rem
ent,
pla
nt
con
figu
rati
on,
con
stru
ctio
n,
test
ing,
and
mai
nte
nan
ce;
•
Som
e k
ey
con
stru
ctio
n r
elat
ed d
ocu
men
tati
on
in
clu
des
mat
eria
l
and
fie
ld q
ual
ity
reco
rds
such
as
mat
eria
l his
tory
do
cket
s,
pre
ssu
re b
ou
nd
ary
do
cum
ents
, w
eld
ing r
ecord
s, f
acto
ry
acce
pta
nce
tes
t (F
AT
) r
esult
s, i
nst
alla
tion
rec
ord
s, c
alib
rati
on
re
sult
s, t
urn
over
rec
ord
s et
c.
No
te f
or
eng
inee
ring
rel
ate
d c
on
tro
lled
do
cum
ents
an
d r
eco
rds
see
EN
5.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
4.3
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
Sec
tion
1
0.4
/5/7
[1
7].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
s 5
.10
, 5.1
1,
5.3
1,
5.3
2,
5.1
41 t
o 5
.14
7 [
5].
43
II.5
. H
um
an r
eso
urc
es
and
tra
inin
g r
evie
w
Th
e h
um
an
res
ou
rces
an
d t
rain
ing
revi
ew
obje
cti
ve i
s to
det
erm
ine
wh
eth
er
hu
man
res
ou
rces
appli
ed b
y th
e co
un
terp
art
to t
he
pro
ject
are
suff
icie
nt
an
d a
deq
ua
tely
tra
ined
an
d q
uali
fied
to c
om
ply
wit
h t
he
revi
ew b
asi
s an
d r
efere
nce
an
d g
ood i
nte
rnati
on
al
pra
ctic
es.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
sta
ff r
ead
iness
ass
ocia
ted w
ith t
he
app
licable
pro
ject
to
sta
rt a
nd m
ain
tain
wo
rk.
Su
ffic
ient
train
ed r
eso
urc
es
nee
d
to b
e c
onfi
rmed
avail
ab
le a
t a
dis
cip
line l
evel,
and
per
sonnel
fore
cast
ing
too
ls s
ho
uld
be
in p
lace
. R
isk m
itig
atio
n m
etho
ds
nee
d t
o b
e in
pla
ce f
or
firs
t ti
me
pro
ject
s o
r in
exp
erie
nce
d s
taff
. S
pec
ial
no
te s
ho
uld
be
taken w
ith r
esp
ect
to t
echnic
al
sup
po
rt o
rgan
izat
ions
as
to w
het
her
their
tra
inin
g
and q
uali
ficat
ion
s ar
e su
ffic
ient
for
their
pro
ject
role
s.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Rec
ruit
ment,
Qu
ali
ficat
ion a
nd
Tra
inin
g o
f P
erso
nnel
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
Safe
ty G
uid
e;
IAE
A S
afe
ty S
tand
ards
Ser
ies
No
. N
S-G
-2.8
[10];
•
Wo
rkfo
rce
Pla
nn
ing
fo
r N
ew N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
rogra
mm
es,
IA
EA
Nu
cle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
G-T
-3.1
0 [
22].
44 44 44
TA
BL
E I
I.5
. P
OS
SIB
LE
HU
MA
N R
ES
OU
RC
ES
SU
BJE
CT
S F
OR
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
N R
EA
DIN
ES
S R
EV
IEW
MIS
SIO
N
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
HR
1
Hir
ing
, d
evelo
pm
en
t, a
nd
tra
inin
g
•
Hir
ing,
dev
elop
men
t, a
nd
tra
inin
g p
lan
s ar
e in
pla
ce p
rior
to s
tart
of
maj
or
con
stru
ctio
n t
o e
nsu
re w
ell-
trai
ned
an
d q
ual
ifie
d s
taff
are
av
aila
ble
.
•
Per
son
nel
att
riti
on
rat
es b
ein
g m
on
itore
d a
nd
con
troll
ed.
•
No a
dver
se t
ren
ds
du
e to
lac
k o
f u
nd
erst
and
ing o
f cu
ltu
ral
dif
fere
nce
s.
Work
forc
e P
lan
nin
g f
or
New
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er
Pro
gra
mm
es,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
G-T
-3
.10
[2
2].
HR
2
Perso
nn
el
qu
ali
fica
tion
•
Tra
inin
g a
nd
qual
ific
atio
n r
equ
irem
ents
def
ined
for
skil
led
con
stru
ctio
n w
ork
ers,
super
vis
ors
, q
ual
ity
insp
ecto
rs,
tech
nic
al
sup
port
org
aniz
atio
n,
trai
ner
s, a
nd o
wn
er/o
per
ator
staf
f, e
tc.
•
Sta
ff m
emb
ers
un
der
stan
d a
nd
res
pec
t p
erso
nn
el q
ual
ific
atio
n
lim
its.
Ven
dors
, su
pp
lier
s, s
ervic
e p
rovid
ers
and
con
trac
tors
b
elie
ve
they
are
work
ing w
ith
in t
hei
r ar
eas
of
exp
erti
se a
nd
exp
erie
nce
.
•
Pro
cess
docu
men
ted
for
coll
ecti
on
an
d m
ain
ten
ance
of
trai
nin
g
and
qu
alif
icat
ion
Rec
ord
s o
f sk
ille
d c
on
stru
ctio
n w
ork
ers,
te
chn
ical
sup
port
org
aniz
atio
n,
and
ow
ner
/op
erat
or
staf
f, e
tc.
Rec
ruit
men
t, Q
ual
ific
atio
n a
nd
Tra
inin
g o
f P
erso
nn
el
for
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e N
S-G
-2.8
[1
0].
Ass
uri
ng t
he
com
pet
ence
of
nu
clea
r p
ow
er p
lan
t
con
trac
tor
per
son
nel
, IA
EA
TE
CD
OC
-12
32
[2
7].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, S
ecti
on
3.9
[1
6].
Man
agin
g H
um
an R
esou
rces
in
the
Fie
ld o
f N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y, I
AE
A N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
G-G
-2.1
S
ecti
on
3 [
23
].
HR
3
Hu
ma
n p
erfo
rm
an
ce
•
Tra
inin
g i
s in
pla
ce o
n r
equ
ired
work
sta
ndar
ds
and p
ract
ices
, u
se
of
pre
-job
bri
efin
gs
and
oth
er h
um
an p
erfo
rman
ce t
ech
niq
ues
(fo
r
exam
ple
, st
op
, th
ink
, ac
t, r
evie
w -
ST
AR
), n
eed
to m
ain
tain
str
ict
con
figu
rati
on
man
agem
ent,
an
d e
xp
ecte
d b
ehav
iou
rs.
Ind
ivid
ual
ow
ner
ship
of
work
qu
alit
y an
d s
afet
y is
em
ph
asiz
ed.
Rec
ruit
men
t, Q
ual
ific
atio
n a
nd
Tra
inin
g o
f P
erso
nn
el
for
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts;
Saf
ety
Gu
ide
NS
-G-2
.8
[10
].
HR
4
Hea
lth
an
d s
afe
ty t
rain
ing
•
Hea
lth
an
d s
afet
y tr
ain
ing r
equir
emen
ts i
den
tifi
ed a
nd
ap
pli
ed.
Rec
ruit
men
t, Q
ual
ific
atio
n a
nd
Tra
inin
g o
f P
erso
nn
el
for
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts;
Saf
ety
Gu
ide
NS
-G-2
.8
[10
].
45
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
HR
5
Perso
nn
el
ava
ila
bil
ity
Req
uir
ed t
rain
ed s
taff
avai
lab
le w
hen
nee
ded
•
Sk
ille
d c
on
stru
ctio
n w
ork
er a
nd
oth
er s
taff
avai
labil
ity
pre
-
pla
nn
ed/f
ore
cast
wit
h t
rack
ing p
roce
sses
in
pla
ce.
•
Mob
iliz
atio
n/d
emob
iliz
atio
n t
ime
inte
gra
ted
in
to f
ore
cast
s.
•
Sp
ecia
lize
d s
kil
ls n
eed
s u
nder
stood
(e.
g.
wel
din
g)
and a
dd
ress
ed.
•
Pote
nti
al p
rob
lem
are
as u
nd
erst
ood
an
d a
dd
ress
ed (
e.g.
oth
er
pro
ject
com
pet
itio
n,
wag
e ra
tes,
un
des
irab
le w
ork
co
nd
itio
ns/
sch
edu
les/
loca
tion
s/lo
gis
tics
).
•
Con
tin
gen
cy p
lan
s in
pla
ce.
Rec
ruit
men
t, Q
ual
ific
atio
n a
nd
Tra
inin
g o
f P
erso
nn
el
for
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts;
Saf
ety
Gu
ide
NS
-G-2
.8
[10
].
HR
6
Fir
st l
ine
sup
ervis
ion
an
d m
an
ag
em
en
t
•
Exp
erie
nce
d s
up
ervis
ion
in
pla
ce t
hat
is
(a)
kn
ow
led
gea
ble
in
th
eir
area
of
resp
on
sib
ilit
y an
d (
b)
rein
forc
es h
igh
sta
nd
ards.
•
Key
man
ager
s h
ave
app
rop
riat
e n
ucl
ear
des
ign
an
d c
on
stru
ctio
n
exp
erie
nce
an
d f
ull
y u
nd
erst
and
NP
P c
on
stru
ctio
n c
om
ple
xit
y an
d
regu
lati
on
s. A
ctio
ns
in p
lace
to m
itig
ate
ack
now
ledged
gap
s (e
.g.
via
use
of
advis
ors
, ed
uca
tion
, tr
ainin
g,
vis
its
or
work
exp
erie
nce
at
oth
er N
PP
con
stru
ctio
n s
ites
etc
.).
Man
agem
ent
of
Op
erat
ion
al S
afet
y in
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er
Pla
nts
IN
SA
G-1
3 (
Ap
pen
dix
: P
lan
nin
g,
Con
trol
and
S
up
port
- S
up
ervis
ion
) [1
5].
SC
AR
T G
uid
elin
es,
IAE
A S
ervic
es S
erie
s 1
6,
An
nex
II
, C
har
acte
rist
ic B
: L
ead
ersh
ip f
or
safe
ty i
s cl
ear
[36
].
46 46 46
II.6
. C
onst
ruct
ion r
ead
iness
rev
iew
Th
e co
nst
ruct
ion
rea
din
ess
rev
iew
obje
ctiv
e is
to i
den
tify
an
d c
hara
cteri
se a
ttri
bu
tes
ass
oci
ate
d w
ith
fie
ld c
on
stru
ctio
n a
ctiv
itie
s th
at
the
cou
nte
rpa
rt c
on
sid
ers
as
imp
ort
an
t, a
nd t
hat
cou
ld b
e add
ress
ed b
y th
e co
nst
ruct
ion
rea
din
ess
revie
w m
issi
on
. T
hes
e att
ribu
tes
wil
l als
o s
erve
as
backgro
un
d i
nfo
rma
tio
n w
hen
add
ress
ing t
he
oth
er t
hem
es.
This
evalu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
ov
erall
avail
abil
ity o
f tr
ades
wo
rkfo
rce t
o c
onst
ruct
the
pro
ject
. It
fo
cuse
s o
n s
ite i
nfr
ast
ruct
ure
and
ser
vic
es
read
iness
, to
ol
and
hea
vy l
ift
equ
ipm
ent
avail
abil
ity,
wo
rk m
anag
em
ent
pro
cess
es,
safe
ty a
nd s
ecu
rity
pro
gra
mm
es,
and o
ver
all
co
nst
ruct
ion
pla
nnin
g.
Info
rmat
ion p
rov
ided
in t
his
sec
tio
n w
ill
typ
icall
y b
e ta
rget
ed d
uri
ng a
mis
sio
n o
n a
sam
pli
ng b
asi
s du
e to
vo
lum
es
of
do
cum
enta
tio
n
invo
lved.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
].
•
OS
AR
T g
uid
eli
nes,
IA
EA
Ser
vic
es
Ser
ies
12 [
35].
47
TA
BL
E I
I.6
. P
OS
SIB
LE
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
N S
UB
JEC
TS
FO
R C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ION
RE
AD
INE
SS
RE
VIE
W M
ISS
ION
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
CO
1
Sit
e i
nfr
ast
ru
ctu
re
req
uir
em
en
ts
•
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n (
road
s, w
ater
, ra
il,
air
etc.
);
•
Load
ing/u
nlo
adin
g r
equ
irem
ents
(d
ock
s, r
ail
spurs
, cr
anes
etc
.) a
nd
hea
vy
lift
cap
abil
ity
in p
lace
;
•
Off
-sit
e p
erm
anen
t u
tili
ties
(w
ater
tre
atm
ent,
pow
er,
sew
age
etc.
);
•
Sit
e su
pp
ort
eq
uip
men
t an
d f
acil
itie
s (e
.g.
trai
lers
, w
ork
shop
s,
rest
room
s, c
afet
eria
s, p
ark
ing,
acco
mm
od
atio
n,
hote
ls,
IT,
tele
com
mu
nic
atio
ns,
do
cum
ent
pro
cess
ing e
qu
ipm
ent,
was
te
coll
ecti
on
/dis
posa
l et
c.)
adeq
uat
e fo
r co
nst
ruct
ion p
roje
ct;
•
Tem
pora
ry u
tili
ty s
ervic
es i
n p
lace
(p
ow
er,
wat
er, se
rvic
e ai
r);
•
Lab
ora
tori
es a
vai
lab
le/i
n p
lace
for
chem
ical
an
alys
es r
equ
ired
du
rin
g
con
stru
ctio
n p
has
e;
•
Con
cret
e b
atch
ing p
lan
t;
•
Mod
ule
lay
dow
n a
nd
ass
emb
ly a
rea
in p
lace
;
•
Tra
inin
g f
acil
itie
s av
aila
ble
;
•
Mock
-up
s (m
od
els)
of
key
com
pon
ents
in
stal
led
wh
ere
pra
ctic
al t
o
pra
ctic
e cr
itic
al i
nst
alla
tion
act
ivit
ies.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
s 2
.1
and
2.7
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er
Pla
nts
, IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.5
Sec
tion
3 [
17
].
Bas
ic I
nfr
astr
uct
ure
for
a N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
ct,
IAE
A T
EC
DO
C-1
51
3 [
26
].
CO
2
Reg
ula
tory r
eq
uir
em
en
ts
•
Inte
rfac
es d
efin
ed a
nd
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
to o
bta
in a
nd t
rack
co
mp
lian
ce t
o a
pp
lica
ble
:
o
Sit
ing/b
uil
din
g p
erm
its/
ord
ers;
o
E
nvir
on
men
tal
per
mit
s an
d a
ppro
val
s;
o
Haz
ard
ou
s m
ater
ials
an
d w
aste
s;
o
Nu
clea
r re
gu
lato
ry a
nd
lic
ense
req
uir
emen
ts;
o
Oth
er r
equ
irem
ents
as
def
ined
by
loca
l la
ws,
rule
s, c
od
es,
stan
dar
ds,
an
d r
egu
lati
on
s;
•
Ou
tsta
nd
ing a
ctio
ns
inte
gra
ted
into
pro
ject
sch
edu
le.
Ris
ks
rela
ted
to
thes
e re
qu
irem
ents
docu
men
ted
(se
e P
M9).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.1
an
d
2.5
[1
6].
Bas
ic I
nfr
astr
uct
ure
for
a N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t P
roje
ct,
IAE
A T
EC
DO
C-1
51
3 [
26
].
Lic
ensi
ng P
roce
ss f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s S
pec
ific
Saf
ety
Gu
ide
Ser
ies
No.
SS
G-1
2,
Sec
tion
s 3
.36
to 3
.43
[1
3].
48 48 48
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
CO
3
To
ols
ava
ila
bil
ity
•
Req
uir
ed t
ools
on
sit
e or
wit
h k
now
n d
eliv
ery;
•
Hea
vy
lift
cra
nes
avai
lab
le o
r sc
hed
ule
d a
s n
eces
sary
;
•
Cal
ibra
tion
an
d t
esti
ng f
acil
itie
s av
aila
ble
. P
roce
ss t
o c
on
trol
cali
bra
tion
rec
ord
s in
pla
ce (
cali
bra
tion
ser
ial
num
ber
tra
ckin
g,
etc.
);
•
To
ol
trac
kin
g p
roce
sses
in
pla
ce.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.2
[1
6].
Hea
vy
Com
pon
ent
Rep
lace
men
t in
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts:
Exp
erie
nce
an
d G
uid
elin
es I
AE
A
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-3
.2 [
19
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
S
ecti
on
s 5
.24
to 5
.30
[5
].
CO
4
Con
stru
cti
on
seq
uen
cin
g
•
Ex
ecu
tion
pla
n i
n p
lace
, ta
kin
g i
nto
acc
ou
nt
des
ign a
nd
mat
eria
l
avai
lab
ilit
y, l
arge
equ
ipm
ent
del
iver
ies,
sta
gin
g r
equ
irem
ents
, co
nst
ruct
ion
/mod
ule
seq
uen
cin
g,
tooli
ng a
nd
cra
nin
g r
equ
irem
ents
, tr
ades
avai
lab
ilit
y, w
eath
er,
etc.
;
•
Work
man
agem
ent
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
;
•
Key
dep
end
enci
es (
e.g.
fun
din
g r
elea
ses,
ow
ner
ap
pro
val
s, r
equir
ed
con
trac
ts,
work
sit
e av
aila
bil
ity)
un
der
stood
.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.1
to
3.5
[1
6].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er
Pla
nts
, IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.5
Sec
tion
s 4
to 9
[1
7].
Hea
vy
Com
pon
ent
Rep
lace
men
t in
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts:
Exp
erie
nce
an
d G
uid
elin
es I
AE
A
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-3
.2 [
19
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
S
ecti
on
s 5
.62
to 5
.64
[5
].
CO
5
Secu
rit
y a
nd
sa
feg
ua
rd
s re
qu
irem
en
ts
•
Sit
e se
curi
ty r
equ
irem
ents
an
d m
ater
ial
con
trol/
insp
ecti
on
/tra
nsf
er
req
uir
emen
ts u
nd
erst
ood
;
•
Sit
e b
ou
nd
ary
iden
tifi
ed a
nd c
on
troll
ed;
•
Per
son
nel
cle
aran
ce r
equir
emen
ts u
nd
erst
ood
an
d i
n p
lace
;
•
Req
uir
emen
ts f
or
veh
icle
an
d o
ther
ch
eck
s in
pla
ce.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
2.8
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
S
ecti
on
5.1
81
to 5
.18
3 [
5].
49
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
CO
6
Con
stru
cti
on
ex
ecu
tion
pla
ns
an
d p
roced
ures
•
Ow
ner
Ap
pro
val
Req
uir
emen
ts d
efin
ed;
•
Ch
ange
Con
trol
and
Non
-Con
form
ance
Pro
cess
es D
efin
ed (
see
sect
ion
EN
3);
•
Do
cum
enta
tion
/del
iver
able
s d
efin
ed;
•
Con
stru
ctio
n p
roce
du
res
and
sta
nd
ard
s id
enti
fied
and
avai
lable
;
•
Reh
ears
als
com
ple
ted
or
pla
nn
ed f
or
key
ex
ecu
tion
act
ivit
ies
(e.g
.
con
cret
e b
ase
slab
pou
rin
g);
•
Fore
ign
Mat
eria
l E
xcl
usi
on
(F
ME
) p
rogra
mm
e in
pla
ce;
•
Inte
rfac
es b
etw
een
co
mp
anie
s d
efin
ed;
•
Sit
e lo
gis
tics
def
ined
(w
ork
zon
e ow
ner
ship
, ac
cess
/egre
ss,
was
te
dis
posa
l p
roce
du
res
etc.
);
•
Pre
ven
tati
ve
mai
nte
nan
ce r
equ
irem
ents
duri
ng c
on
stru
ctio
n p
has
e
def
ined
;
•
Hu
man
per
form
ance
pro
gra
mm
e in
pla
ce (
wit
h g
oal
to e
nsu
re
work
ers
and
sup
ervis
ors
un
der
stan
d a
nd r
igoro
usl
y ad
her
e to
pro
ced
ure
s an
d o
ther
work
docu
men
ts);
•
Act
ivit
ies
that
cou
ld i
mp
act
nea
rby
op
erat
ing u
nit
s ad
dre
ssed
(c
aref
ull
y p
lan
ned
, fo
rmal
in
terf
aces
an
d n
oti
fica
tion
pro
ced
ure
s in
pla
ce).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
s 3
.3,
3.4
, 3.7
, 5
.1 [
16
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e N
o.
GS
-G-3
.5,
Sec
tion
s 5
.14
9,
6.4
2 t
o 6
.69,
V.7
to V
10
, V
.19
to V
.22
[5
].
CO
7
En
vir
on
men
tal
ma
na
gem
en
t
•
En
vir
on
men
tal
man
agem
ent
syst
ems
in p
lace
.
•
Haz
ard
ou
s m
ater
ial
iden
tifi
cati
on
, st
ora
ge,
an
d c
ontr
ol
mea
sure
s in
pla
ce (
incl
ud
ing m
easu
res
for
bu
lk c
on
sum
able
s, c
hem
ical
s, s
olv
ents
, cl
ean
ers
etc.
);
•
Mon
itori
ng a
nd
corr
ecti
ve
acti
on
sys
tem
s in
pla
ce f
or
con
stru
ctio
n
imp
acts
on
sit
e co
nd
itio
ns
(e.g
. ex
cavat
ion
an
d b
ack
fill
) an
d n
atu
ral
envir
on
men
t (e
.g.
gro
un
dw
ater
, w
ild
life
etc
.);
Em
ergen
cy r
esp
on
se p
roce
sses
in
pla
ce f
or
spil
ls a
nd
oth
er i
nci
den
ts.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.8
[1
6].
Sit
e E
val
uat
ion
for
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A
Saf
ety
Req
uir
emen
ts N
o.
NS
-R-3
[2
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
S
ecti
on
5.1
70
to 5
.17
4 [
5].
50 50 50
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
CO
8
Sa
fety
ma
na
gem
en
t
•
Go
od
saf
ety
cult
ure
est
abli
shed
;
•
Ind
ust
rial
saf
ety
pro
gra
mm
e d
ocu
men
ted
an
d m
etri
cs e
stab
lish
ed,
incl
ud
ing s
afet
y in
spec
tion
s, f
orw
ard
lo
ok
ing m
etri
cs (
e.g.
atti
tud
es,
beh
avio
urs
, jo
b s
ite
con
dit
ion
s);
•
Hig
h l
evel
of
ow
ner
in
volv
emen
t in
con
trac
tor
con
stru
ctio
n s
afet
y
pro
gra
mm
es (
e.g.
safe
ty b
rief
ings,
in
spec
tion
s);
•
Low
tole
ran
ce f
or
safe
ty v
iola
tion
s;
•
Low
lev
els
of
site
saf
ety
inci
den
ts;
•
Saf
e b
ehav
iou
rs v
alu
ed a
nd
en
cou
raged
;
•
Des
ign
pro
cess
es i
nco
rpora
te s
afet
y p
rofe
ssio
nal
rev
iew
s;
•
Saf
ety
pre
qu
alif
icat
ion
pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
for
con
trac
tors
;
•
To
ols
, tr
ain
ing a
nd
eq
uip
men
t av
aila
ble
to a
chie
ve
a sa
fe w
ork
envir
on
men
t;
•
Hou
sek
eep
ing p
rogra
mm
e in
pla
ce;
•
Hig
h-r
isk
act
ivit
y p
lan
nin
g a
nd
haz
ard
an
alys
is p
roce
sses
in
pla
ce;
•
Just
in
tim
e tr
ainin
g,
pre
-job
bri
efs,
an
d/o
r m
ock
-up
s u
sed
for
firs
t
tim
e, s
ensi
tive,
or
com
ple
x t
ask
s.
•
Co
mp
reh
ensi
ve
lift
ing,
riggin
g,
mat
eria
l h
andli
ng,
rad
ioac
tive
sou
rce,
an
d e
lect
rica
l sa
fety
pro
gra
mm
es i
n p
lace
;
•
Pro
cess
es i
n p
lace
to e
nsu
re p
hys
ical
con
dit
ion
s th
at m
igh
t im
pac
t on
safe
ty a
re p
rom
ptl
y ad
dre
ssed
.
•
Em
plo
yee
s st
op
-work
au
thori
ty p
roce
sses
to c
orr
ect
un
safe
con
dit
ion
s (p
rote
ct f
rom
im
min
ent
dan
ger
) d
efin
ed;
•
Rad
iati
on
pro
tect
ion
pro
gra
mm
es a
nd
tra
inin
g i
n e
ffec
t p
rior
to
intr
od
uct
ion
of
nu
clea
r m
ater
ial
to s
ite
(or
wh
ere
imp
acte
d b
y ad
jace
nt
nu
clea
r si
te);
•
Em
ergen
cy p
rep
ared
nes
s ca
pab
ilit
ies
esta
bli
shed
(fi
re,
med
ical
,
rad
iati
on
em
ergen
cies
).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
3.8
[1
6].
Saf
ety
Cu
ltu
re i
n P
re-o
per
atio
nal
Ph
ases
of
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
t P
roje
cts
Saf
ety
Rep
ort
s S
erie
s 7
4 [
33
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s, I
AE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
S
ecti
on
5.6
5 t
o 5
.78
, 5
.15
0,
5.1
80
, 5
.18
1,
6.3
5
to 6
.39
, an
d A
pp
end
ix I
[5
].
OS
AR
T g
uid
elin
es,
IAE
A S
ervic
es S
erie
s 1
2,
Sec
tion
3.1
.5 [
35
].
CO
9
New
con
stru
cti
on
pra
cti
ces
an
d t
ech
nolo
gie
s
•
Imp
act
of
pla
nn
ed n
ew/a
dvan
ced
con
stru
ctio
n p
ract
ices
,
tech
nolo
gie
s, a
nd
ad
van
ced
mat
eria
ls e
val
uat
ed a
nd
ris
ks
mit
igat
ed
(fir
st o
f a
kin
d/f
irst
in
a c
ou
ntr
y ri
sks)
.
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er
Pla
nts
, IA
EA
Nu
clea
r E
ner
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.5
[17
].
51
II.7
. C
onst
ruct
ion i
nst
all
atio
n c
om
ple
tio
n a
ssura
nce/
syst
em
hando
ver
Th
e co
nst
ruct
ion
co
mp
leti
on
ass
ura
nce/
syst
em h
an
dove
r re
view
obje
ctiv
e is
to a
ssess
qu
ali
ty o
f docu
men
ted p
rocess
es f
or
ass
uri
ng
th
at
all
requ
ired c
on
stru
ctio
n r
ela
ted
act
ivit
ies
ass
oci
ate
d w
ith
a s
yste
m,
stru
ctu
re o
r co
mpon
ent
are
com
ple
ted t
o r
equ
ired
qu
ali
ty l
evel
s p
rio
r to
turn
over
to
co
mm
issi
on
ing
.
Fo
r a
Phas
e 1
mis
sio
n t
he f
ocu
s w
ou
ld b
e o
n w
heth
er r
equ
ired
pro
cess
es
are
in p
lace
, w
hil
e P
hase
2 m
issi
ons
wo
uld
revie
w p
erfo
rmance
again
st
the
issu
ed p
roce
ss.
Th
is e
valu
atio
n s
ho
uld
ass
ess
the
stat
us
of
pro
cess
es
surr
ound
ing s
yst
em
turn
over
to
co
mm
issi
onin
g.
Fo
llo
win
g s
tart
of
const
ruct
ion s
yst
em
s w
ill
rap
idly
be b
uil
t. T
he
over
all
pro
ject
req
uir
es
a fa
st,
quali
ty,
turn
over
to t
he
com
mis
sio
nin
g o
rganiz
atio
n i
n o
rder
to
min
imiz
e p
roje
ct d
ura
tio
n.
These
pro
cess
es
sho
uld
be
avail
able
as
soo
n a
s co
nst
ruct
ion b
egin
s, a
nd t
he c
om
mis
sio
nin
g o
rganiz
atio
n s
ho
uld
be
full
y a
war
e o
f th
e tu
rno
ver
sch
edu
le.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Manag
em
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nu
cle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17];
•
The
Man
agem
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucle
ar I
nst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5
].
•
OS
AR
T g
uid
eli
nes,
IA
EA
Ser
vic
es
Ser
ies
12 [
25].
52 52 52
TA
BL
E I
I.7
. P
OS
SIB
LE
IN
ST
AL
LA
TIO
N C
OM
PL
ET
EN
ES
S S
UB
JEC
TS
FO
R C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ION
RE
AD
INE
SS
RE
VIE
W M
ISS
ION
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
IC1
P
rocess
def
ined
•
Form
al p
roce
ss i
n e
ffec
t fo
r d
ocu
men
tin
g c
on
stru
ctio
n
com
ple
tion
act
ivit
ies
(in
clu
din
g f
lush
ing,
clea
nin
g,
or
chec
k
and
tes
t ac
tivit
ies
per
form
ed b
y th
e co
nst
ruct
or)
, tr
ansf
erri
ng
info
rmat
ion
to r
ecord
s, a
nd
tra
nsf
erri
ng s
yste
m a
nd a
rea
ow
ner
ship
to c
om
mis
sion
ing o
rgan
izat
ion
an
d o
per
atio
ns.
Mod
ific
atio
ns
to N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e;
IAE
A S
afe
ty S
tan
dar
ds
Ser
ies
No.
NS
-G-2
.3 [
8].
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
4.1
to 4
.3
[16
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.3
1,
5.3
2,
V.1
1,
V.1
8,
and V
.31
to V
.35
[5
].
OS
AR
T g
uid
elin
es,
IAE
A S
ervic
es S
erie
s 1
2,
Sec
tion
3
.10
.12
[3
5].
Co
mm
issi
on
ing f
or
Nu
clea
r P
ow
er P
lan
ts S
afet
y G
uid
e S
erie
s N
o.
NS
-G-2
.9,
Sec
tion
s 4
.6 t
o 4
.8,
4.2
7,
4.5
8 t
o 4
.64 [
11
].
IC2
W
alk
do
wn
process
es
•
Do
cum
ente
d w
alk
dow
n p
roce
sses
in
corp
ora
ted
as
par
t of
com
ple
tion
ass
ura
nce
pro
cess
(e.
g.
rep
ort
s, p
hoto
s, v
ideo
s et
c.).
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
V.1
1 [
5].
IC3
H
old
poin
ts
•
Con
stru
ctio
n c
om
ple
tion
act
ivit
ies
com
ple
ted
pri
or
to
com
mis
sion
ing s
tart
;
•
Con
stru
ctio
n c
om
ple
tion
act
ivit
ies
wit
h a
pp
rop
riat
e h
old
poin
ts a
re s
ched
ule
d a
s p
art
of
the
mas
ter
pro
ject
sch
edu
le.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
4.1
to 4
.3
[16
].
IC4
O
pen
ite
m t
rack
ing
•
Rob
ust
met
hod
in
pla
ce f
or
trac
kin
g a
nd
co
mp
leti
ng o
pen
item
s to
be
carr
ied
in
to c
om
mis
sion
ing o
r op
erat
ional
ph
ase.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
t C
on
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
an
d E
xp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
En
erg
y S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
Sec
tion
4.1
to 4
.3
[16
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
V.1
1 (
2)
[5].
53
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
IC5
L
ab
ell
ing
an
d c
on
trol
of
bou
nd
arie
s
•
Pro
cess
in
pla
ce t
o l
abel
all
SS
Cs
and
to c
on
trol
bou
nd
arie
s
bet
wee
n t
urn
ed o
ver
an
d n
ot
turn
ed o
ver
SS
C’s
(ta
ggin
g,
work
pro
tect
ion
, ow
ner
ship
bou
nd
arie
s li
st e
tc.)
.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.1
63
to 5
.16
4,
V.1
1 [
5].
OS
AR
T g
uid
elin
es,
IAE
A S
ervic
es S
erie
s 1
2,
Sec
tion
3
.10
.13
[3
5].
IC6
In
access
ible
ite
ms
•
Pro
cess
in
pla
ce f
or
SS
C’s
th
at w
ill
late
r b
ecom
e in
acce
ssib
le
to r
ecei
ve
com
pre
hen
sive
insp
ecti
on
an
d o
ver
sigh
t as
par
t of
han
do
ver
rev
iew
.
IC7
In
terim
ma
inte
na
nce d
uri
ng
con
stru
cti
on
•
Mai
nte
nan
ce p
roce
du
res,
tooli
ng,
and
pre
ven
tati
ve
mai
nte
nan
ce p
rogra
mm
es i
n p
lace
to s
up
port
sys
tem
s b
ein
g
op
erat
ed w
hil
e co
nst
ruct
ion
is
stil
l in
pro
gre
ss.
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.1
0 (
g)
[5].
54 54 54
II.8
. T
arget
ed A
rea
Rev
iew
(in
clu
din
g P
roje
ct D
ela
ys
and C
orr
ecti
ve
Act
ions)
Th
e ta
rgete
d a
rea
rev
iew
obje
ctiv
e is
to r
evie
w o
ther
are
as
as
requ
est
ed b
y th
e co
un
terp
art
on
a f
ocu
ssed
ba
sis.
Fo
r ex
am
ple
wher
e p
roje
ct d
ela
ys
have
occ
urr
ed,
one
po
ssib
le a
ctio
n w
ou
ld b
e to
rev
iew
whet
her
less
ons
lear
ned
abo
ut
such d
ela
ys
on t
his
or
pre
vio
us
sim
ilar
pro
ject
s hav
e been u
nder
stoo
d,
and
that
appro
pri
ate
mea
sure
s have b
een t
aken t
o a
ddre
ss t
hem
fro
m a
pro
cess
or
risk
mit
igat
ion
per
spec
tive
(su
ch a
rev
iew
wo
uld
typ
icall
y b
e fo
r P
has
e 2 r
evie
ws
only
at
counte
rpa
rt r
equ
est)
.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
No
ne.
55
TA
BL
E I
I.8
. P
OS
SIB
LE
TA
RG
ET
ED
AR
EA
SU
BJE
CT
S F
OR
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
N R
EA
DIN
ES
S R
EV
IEW
MIS
SIO
N
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
S
pec
ific
ref
eren
ces
Con
clu
sion
TA
1
Co
mp
lete
d a
cti
vit
ies
an
d e
xp
en
dit
ures
•
Rev
iew
of
acti
vit
ies,
work
seq
uen
ces,
dura
tion
s, m
anp
ow
er,
and
ca
pit
al e
xp
end
iture
s.
TA
2
Deta
iled
as-
ex
peri
en
ced
sch
ed
ule
revie
w
•
Rev
iew
du
rati
on
an
d s
equ
ence
s of
as-e
xp
erie
nce
d s
ched
ule
.
TA
3
Va
ria
nce r
evie
w
•
Var
ian
ces
bet
wee
n p
lan
ned
an
d a
ctu
al p
erfo
rman
ce a
nd
del
ay
anal
ysis
.
TA
4
Sig
nif
ica
nt
even
ts o
f in
terest
•
Sig
nif
ican
t in
cid
ents
du
rin
g P
has
e 1
con
stru
ctio
n.
TA
5
Correcti
ve a
cti
on
revie
w
•
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
of
corr
ecti
ve
acti
on
s to
pre
ven
t re
pea
t p
rob
lem
s.
•
Man
ager
ial
resp
on
se t
o r
epea
t is
sues
.
TA
6
Oth
er
area
s
•
Oth
er a
reas
(b
y re
qu
est
of
cou
nte
rpar
t).
See
Sec
tion
2.3
.7.
56 56 56
II.9
. T
echnic
al
Vis
its
Th
e te
chn
ica
l vi
sit
obje
ctiv
e is
to
rev
iew
speci
fic f
aci
liti
es
that
may
be
per
tin
ent
to c
on
stru
ctio
n p
roje
ct s
ucc
ess,
wh
ich
may
be
loca
ted o
ff o
f
the
con
stru
ctio
n s
ite
pro
per,
an
d t
hu
s w
ou
ld r
equ
ire
speci
al
coo
rdin
ati
on
or
logis
tics
as
part
of
the
con
stru
ctio
n m
issi
on
.
These
vis
its
wo
uld
typ
icall
y o
nly
be
at c
ounte
rpar
t re
ques
t.
Gen
era
l re
fere
nce
do
cum
ents
•
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucle
ar P
ow
er P
lant
Co
nst
ruct
ion:
Gu
ideli
nes
and E
xper
ience,
IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.7
[16];
•
Co
nst
ruct
ion T
ech
no
log
ies
for
Nucle
ar P
ow
er P
lants
, IA
EA
Nucle
ar E
ner
gy S
erie
s N
P-T
-2.5
[17];
•
The
Manag
em
ent
Syst
em
fo
r N
ucl
ear
Inst
all
atio
ns,
IA
EA
Safe
ty G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
[5].
57
TA
BL
E I
I.9
. P
OS
SIB
LE
TE
CH
NIC
AL
VIS
IT S
UB
JEC
TS
FO
R C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ION
RE
AD
INE
SS
RE
VIE
W M
ISS
ION
Id.
Sub
ject
an
d d
escr
ipti
on
R
efer
ence
C
on
clu
sion
TV
1
Co
mp
on
en
t fa
bric
ato
rs
•
Maj
or
com
pon
ent
man
ufa
ctu
rer(
s)/s
up
pli
er(s
) fa
cili
ty.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lant
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
and
Exp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on
3.6
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afet
y G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.1
6 [
5]
TV
2
Mod
ule
ass
em
bly
•
Con
stru
ctio
n m
od
ule
ass
emb
ly a
rea.
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lant
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
and
Exp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on
3.6
an
d 3
.7
[16
].
Con
stru
ctio
n T
ech
nolo
gie
s fo
r N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lan
ts,
IAE
A N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.5,
Sec
tion
8
[17
].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afet
y G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
V.8
, V
.14 [
5].
TV
3
Rem
ote
TS
Os
•
Rem
ote
ly l
oca
ted
tec
hn
ical
sup
port
org
aniz
atio
n(s
) (e
.g.
engin
eeri
ng).
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent
in N
ucl
ear
Pow
er P
lant
Con
stru
ctio
n:
Gu
idel
ines
and
Exp
erie
nce
, IA
EA
N
ucl
ear
Ener
gy
Ser
ies
NP
-T-2
.7 S
ecti
on
2.3
[1
6].
Th
e M
anag
emen
t S
yste
m f
or
Nu
clea
r In
stal
lati
on
s,
IAE
A S
afet
y G
uid
e G
S-G
-3.5
Sec
tion
5.7
9 t
o 5
.83
[5
].
TV
4
Oth
ers
•
Oth
ers
(by
req
ues
t of
cou
nte
rpar
t).
See
Sec
tion
2.3
.6.
58
APPENDIX III: MISSION REPORT TEMPLATE
This appendix may be used by the construction review team as a template for the mission
report. It is available in electronic form. On the following pages text in italics should be
replaced with attributes of the given construction readiness review mission.
59
Construction Review -location-20XX Original:
English
Distribution: Restricted
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
REPORT
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION READINESS
FOR A NUCLEAR POWER PROJECT
IAEA REVIEW OF
Review Mission Title
Review Location and Review Period
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF
CONSTRUCTION READINESS FOR A NUCLEAR POWER PROJECT
IAEA REVIEW OF title of project under review
DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY
DIVISION OF NUCLEAR POWER
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
60
MISSION REPORT
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION READINESS
FOR A NUCLEAR POWER PROJECT
IAEA REVIEW OF Review Mission Title
Plant or Project Graphic may be added on this page.
REPORT TO
Counterpart Organization
Review location and review period
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
61
MISSION REPORT
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION READINESS FOR A NUCLEAR
POWER PROJECT
IAEA REVIEW OF Review |Mission Title
Mission date: Review Period
Location: Location of Review
Facility: Counterpart Organization
Organized by: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Department of Nuclear Energy
Division of Nuclear Power
IAEA Review Team: Participant Name (Organization,
Country)
Participant Name (Organization,
Country)
Issued Date
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
62
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................
1.1 MISSION BACKGROUND ..................................................................................
1.2 MISSION OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE ...................................................................
1.3 REVIEW BASIS AND REFERENCES .................................................................
1.3.1 Guideline References for Review Conduct .................................................
1.3.2 Information Reviewed ................................................................................
1.4 REVIEW CONDUCT ............................................................................................
1.5 MISSION REPORT CONTENT ............................................................................
2 MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................
2.1 GENERAL CONCLUSION ...................................................................................
2.1.1 Review of Presented Documents.................................................................
2.1.2 Tours and/or Demonstrations ......................................................................
2.2 SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS, SUGGESTIONS, AND GOOD
PRACTICES .................................................................................................
2.2.1 Recommendations ......................................................................................
2.2.2 Suggestions.................................................................................................
2.2.3 Good Practices ............................................................................................
3 ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES ..................................................................................
3.1 ISSUES ..................................................................................................................
3.1.1 General .......................................................................................................
3.1.2 Reviewed Issues Summary .........................................................................
4 GOOD PRACTICES AND PERFORMANCES OBSERVED ...............................
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................
REFERENCES (FOR MISSION REPORT) .............................................................................
ABBREVIATIONS USED.......................................................................................................
ANNEX I. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ...........................................................................
ANNEX II. MISSION PROGRAM ..................................................................................
ANNEX III. ISSUE SHEET TEMPLATE .........................................................................
ANNEX IV. IAEA REVIEW TEAM QUESTIONS, REQUESTS FOR
ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION .................................................................
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
63
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2013 the IAEA Nuclear Power Engineering Section established the “Construction
Readiness Review" (CORR) mission to conduct peer reviews of construction projects related
to nuclear power plants.
This report documents the Construction Review performed during the week of Review
Period and Review Location, on the project being reviewed.
Background of the system(s) being reviewed.
History of review request, discussion of preparatory meeting, and basis for review such as
….These guidelines were based on IAEA Nuclear Energy Series documents Project
Management in Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience NP-T-2.7,
Construction Technologies for Nuclear Power Plants NP-T-2.5, and well as other internally
recognized project or construction management documents (list specific documents utilized
during the mission).
The Construction Review was performed by a group of invited subject matter experts. Results
of their review were published in a mission report at the end of the review, which provided
recommendations, suggestions and noted good practices in the construction process.
Goals of counterpart organization….such as their goals were that the mission would provide
them with a basis for proceeding with the next stage of the NPP construction project, and by
implementing mission recommendations and findings future project risk would be minimized.
Description of general manner as to how the review was conducted…such as
Construction Review activities consisted of a series of formal presentations by counterpart
organization staff (supported by associated organizations) clarification discussions between
the IAEA review team and the counterpart organization staff after these presentations, as
well as a tour of the construction site and related facilities. The IAEA mission review team
then submitted a series of written questions to project staff, which were followed up by
written responses and subsequent discussions between the two parties.
Conclusions of this report summarize the findings of the review mission and provide number
(99) recommendations and number (99) suggestions for the project to consider, along with
acknowledging number (99) good practices from which other project organizations may
benefit. Through the review of presented documents and counterpart discussion, the IAEA
review team confirmed that extensive work of high quality has been performed to develop
the project under review to its current state. In general, the reviewed project contains the
elements generally recommended IAEA Nuclear Energy Series documents related to project
management of NPP projects, and construction technology for NPP projects. Specific issues,
identified as areas for further improvement, are listed in the issues sheets, as suggestions and
recommendations.
If deemed appropriate by review team, text similar to the following may be used….
It should be noted that nuclear power plant projects, such as those of the project under
review, are extremely complex and the review mission was conducted for only a relatively
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
64
short time period. It is the opinion of the review team that some comments in the report
should not be seen as deficiencies in the overall project, but may be a result of the difficulty
in resolving all of their concerns in such a limited time period.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. MISSION BACKGROUND
A review mission entitled the “Review of Construction Readiness for a Nuclear Power Plant
Project" (CORR review) was established in 2013 at the Nuclear Power Engineering Section of
the IAEA. The mission is intended to conduct peer reviews of construction projects related to
nuclear power plants.
Construction Readiness review missions are performed by a group of invited subject matter
experts from various IAEA member states. The construction readiness review mission is
based on appropriate IAEA documents, such as Safety Guides and Nuclear Energy Series
reports.
This portion may be tailored based on the results of the preparatory meeting….
Guidelines for this construction readiness review mission were established at a consultancy
meeting in location and date of the preparatory meeting. Review methodology follows the
structure of IAEA CORR guidelines – Guidelines for preparing and conducting review
missions of construction project readiness for nuclear power plants [37].
More specifically, nine (9) specific requirement areas were selected for review:
[Adjust list below as necessary]
1. Project management;
2. Engineering readiness (engineering deliverables required to support construction);
3. Procurement/material/supply chain readiness (material available to support
construction activities);
4. Quality management and records;
5. Human resources and training;
6. Construction readiness;
7. Construction installation completion assurance/system turnover process;
8. Targeted reviews (including project delays and corrective actions);
9. Technical visits.
The subject of the current construction review was the project under review and a brief
discussion of its background including a discussion of any previous third party and/or
regulatory reviews.
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
65
1.2. MISSION OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
Objectives of the construction review mission were to:
• Conduct an independent and comprehensive review of the project under review using
information provided by the counterpart and obtained by the construction review team
during the mission period. The review focussed on project readiness to proceed to its
next stage, and covered the nine (9) areas identified in Section 1.1;
• Produce a mission report, including issue sheets.
It is the counterpart organization’s expectation that the IAEA’s construction review findings,
as an independent international technical review, will provide the following benefits to their
project:
• Improvement performance of the project under review by implementing mission
recommendations and findings;
• Other expectations of the counterpart.
1.3. REVIEW BASIS AND REFERENCES
1.3.1. Guideline references for review conduct
The review basis was IAEA Nuclear Energy Series documents Project Management in
Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience NP-T-2.7 [16], Construction
Technologies for Nuclear Power Plants NP-T-2.5 [17], and well as other internally recognized
project or construction management documents (list specific documents utilized during the
mission).
Review team members also used expert judgment to compare review subjects against or
existing international good practices.
1.3.2. Information reviewed
Information provided by counterpart for the review purposes was supported by the following
documents:
Item
No. Title Revision (date) Page
1 Listing of review basis documents…
2
3
4
5
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
66
1.4. REVIEW CONDUCT
The construction review mission was conducted based on technical information provided by
counterpart in the following forms:
• Presentations by counterpart experts and representatives of other companies, delivered
on the first two days of the mission;
• Description of the review material and discussion of any demonstrations and technical
visits held during the review process;
• As required…Additional presentations and discussions, including counterpart
responses to the initial list of items to be clarified. (The list of XX general and YY
specific questions and requests compiled by the review team on the second day of the
mission can be found in Annex IV of this report.).
Counterparts from counterpart and additional counterparts from participating organizations
were involved in technical meetings and discussions. A list of all participants can be found in
Annex I of this report.
The counterpart organization was very well prepared and comprehensive, and also was
presented very well. Material on the selected subjects included:
• Summary of the topics covered during the presentations and discussions.
During the course of the mission, the counterpart also prepared responses and additional
presentations to clarify details addressed by the IAEA experts.
Discussion of any technical visits and/or demonstrations during the review follows…
Conclusions, recommendations, suggestions, and good practices (documented in the
remainder of this report) were presented and agreed upon with the counterparts during the
closeout session.
This report is a joint effort of the IAEA review team and its content was shared among all
review team members.
The review was conducted in an excellent atmosphere of mutual understanding with a positive
sharing of experience between team members and counterparts.
1.5. MISSION REPORT CONTENT
Section 1 of the report provides general mission information. Section 2 provides a summary
with general conclusions, and a list of specific recommendations, suggestions, and good
practices identified. Section 3 provides detail regarding findings in each area reviewed, while
section 4 provides further explanation regarding good practices and performances that have
been identified.
Annexes I and II of the report provide a list of participants in the meetings and the mission
programme. Detailed technical recommendations and suggestions developed by the IAEA
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
67
experts are collected in Annex III in issue sheets. Annex IV contains a list of clarification
questions that were submitted to the counterpart.
2. MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1. GENERAL CONCLUSION
Concluding remarks will be dependent on observations made during review but a suggested
format is…
Through review of presented documents and discussions with counterparts, the IAEA review
team confirmed that extensive work of high quality has been performed to progress the
project project(s) under review to its current state. Reviewed parts of the project generally
contain the elements generally recommended in IAEA Nuclear Energy Series documents
related to Project Management of NPP Projects, and Construction Technology for NPP
projects. Specific issues, identified as areas for further improvement, are listed in issues
sheets, as suggestions and recommendations.
2.1.1. Review of presented documents
The review areas covered (as appropriate):
• Review area 1;
• Review area 2;
• Review area n.
2.1.1.1. Review area 1
Discussion of review area 1
2.1.1.2. Review area 2
Discussion of review area 2
2.1.2. Tours and/or demonstrations
Summary of review findings …
After review and discussion with counterparts, the IAEA review team compiled AA
recommendations, BB suggestions, and CC good practices (See Sections 2.2, 3, 4, and Annex
III for more details.)
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
68
2.2. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS, SUGGESTIONS, AND GOOD PRACTICES
List specific text of recommendations, suggestions and good practices only. Further
explanation will be contained in Sections 3 and 4.
2.2.1. Recommendations
R1) Text of recommendation 1;
R2) Text of recommendation 2.
2.2.2. Suggestions
S1) Text of suggestion 1;
S2) Text of suggestion 2.
2.2.3. Good Practices
GP1) Text of good practice 1;
GP2) Text of good practice 2.
3. ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES
3.1. ISSUES
3.1.1. General
In this section, issues arising from the project review performed by the IAEA review team
are presented in detail, following the prepared format for the CORR service.
Recommendations and suggestions are numbered in sequential order for further reference.
Reviewed documents, corresponding specifically to the issue under consideration, are also
listed in the issue sheets.
Information documented in issue sheets, developed in accordance with Section 2.5.2 of the
construction review mission protocol [37], should be included at this point,
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
69
3.1.2. Reviewed issues summary
The following table summarizes the issues and associated recommendations and suggestions:
Issue No. Title of Issue Recommendation
No.
Suggestion
No.
CO-I1 Text from Section 2 of the issue sheet No. 1 from the “CO” area.
Applicable R No. (if one exists)
Applicable S No. (if one exists)
CO-I2 Text from Section 2 of the issue sheet No. 2
from the “CO” area.
Applicable R No.
(if one exists)
Applicable S No.
(if one exists)
HR-I1 Text from Section 2 of the issue sheet No. 1 from the “HR” area.
Applicable R No. (if one exists)
Applicable S No. (if one exists)
Total No. of issue sheets No. of Recommendations No. of Suggestions
All issue sheets are collected in Annex III.
4. GOOD PRACTICES AND PERFORMANCES OBSERVED
Good practices and good performances identified by the IAEA review team, developed in
accordance with Section 2.5.3 of the construction review mission protocol [37], should be
included and expanded upon at this point.
During the course of this CORR mission, a number of good practices were observed or
identified by the IAEA review team that are novel, have proven benefits, and can be used on
other NPP construction projects. These include [insert explanation of identified good
practices here]…..
A summary of identified good practices is in the following table:
GP No. Title of Good Practice
GP-1 Text of Good Practice GP-1
GP-2… Text of Good Practice GP-2
GP-n Text of Good Practice GP-n
A number of good performance areas were also identified. These include [insert explanation
of identified good performances here]……
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
70
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Tailored based on how the review went….
The host organization provided excellent conditions for conducting the mission. The
counterpart organization staff was fully prepared for technical discussions, presentations and
demonstrations, and promptly responded to questions and clarification requests from the
IAEA review team.
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
71
REFERENCES (FOR MISSION REPORT)
[1] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety Assessment for Facilities
and Activities; IAEA Safety Standards Series, General Safety Requirements Part 4,
No. GSR Part 4 IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[2] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Site Evaluation for Nuclear
Installations, NS-R-3, IAEA, Vienna (2003).
[3] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Management System for
Facilities and Activities, GS-R-3, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[4] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Application of the Management
System for Facilities and Activities, GS-G-3.1, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[5] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Management System for
Nuclear Installations, GS-G-3.5, IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[6] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Format and Content of the Safety
Analysis Report for Nuclear Power Plants, GS-G-4.1, IAEA, Vienna (2004).
[7] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Fire Safety in the Operation of
Nuclear Power Plants, NS-G-2.1, IAEA, Vienna (2000).
[8] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Modifications to Nuclear Power
Plants, NS-G-2.3, IAEA, Vienna (2001).
[9] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Maintenance, Surveillance and In-
service Inspection in Nuclear Power Plants Safety Guide, Series No. NS-G-2.6, IAEA,
Vienna (2002).
[10] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Recruitment, Qualification and
Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants Safety Guide Series No. NS-G-2.8,
IAEA, Vienna (2002).
[11] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Commissioning for Nuclear
Power Plants Safety Guide Series No. NS-G-2.9, IAEA, Vienna (2003).
[12] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY Ageing Management of Nuclear
Power Plants, NS-G-2.12, IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[13] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Licensing Process for Nuclear
Installations Specific Safety Guide Series No. SSG-12, IAEA, Vienna (2010).
[14] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Chemistry Programme for Water
Cooled Nuclear Power Plants, Specific Safety Guide Series No. SSG-13, IAEA, Vienna
(2011).
[15] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Management of Operational
Safety in Nuclear Power Plants, INSAG-13, IAEA, Vienna (1999).
Add others referred to in the report. Although not the focus of this review, other published
IAEA Safety guides specific to NPP design or ageing management may also be referred to if
applicable.
[16] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Project Management in Nuclear
Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series
NP-T-2.7, IAEA, Vienna (2012).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
72
[17] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Construction Technologies for
Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-T-2.5, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
[18] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Restarting of Delayed Nuclear
Power Plant Projects, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-T-3.4, IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[19] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Heavy Component Replacement
in Nuclear Power Plants: Experience and Guidelines IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-
T-3.2, IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[20] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Financing of New Nuclear Power
Plants, , IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-4.2 , IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[21] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Stakeholder Involvement
Throughout the Life Cycle of Nuclear Facilities, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-
1.4, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
[22] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Workforce Planning for New
Nuclear Power Programmes, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-3.10, IAEA, Vienna
(2011).
[23] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Managing Human Resources in
the Field of Nuclear Energy, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-G-2.1, IAEA, Vienna
(2009).
[24] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Management of Delayed Nuclear
Power Plant Projects, IAEA TECDOC-1110, IAEA, Vienna (1999).
[25] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Construction and Commissioning
Experience of Evolutionary Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA TECDOC-
1390, IAEA, Vienna (2004).
[26] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Basic Infrastructure for a Nuclear
Power Plant Project, IAEA TECDOC-1513, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[27] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Assuring the competence of
nuclear power plant contractor personnel, IAEA TECDOC-1232, IAEA, Vienna (2001).
[28] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Risk Management, a Tool For
Improving NPP Performance, IAEA TECDOC-1209, IAEA, Vienna (2001).
[29] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Guidelines for Integrated Risk
Assessment and Management in Large Industrial Areas, , IAEA TECDOC-994, IAEA,
Vienna (1998).
[30] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Managing Suspect and
Counterfeit Items in the Nuclear Industry, IAEA-TECDOC-1169, IAEA, Vienna
(2000).
[31] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Equipment Qualification in
Operational Nuclear Power Plants, Upgrading, Preserving, and Renewing, Safety
Report Series No. 3, IAEA, Vienna (1998).
[32] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Assessment of Defence in Depth
for Nuclear Power Plants; Safety Reports Series No. 46, IAEA, Vienna (2005).
[33] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety Culture in Pre-operational
Phases of Nuclear Power Plant Projects Safety Reports Series 74, IAEA, Vienna (2012).
[34] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Computer Security at Nuclear
Facilities Reference Manual; IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 17, Technical
Guidance, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
73
[35] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, OSART guidelines: Reference
report for IAEA Operational Safety Review Teams (OSARTs), IAEA Services Series
12 (IAEA SVS-12), IAEA, Vienna (2005).
[36] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, SCART Guidelines, Reference
report for IAEA Safety Culture Assessment Review Team (SCART), IAEA Services
Series 16 (IAEA SVS-16), IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[37] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, CORR guidelines- Guidelines for
preparing and conducting review missions of construction project readiness for nuclear
power plants, IAEA Services Series 24 (IAEA SVS-24), IAEA, Vienna (2013).
Add others referred to in the report. Although not the focus of this review, other published
IAEA Technical Documents, Reports, or Guidelines specific to NPP design, ageing
management and/or construction may also be referred to if applicable.
The following list contains titles of a sampling of internationally recognized project and
construction management documents that with the agreement of the counterpart were
utilized by the construction review team in evaluating the readiness of the NPP construction
project, identifying potential best practices, and/or simply as background material.
Identification of such documents does not represent their official endorsement by the IAEA
nor a complete list of publications from the indicated organization.
Edit to remove any documents not utilized on the mission, or add any additional
documentation that was utilized.
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, (http://www.iso.org/)
[38] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 10006:2003 Quality
management systems - Guidelines for quality management in projects, ISO, Geneva
(2003).
[39] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 21500:2012 Guidance on
project management, ISO, Geneva (2012).
[40] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 10005:2005 Quality
management systems - Guidelines for quality plans, ISO, Geneva (2005).
[41] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 22263:2008 Organization
of information about construction works - Framework for management of project
information, ISO, Geneva (2008).
[42] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 9001:2008 Quality
Management System Requirements, ISO, Geneva (2008).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, (http://www.pmi.org/)
[43] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 5th
Edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2013).
[44] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Construction Extension to the PMBOK®
Guide, 3rd
edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2007).
[45] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Scheduling, 2nd
edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2011).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
74
[46] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Earned Value
Management, 2nd
edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2009).
[47] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project Risk
Management, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2009).
[48] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project Estimating,
PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2010).
[49] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project Configuration
Management, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2007).
[50] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Work Breakdown
Structures, 2nd
edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2006).
PRINCE2, (http://www.prince-officialsite.com/)
[51] PRINCE2, Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2, TSO (The Stationery Office)
London, (2009).
[52] PRINCE2, Directing Successful Projects with PRINCE2, TSO (The Stationery Office)
London, (2009).
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, (http://www.construction-institute.org)
[53] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR113-2 PDRI: Project Definition Rating
Index – Industrial Projects, Version 3.2 , CII, Austin, TX, USA (2009).
[54] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR242-2 Front End Planning of
Renovation and Revamp Projects, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2009).
[55] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR213-2 Front End Planning Toolkit,
Version 3.0, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2012).
[56] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR220-2 Project Health Indicator (PHI)
Tool: Assessing Project Health During Project Execution, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2006).
EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, (http://www.eci-online.org/)
[57] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, G001 Guidelines for the Management of
Major Construction Projects, ECI, Loughborough, UK (1991).
[58] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, PDD/01 Project Development and
Definition, ECI, Loughborough, UK (2005).
[59] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, RMVEP/001 Risk Management Value
Enhancement Practice, ECI, Loughborough, UK (2004).
ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING,
(http://www.aacei.org)
[60] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 16R-90:
Conducting Technical and Economic Evaluations: As Applied for the Process and
Utility Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (1991).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
75
[61] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 19R-97:
Estimate Preparation Costs: As Applied for the Process Industries, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (1997).
[62] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 20R-98:
Project Code of Accounts, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2003).
[63] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 21R-98:
Project Code of Accounts: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction
for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2003).
[64] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 22R-01:
Direct Labor Productivity Measurement: As Applied in Construction and Major
Maintenance Projects, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2004).
[65] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 23R-02:
Identification of Activities, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2007).
[66] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 24R-03:
Developing Activity Logic, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2004).
[67] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 25R-03:
Estimating Lost Labor Productivity in Construction Claims, AACE, Morgantown, WV,
USA, (2004).
[68] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 27R-03:
Schedule Classification System, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[69] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 28R-03:
Developing Location Factors by Factoring: As Applied in Architecture, Engineering,
Procurement and Construction, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2006).
[70] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 29R-03:
Forensic Schedule Analysis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[71] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 30R-03:
Implementing Project Constructability, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[72] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 31R-03:
Reviewing, Validating and Documenting the Estimate, AACE, Morgantown, WV,
USA, (2009).
[73] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 32R-04:
Determining Activity Durations, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[74] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 34R-05:
Basis of Estimate, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2013).
[75] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 36R-08:
Development of Cost Estimate Plans - As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and
Construction for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[76] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 37R-06:
Schedule Levels of Detail: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[77] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 38R-06:
Documenting the Schedule Basis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[78] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 39R-06:
Project Planning - As Applied in Engineering and Construction for Capital Projects,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
76
[79] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 40R-08:
Contingency Estimating: General Principles, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
[80] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 41R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Range Estimating, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
[81] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 42R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Parametric Estimating, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[82] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 43R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Parametric Estimating – Example
Models as Applied for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[83] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 44R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Expected Value, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[84] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 45R-08:
Scheduling Claims Protection Methods, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[85] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 48R-06:
Schedule Constructability Review, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[86] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 49R-06:
Identifying the Critical Path, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[87] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 52R-06:
Time Impact Analysis: As Applied in Construction, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA,
(2006).
[88] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 53R-06:
Schedule Update Review: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
[89] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 54R-07:
Recovery Scheduling - As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[90] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 55R-09:
Analyzing S-Curves, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[91] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 56R-08:
Cost Estimate Classification System - As Applied for the Building and General
Construction Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[92] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 57R-09:
Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis Using Monte Carlo Simulation of a CPM
Model , AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[93] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 58R-10:
Escalation Estimating Principles and Methods Using Indices, AACE, Morgantown,
WV, USA, (2011).
[94] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 59R-10:
Development of Factored Cost Estimates – As Applied in Engineering, Procurement,
and Construction for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[95] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 60R-10:
Developing the Project Controls Plan , AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
Construction Readiness Review Mission of NPP
Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
77
[96] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 62R-11:
Identification and Qualitative Analysis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[97] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 64R-11:
CPM Schedule Risk Modeling and Analysis: Special Considerations , AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[98] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 65R-11:
Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using
Expected Value, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[99] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 68R-11:
Escalation Estimating Using Indices and Monte Carlo Simulation, AACE, Morgantown,
WV, USA, (2012).
GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR PROJECT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS GAPPS,
(http://www.globalpmstandards.org/)
[100] GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR PROJECT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, GAPPS
(2007) A Framework for Performance Based Competency Standards for Global Level
1 and 2 Project Managers, GAPPS, Australia (2007).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN , (http://www.pmaj.or.jp/ENG/)
[101] PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN, Project Management
Knowledge System (P2M) PMAJ, Tokyo, Japan (2005).
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE (EPRI), (http://www.epri.com)
[102] ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, Advanced Nuclear Technology:
Supplier Quality Management for New Nuclear Plant Construction Projects, 2013
Technical Report 3002000521, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, USA (2013).
INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS (INPO), (http://www.inpo.org)
[103] INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS, Principles for Excellence in
Nuclear Power Construction, INPO 09-007, INPO, Atlanta, GA, USA (2010).
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
78
ABBREVIATIONS USED (FOR MISSION REPORT)
List should be tailored for the review (do not include if small and abbreviations can be
included in report text).....
AIP Advance Information Package
CORR Construction Readiness Review Mission
NPP Nuclear Power Plant
SSC Systems, Structures, and Components
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
79
ANNEX I. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
I. IAEA Expert Team
1. Reviewer 1 IAEA/NENP, Team Leader
2. Reviewer 2… Organization, country
3. Reviewer n… Organization, country
II. Counterpart Participants
1. Participant 1 Organization
2. Participant 2… Organization
3. Participant n… Organization
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
80
ANNEX II. MISSION PROGRAMME
Insert agenda/timetable of review meeting
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
81
ANNEX III. ISSUE SHEET TEMPLATE
Insert issue sheets in sequential order by area.
1. ISSUE IDENTIFICATION Issue Number: ____- I ____ (format Area - I#)
NPP: Unit:
Mission: IAEA Review of (PROJECT UNDER REVIEW)
Reviewed Area:
Issue Title:
2. ISSUE CLARIFICATION
2.1 – FUNDAMENTAL OVERALL PROBLEM:
2.2 – IAEA BASIS:
3. ASSESSMENT BY THE IAEA REVIEW TEAM Date: D1/M1/YYY1
3.1 – FACTS:
F1)
F2)
F3)
F4)
3.2 –CONSEQUENCES:
3.3 – RECOMMENDATIONS / SUGGESTIONS:
R) … should….
S) Consideration should be given to …
3.4 – DOCUMENTS REVIEWED:
4. COUNTERPART ACTIONS Date: D2/M2/ YYY2
n.a.
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
82
5. FOLLOW-UP ASSESSMENT BY THE IAEA REVIEW
TEAM
Date: D3/M3/ YYY3
5.1 – FACTS:
F1) n.a.
5.2 – DOCUMENTS REVIEWED:
n.a.
5.3 – RESOLUTION DEGREE:
1. Withdrawn
2. Insufficient progress to date
3. Satisfactory progress to date
4. Issue resolved
Withdrawn - Recommendation/suggestion is not appropriate due, for example, to poor or
incorrect definition of original finding, its having minimal impact, or where additional
clarification was provided.
Insufficient progress to date - Actions taken or planned do not lead to conclusion that issue
will be resolved in a reasonable time frame. This category includes recommendations for
which no action has been taken, unless the recommendation has been withdrawn.
Satisfactory progress to date - The implemented actions meet partially the intent of
recommendation/suggestion of previous mission.
Issue resolved - The intent of recommendation/suggestion of previous mission is fully met.
Issue closed.
Construction Readiness
Review Mission of NPP Project(s)under Review
Construction-mission-20XX
MR. XX
83
ANNEX IV. IAEA REVIEW TEAM QUESTIONS, REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL
EXPLANATION
These are clarification questions submitted by the review team prior to development of issue
sheets…
General questions
1. General question 1
2. General question n
Detailed questions
1. Detailed question 1
2. Detailed question n
Besides “IAEA REVIEW TEAM QUESTIONS” add any other Annexes or Appendices as
needed here after Annex IV.
End of Mission Report Template.
85
REFERENCES
[1] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety Assessment for Facilities
and Activities; IAEA Safety Standards Series, General Safety Requirements Part 4,
No. GSR Part 4 IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[2] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Site Evaluation for Nuclear
Installations, NS-R-3, IAEA, Vienna (2003).
[3] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Management System for
Facilities and Activities, GS-R-3, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[4] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Application of the Management
System for Facilities and Activities, GS-G-3.1, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[5] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Management System for
Nuclear Installations, GS-G-3.5, IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[6] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Format and Content of the
Safety Analysis Report for Nuclear Power Plants, GS-G-4.1, IAEA, Vienna (2004).
[7] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Fire Safety in the Operation of
Nuclear Power Plants, NS-G-2.1, IAEA, Vienna (2000).
[8] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Modifications to Nuclear Power
Plants, NS-G-2.3, IAEA, Vienna (2001).
[9] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Maintenance, Surveillance and
In-service Inspection in Nuclear Power Plants Safety Guide, Series No. NS-G-2.6,
IAEA, Vienna (2002).
[10] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Recruitment, Qualification and
Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants Safety Guide Series No. NS-G-2.8,
IAEA, Vienna (2002).
[11] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Commissioning for Nuclear
Power Plants Safety Guide Series No. NS-G-2.9, IAEA, Vienna (2003).
[12] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY Ageing Management of Nuclear
Power Plants, NS-G-2.12, IAEA, Vienna (2009).
[13] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Licensing Process for Nuclear
Installations Specific Safety Guide Series No. SSG-12, IAEA, Vienna (2010).
[14] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Chemistry Programme for Water
Cooled Nuclear Power Plants, Specific Safety Guide Series No. SSG-13, IAEA,
Vienna (2011).
[15] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Management of Operational
Safety in Nuclear Power Plants, INSAG-13, IAEA, Vienna (1999).
[16] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Project Management in Nuclear
Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series
NP-T-2.7, IAEA, Vienna (2012).
[17] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Construction Technologies for
Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-T-2.5, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
[18] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Restarting of Delayed Nuclear
Power Plant Projects, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-T-3.4, IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[19] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Heavy Component Replacement
in Nuclear Power Plants: Experience and Guidelines IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NP-
T-3.2, IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[20] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Financing of New Nuclear
Power Plants, , IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-4.2 , IAEA, Vienna (2008).
86
[21] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Stakeholder Involvement
Throughout the Life Cycle of Nuclear Facilities, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-
1.4, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
[22] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Workforce Planning for New
Nuclear Power Programmes, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-3.10, IAEA, Vienna
(2011).
[23] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Managing Human Resources in
the Field of Nuclear Energy, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-G-2.1, IAEA, Vienna
(2009).
[24] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Management of Delayed Nuclear
Power Plant Projects, IAEA TECDOC-1110, IAEA, Vienna (1999).
[25] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Construction and
Commissioning Experience of Evolutionary Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants,
IAEA TECDOC-1390, IAEA, Vienna (2004).
[26] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Basic Infrastructure for a
Nuclear Power Plant Project, IAEA TECDOC-1513, IAEA, Vienna (2006).
[27] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Assuring the competence of
nuclear power plant contractor personnel, IAEA TECDOC-1232, IAEA, Vienna
(2001).
[28] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Risk Management, a Tool For
Improving NPP Performance, IAEA TECDOC-1209, IAEA, Vienna (2001).
[29] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Guidelines for Integrated Risk
Assessment and Management in Large Industrial Areas, IAEA TECDOC-994, IAEA,
Vienna (1998).
[30] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Managing Suspect and
Counterfeit Items in the Nuclear Industry, IAEA-TECDOC-1169, IAEA, Vienna
(2000).
[31] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Equipment Qualification in
Operational Nuclear Power Plants, Upgrading, Preserving, and Renewing, Safety
Report Series No. 3, IAEA, Vienna (1998).
[32] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Assessment of Defence in Depth
for Nuclear Power Plants; Safety Reports Series No. 46, IAEA, Vienna (2005).
[33] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety Culture in Pre-operational
Phases of Nuclear Power Plant Projects, Safety Reports Series 74, IAEA, Vienna
(2012).
[34] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Computer Security at Nuclear
Facilities Reference Manual; IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 17, Technical
Guidance, IAEA, Vienna (2011).
[35] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, OSART guidelines Reference
report for IAEA Operational Safety Review Teams (OSARTs), IAEA Services Series
12 (IAEA SVS-12), IAEA, Vienna (2005).
[36] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, SCART Guidelines, Reference
Report for IAEA Safety Culture Assessment Review Team (SCART), IAEA Services
Series 16 (IAEA SVS-16), IAEA, Vienna (2008).
[37] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 10006:2003 Quality
management systems - Guidelines for quality management in projects, ISO, Geneva
(2003).
[38] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 21500:2012 Guidance on
87
project management, ISO, Geneva (2012).
[39] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 10005:2005 Quality
management systems - Guidelines for quality plans, ISO, Geneva (2005).
[40] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 22263:2008 Organization of
information about construction works - Framework for management of project
information, ISO, Geneva (2008).
[41] INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION, ISO 9001:2008 Quality
Management System Requirements, ISO, Geneva (2008).
[42] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 5th Edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2013).
[43] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Construction Extension to the PMBOK®
Guide, 3rd edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2007).
[44] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Scheduling, 2nd
edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2011).
[45] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Earned Value
Management, 2nd edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2009).
[46] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project Risk
Management, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2009).
[47] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project Estimating,
PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2010).
[48] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Project
Configuration Management, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2007).
[49] PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE, Practice Standard for Work Breakdown
Structures, 2nd edition, PMI, Newtown Square, USA (2006).
[50] PRINCE2, Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2, TSO (The Stationery
Office) London, (2009).
[51] PRINCE2, Directing Successful Projects with PRINCE2, TSO (The Stationery Office)
London, (2009).
[52] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR113-2 PDRI: Project Definition
Rating Index – Industrial Projects, Version 3.2, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2009).
[53] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR242-2 Front End Planning of
Renovation and Revamp Projects, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2009).
[54] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR213-2 Front End Planning Toolkit,
Version 3.0, CII, Austin, TX, USA (2012).
[55] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY INSTITUTE, IR220-2 Project Health Indicator (PHI)
Tool: Assessing Project Health During Project Execution, CII, Austin, TX, USA
(2006).
[56] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, G001 Guidelines for the Management
of Major Construction Projects, ECI, Loughborough, UK (1991).
[57] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, PDD/01 Project Development and
Definition, ECI, Loughborough, UK (2005).
[58] EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE, RMVEP/001 Risk Management Value
Enhancement Practice, ECI, Loughborough, UK (2004).
[59] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 16R-90:
Conducting Technical and Economic Evaluations: As Applied for the Process and
Utility Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (1991).
88
[60] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 19R-97:
Estimate Preparation Costs: As Applied for the Process Industries, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (1997).
[61] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 20R-98:
Project Code of Accounts, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2003).
[62] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 21R-98:
Project Code of Accounts: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction
for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2003).
[63] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 22R-01:
Direct Labor Productivity Measurement: As Applied in Construction and Major
Maintenance Projects, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2004).
[64] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 23R-02:
Identification of Activities, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2007).
[65] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 24R-03:
Developing Activity Logic, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2004).
[66] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 25R-03:
Estimating Lost Labor Productivity in Construction Claims, AACE, Morgantown,
WV, USA, (2004).
[67] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 27R-03:
Schedule Classification System, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[68] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 28R-03:
Developing Location Factors by Factoring: As Applied in Architecture, Engineering,
Procurement and Construction, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2006).
[69] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 29R-03:
Forensic Schedule Analysis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[70] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 30R-03:
Implementing Project Constructability, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[71] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 31R-03:
Reviewing, Validating and Documenting the Estimate, AACE, Morgantown, WV,
USA, (2009).
[72] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 32R-04:
Determining Activity Durations, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[73] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 34R-05:
Basis of Estimate, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2013).
[74] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 36R-08:
Development of Cost Estimate Plans - As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and
Construction for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[75] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 37R-06:
Schedule Levels of Detail: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[76] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 38R-06:
Documenting the Schedule Basis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[77] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 39R-06:
Project Planning - As Applied in Engineering and Construction for Capital Projects,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[78] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 40R-08:
Contingency Estimating: General Principles, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
89
[79] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 41R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Range Estimating, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
[80] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 42R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Parametric Estimating, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[81] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 43R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Parametric Estimating –
Example Models as Applied for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV,
USA, (2011).
[82] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 44R-08:
Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using Expected Value, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[83] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 45R-08:
Scheduling Claims Protection Methods, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[84] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 48R-06:
Schedule Constructability Review, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2009).
[85] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 49R-06:
Identifying the Critical Path, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[86] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 52R-06:
Time Impact Analysis: As Applied in Construction, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA,
(2006).
[87] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 53R-06:
Schedule Update Review: As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2008).
[88] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 54R-07:
Recovery Scheduling - As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction,
AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[89] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 55R-09:
Analyzing S-Curves, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2010).
[90] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 56R-08:
Cost Estimate Classification System - As Applied for the Building and General
Construction Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[91] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 57R-09:
Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis Using Monte Carlo Simulation of a CPM
Model , AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[92] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 58R-10:
Escalation Estimating Principles and Methods Using Indices, AACE, Morgantown,
WV, USA, (2011).
[93] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 59R-10:
Development of Factored Cost Estimates – As Applied in Engineering, Procurement,
and Construction for the Process Industries, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[94] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 60R-10:
Developing the Project Controls Plan, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2011).
[95] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 62R-11:
Identification and Qualitative Analysis, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
90
[96] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 64R-11:
CPM Schedule Risk Modeling and Analysis: Special Considerations, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[97] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 65R-11:
Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis and Contingency Determination Using
Expected Value, AACE, Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[98] ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COST ENGINEERING, 68R-11:
Escalation Estimating Using Indices and Monte Carlo Simulation, AACE,
Morgantown, WV, USA, (2012).
[99] GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR PROJECT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, GAPPS
(2007) A Framework for Performance Based Competency Standards for Global Level
1 and 2 Project Managers, GAPPS, Australia (2007).
[100] PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN, Project Management
Knowledge System (P2M), PMAJ, Tokyo, Japan (2005).
[101] ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, Advanced Nuclear Technology:
Supplier Quality Management for New Nuclear Plant Construction Projects, 2013
Technical Report 3002000521, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, USA (2013).
[102] INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS, Principles for Excellence in
Nuclear Power Construction, INPO 09-007, INPO, Atlanta, GA, USA (2010).
91
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Advance information package: A set of documents provided to construction review team
members by the counterpart organization during the preparatory phase prior to the review
mission.
Breakout session: A technical session during the review mission where only part of the
construction review team is involved.
Briefing meeting: A meeting or conference call of the construction review team held prior to
the review mission, to ensure all members of the construction review team have all necessary
information, and to gather a list of initial questions for the counterpart.
Code of conduct: A set of policies and practices that construction review team members
must observe during the review mission.
Closeout session: Final plenary session during the review mission, where the construction
review team presents Findings, the counterpart expresses their point of view, and mutual
agreement is attained on any remaining outstanding issues.
Construction readiness review mission (CORR mission): Review service directly
addressing strategy and key elements for implementation of construction projects for NPPs
noting, in applicable cases, specific concerns related to quality assurance requirements, and
readiness related to project under review.
Construction review team: Group of industry experts and/or IAEA staff members
assembled to perform the construction readiness review mission.
Construction review team meeting: Meeting during the construction readiness review
mission involving the construction review team only. It allows team members to share
information and understanding, compare points of view, and to reach a team consensus on
questions and Findings.
Construction review team leader: An IAEA staff member designated as responsible for all
preparatory activities, to act as an official liaison with the counterpart, to co-chair the review
mission with the counterpart representative, to prepare and issue the mission report, and to
be responsible for follow-up activities.
Counterpart: Organization that requested the construction readiness review mission, that is
responsible for providing information and answers necessary to the review, and that hosts the
review mission.
Counterpart representative: Person designated by the counterpart to be their representative
and point of contact with the construction review team leader.
Debriefing meeting: Meeting of construction review team held after the review mission to
develop the quasi-final state of the mission report.
Fact: An evidence of deficiency in programmes or performance. Based on grouping facts of
similar nature, each reviewer develops an issue stated as a fundamental overall problem
which can have a significant consequence for the project under review.
Finding: An issue, recommendation, suggestion or good practice that the construction
review team mentions, or intends to mention, in the mission report.
Fundamental overall problem: A generic deficiency in programmes or performance which
can lead to significant consequences for the project under review.
Good practice: An outstanding, markedly superior, and proven performance, programme,
activity or design element that contributes directly or indirectly to project or nuclear power
plant good performance. They should be sufficiently superior and have broad enough
application to be brought to the attention of other NPPs, construction companies, suppliers,
assessors, integrators, etc. and be worthy of their consideration in a general drive for
excellence. Just fulfilling normal requirements or expectations would not merit a good
practice.
92
Good performance: A superior objective that has been achieved, or a good technique or
programme that contributes directly or indirectly to sustained project performance that works
well for the project in question. However, it might not be necessary to recommend its
adoption on other NPP projects, because of financial considerations, differences in approach,
technical reasons, or others.
Issue: An identified concern or an area for improvement, which has been identified on the
basis of the review basis and reference, and/or internationally recognized good practices in
the subject area.
Opening session: Initial plenary session during the review mission, to ensure all participants
in the review mission (construction review team and counterpart) have all necessary or
useful information.
Plenary session: Session during the review mission involving the complete construction
review team and counterpart.
Project under review: The NPP project to be reviewed, with its defined scope and
boundaries.
Recommendation: Advice from the construction review team on what improvements should
be made that would contribute to resolve an issue. Follow-up action is required.
Resolution degree: A status related to an issue at a given time. It is one of “issue resolved”,
“satisfactory progress to date”, “insufficient progress to date”, or “withdrawn”.
Review basis and reference: A set of documents against which the project under review
will be assessed.
Review mission agenda: A documented schedule for the conduct of the construction
readiness review mission.
Suggestion: Advice from the construction review team on what improvements may be made
that would contribute to resolve an issue. Follow-up action is not strictly required; it is only
optional in order to get closer to internationally recognized good practices.
Targeted review: Technical session during the review mission that allows the construction
review team to study a selected topic in deep detail.
Technical presentation: Technical session where the counterpart presents a specific aspect
of the project under review, at a level of detail that allow the construction review team to
assess the project’s compliance to the review basis and reference.
Technical session: A session during the review mission involving the construction review
team and counterpart, where the construction review team reviews specific technical
subjects.
Technical visit: Technical session where the construction review team can collect facts first
hand that would otherwise be difficult to gather from documentation or presentations.
1
93
CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW
Chung, H. Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KHNP)
Republic of Korea
James, P. Consultant Canada
Kang, K.S. International Atomic Energy Agency
Kumar, P. Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited (BHAVINI)
India
Malkawi, A. Jordan Atomic Energy Commission Jordan
Moore, J.H. International Atomic Energy Agency
Nuzzo, F. International Atomic Energy Agency
Robertson, T. Chicago Bridge & Iron Company (CB&I) United States of America
Štilinis, R. Visagino atominė elektrinė, UAB Lithuania
Turkov, V. Republican Unitary Enterprise Belnipienergoprom
Belarus
Zafar Ullah, M. Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of Bangladesh
Bangladesh
Consultants Meetings Vienna, Austria: 6–8 November, 2012; 23–25 April, 2013
@ No. 23
ORDERING LOCALLYIn the following countries, IAEA priced publications may be purchased from the sources listed below, or from major local booksellers. Orders for unpriced publications should be made directly to the IAEA. The contact details are given at the end of this list.
AUSTRALIADA Information Services648 Whitehorse Road, Mitcham, VIC 3132, AUSTRALIA Telephone: +61 3 9210 7777 Fax: +61 3 9210 7788 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.dadirect.com.au
BELGIUMJean de LannoyAvenue du Roi 202, 1190 Brussels, BELGIUM Telephone: +32 2 5384 308 Fax: +32 2 5380 841 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.jean-de-lannoy.be
CANADARenouf Publishing Co. Ltd.Telephone: +1 613 745 2665 Fax: +1 643 745 7660 5369 Canotek Road, Ottawa, ON K1J 9J3, CANADA Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.renoufbooks.com
Bernan Associates4501 Forbes Blvd., Suite 200, Lanham, MD 20706-4391, USA Telephone: +1 800 865 3457 Fax: +1 800 865 3450 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.bernan.com
CZECH REPUBLICSuweco CZ, spol. S.r.o.Klecakova 347, 180 21 Prague 9, CZECH REPUBLIC Telephone: +420 242 459 202 Fax: +420 242 459 203 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.suweco.cz
FINLANDAkateeminen KirjakauppaPO Box 128 (Keskuskatu 1), 00101 Helsinki, FINLAND Telephone: +358 9 121 41 Fax: +358 9 121 4450 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.akateeminen.com
FRANCEForm-Edit5, rue Janssen, PO Box 25, 75921 Paris CEDEX, FRANCE Telephone: +33 1 42 01 49 49 Fax: +33 1 42 01 90 90 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.formedit.fr
Lavoisier SAS14, rue de Provigny, 94236 Cachan CEDEX, FRANCE Telephone: +33 1 47 40 67 00 Fax: +33 1 47 40 67 02 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.lavoisier.fr
L’Appel du livre99, rue de Charonne, 75011 Paris, FRANCE Telephone: +33 1 43 07 50 80 Fax: +33 1 43 07 50 80 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.appeldulivre.fr
GERMANYGoethe Buchhandlung Teubig GmbHSchweitzer Fachinformationen Willstaetterstrasse 15, 40549 Duesseldorf, GERMANY Telephone: +49 (0) 211 49 8740 Fax: +49 (0) 211 49 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.goethebuch.de/
HUNGARYLibrotade Ltd., Book ImportPF 126, 1656 Budapest, HUNGARY Telephone: +36 1 257 7777 Fax: +36 1 257 7472 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.librotade.hu
INDIAAllied Publishers Pvt. Ltd.1st Floor, Dubash House, 15, J.N. Heredi Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400001, INDIA Telephone: +91 22 42126969/31 Fax: +91 22 2261 7928 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.alliedpublishers.com
Bookwell3/79 Nirankari, Dehli 110009, INDIA Tel.: +91 11 2760 1283 +91 11 27604536 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.bookwellindia.com/
ITALYLibreria Scientifica “AEIOU”Via Vincenzo Maria Coronelli 6, 20146 Milan, ITALY Tel.: +39 02 48 95 45 52 Fax: +39 02 48 95 45 48 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.libreriaaeiou.eu/
JAPANMaruzen Co., Ltd.1-9-18 Kaigan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0022, JAPAN Tel.: +81 3 6367 6047 Fax: +81 3 6367 6160 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://maruzen.co.jp
NETHERLANDSMartinus Nijhoff InternationalKoraalrood 50, Postbus 1853, 2700 CZ Zoetermeer, NETHERLANDS Tel.: +31 793 684 400 Fax: +31 793 615 698 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.nijhoff.nl
Swets PO Box 26, 2300 AA Leiden Dellaertweg 9b, 2316 WZ Leiden, NETHERLANDS Telephone: +31 88 4679 263 Fax: +31 88 4679 388 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.swets.com
SLOVENIACankarjeva Zalozba ddKopitarjeva 2, 1515 Ljubljana, SLOVENIA Tel.: +386 1 432 31 44 Fax: +386 1 230 14 35 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.mladinska.com/cankarjeva_zalozba
SPAINDiaz de Santos, S.A.Librerias Bookshop Departamento de pedidos Calle Albasanz 2, esquina Hermanos Garcia Noblejas 21, 28037 Madrid, SPAIN Telephone: +34 917 43 48 90 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.diazdesantos.es/
UNITED KINGDOMThe Stationery Office Ltd. (TSO)PO Box 29, Norwich, Norfolk, NR3 1PD, UNITED KINGDOM Telephone: +44 870 600 5552 Email (orders): [email protected] (enquiries): [email protected] Web site: http://www.tso.co.uk
On-line orders:DELTA International Ltd.39, Alexandra Road, Addlestone, Surrey, KT15 2PQ, UNITED KINGDOM Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.profbooks.com
United Nations (UN)300 East 42nd Street, IN-919J, New York, NY 1001, USA Telephone: +1 212 963 8302 Fax: +1 212 963 3489 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.unp.un.org
UNITED STATES OF AMERICABernan Associates4501 Forbes Blvd., Suite 200, Lanham, MD 20706-4391, USA Tel.: +1 800 865 3457 Fax: +1 800 865 3450 Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.bernan.com
Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd.812 Proctor Avenue, Ogdensburg, NY 13669, USA Tel.: +800 551 7470 (toll free) +800 568 8546 (toll free) Email: [email protected] Web site: http://www.renoufbooks.com
Orders for both priced and unpriced publications may be addressed directly to:IAEA Publishing Section, Marketing and Sales Unit, International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone: +43 1 2600 22529 or 22488 • Fax: +43 1 2600 29302 Email: [email protected] • Web site: http://www.iaea.org/books 13
-46871
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCYVIENNA
ISSN 1816–9309
CORR GuidelinesPreparing and Conducting Review Missions of Construction Project Readiness for Nuclear Power Plants
Vienna, December 2013
Services Ser ies 24
@ CO
RR
Guidelines
