PBM2 RULES FOR QUALIFICATION OF NDT SYSTEMS IN SWEDEN

Transkript

1 PBM2 RULES FOR QUALIFICATION OF NDT SYSTEMS IN SWEDEN Edition: 4 This document is jointly produced by the Swedish nuclear power companies. All revisions shall be approved by joint consultation. Approved Barsebäck Power Station PER-GUNNAR CEDER Oskarshamn Power Station BJÖRN GUSTAFSON Forsmark Power Station TOMAS SMED Ringhals Power Station JAN EDBERG

2 PBM2 2(21) Contents INDEX OF REVISIONS - TBM SCOPE DEFINITIONS LIST OF TERMS DEFECT SIZES THE PARTIES' AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY AND TASKS THE LICENSEE (TH) THE QUALIFICATION BODY (KO) THE ACCREDITED LABORATORY (AL) THE ACCREDITED INSPECTION AGENCY (AK) QUALIFICATION FOR IN-SERVICE INSPECTION GENERAL QUALIFICATION PROCEDURE INSPECTION PROCEDURE TECHNICAL JUSTIFICATION DEFECT SPECIFICATION REVIEW OF QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTS EQUIPMENT (MANIPULATOR) QUALIFICATION PRACTICAL TRIALS FOR PROCEDURE AND EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION QUALIFICATION OF PERSONNEL SYSTEM QUALIFICATION ASSESSMENT REQUALIFICATION RESULT REPORTS QUALIFICATION CERTIFICATE QUALIFICATION CERTIFICATE WITHDRAWAL LESSONS LEARNED FORMAL COMPLAINTS QUALIFICATION FOR REPAIRS, MANUFACTURING AND SITE ERECTION GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF WELL-TRIED SCOPE OF QUALIFICATION QUALIFICATION DOCUMENTATION QALIFICATION DOSSIER REGISTER OF CERTIFICATES TEST PIECE REGISTER TEST PIECES QUALITY ASSURANCE FINGERPRINTING AND DEFECT MAPPING QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE QUALIFICATION BODY QUALITY-ASSURANCE SYSTEM SECRECY REFERENCES Edition: 4

3 PBM2 3(21) Appendix 1 Kvalificering av OFP-system; Ringhals Rapport /2.0, Appendix 2 Återkommande Kontroll Förslag till hantering av funna defekter större/mindre än kvalificeringsdefekten; Barsebäck Kraft Förslag T , Appendix 3 Barsebäck Kraft AB Utredningsrapport; ÅF-Kontroll AB ÅFK-P-155-rev 2, Appendix 4 ENIQ Recmmended Practice 2: Recommended Contents for a Technical Justification, Issue 1; 1998, ENIQ Report nr. 4, EUR EN. Appendix 5 ENIQ Recommended Practice 3: Strategy Document for Technical Justification, Issue 1; 1998, ENIQ-Report nr. 5, EUR EN. Appendix 6 Uniform reporting requirements from In Service Inspections; BKAB letter , ref. Jan-Åke Berglund. Appendix 7 Definitions. Edition: 4

4 PBM2 4(21) Index of Revisions PBM2 EDITION REASON FOR REVISION PAGE DATE 2 Thorough revision due to the regulation SKIFS 1996:1 issued by the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate regarding revision of "the regulation SKIFS 1994:1 Mechanical Equipment in Nuclear Plants". revisions due to aspects from review of issue 1 performed by licensees and SAQ Nuclear Engineering Inspection Limited. Revision of the entire document Revised due to experience and comments from nuclear plant owners. 4 Revision due to new regulations for mechanical components in nuclear power plants, SKIFS 2000:2, that replaces SKIFS 1994:1. Earlier directives for crack growth calculations in BWR and PWR environments due to environmental cracking and fatigue, respectively, have been replaced by the new appendixes 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 9A, 9B. Revision of the entire document Revision of the entire document Edition: 4

5 PBM2 Chapter 1 5(21) 1 SCOPE Chapter 3, 11 of SKIFS 2000:2 contains the following about qualification for in service inspection: Non-destructive testing (NDT) of reactor pressure-vessels and mechanical components in Inspection Groups A and B shall be performed with inspection systems which have been qualified to reliably detect, characterise and size those defects which can occur in the types of components in question. The Licensee is responsible that such qualification is invigilated and reviewed by a qualification body which is approved for the purpose by the Swedish Nuclear Inspectorate (SKI). For approval it is required that the qualification body has an independent and impartial status and an appropriate organisation with the necessary technical competence for the tasks in question. Regarding inspection for repairs, manufacturing and site erection Chapter 4, 10 of SKIFS 2000:2 says: Inspections involving non destructive examinations shall be performed using well-tried NDT applications. The General Recommendations to this paragraph say: When well-tried NDT applications are not available, the fitness for purpose of the NDT procedures intended to be used shall be demonstrated through relevant qualification according to the principles of chapter 3, 11 These qualification rules (PBM 2) are the Licensee s general specification for carrying out inspection qualification in accordance with the regulatory requirements in SKIFS 2000:2 [1], hereafter called the regulations. In addition to the regulations, it is based on the ENIQ European Methodology document [2]. PBM 2 contains definitions of key concepts, instructions concerning the allocation of tasks and responsibilities between the parties concerned, a description of the process of qualification, plus guidelines for assessing qualifications. It also contains quality assurance requirements for the qualification body and basic requirements for inspectors, procedures and equipment which are to be qualified. Finally, it is the intention of the Licensees, that PBM 2 shall be the guiding document for the interpretation of the licensing authorities regulations on inspection qualification issues. As PBM 2 is a set of requirements, the contents are concentrated on what shall be done and very little on how it should be carried out. However, during the 5 years that inspection qualification has been a requirement in Sweden it has become increasingly evident that there exists a great potential for improvement in actually carrying out inspection qualifications. Therefore in late 1999 a joint effort was launched by the nuclear utilities to thoroughly analyse the qualification process. This study was completed in mid The result is a description of how inspection qualification should be carried out to be efficient while at the same time meeting exacting technical standards. The final report on the inspection qualification process (only available in the Swedish language) is attached as a support document, appendix 1. Edition: 4

6 PBM2 Chapter 2 6(21) 2 DEFINITIONS 2.1 List of terms The terms used specifically in PBM 2 are listed below. These terms as well as those that are specific for the other PAKT documents are included in the PAKT Definitions which is attached as appendix 7. Acceptable defect size Accredited Inspection Agency (AK) Accredited Laboratory (AL) Assessment Characterisation Defect- and Structural Integrity Analysis Defect Description Defect Specification Detection Detection target Discriminate Essential variables Evaluate Indication Inspection Inspection Interval Inspection System Licensee (TH) Practical Assessment/Trials Qualification Qualification Body (KO) Qualification Defect Qualification certificate Procedure Purpose Scope Sizing Technical Justification (TJ) Edition: 4

7 PBM2 Chapter 2 7(21) 2.2 Defect sizes Regarding the formal treatment of defect sizing and reporting, for qualification and inspection on site, some difficulties have earlier arisen due to different interpretations by the involved parties of the terms used. To overcome this problem some reports have been prepared which describe the licensees view on the use of different sizing terms and a uniform practice for reporting. These reports are attached in appendixes 2, 3 and 6. Unfortunately only appendix 6 on uniform reporting requirements is available in English. In figure 1, in appendix 2, there is an example of a crack growth diagram where the inspection interval is described as a function of the initial crack size and the crack growth rate and is based on the qualification defect size. However, when a component is actually inspected and found to have no defects larger than the detection target (no reportable defects), this latter size may be used to calculate the inspection interval (which many times still is a conservative estimate), see the figure below Acceptabel Defect Defect depth (mm) > Sizing tolerance Qualification defect Detection target Start defect Inspection interval Hours Figure: Example of a crack growth diagram for a component with defects the detection target size. The inspection interval is then calculated as the time span between detction target size and acceptable defect size, based on the crack growth rate function for that component. Edition: 4

8 PBM2 Chapter 3 8(21) 3 THE PARTIES' AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY AND TASKS 3.1 The Licensee (TH) The Licensee is responsible for ensuring that in-service inspection is performed according to the regulatory requirements, which includes seeing to that inspection of components in inspection groups A and B is carried out with inspection systems which are qualified in accordance with the regulatory requirements. To fulfil these requirements the Licensee shall: Contract inspection vendors that are accredited for their task according to the regulatory requirements (accredited laboratories, AL). Have detailed knowledge of the inspection conditions for all components and/or parts thereof that may be inspected. This involves knowledge of materials, dimensions, manufacturing methods, access for inspection and essential human factors. It also includes knowledge of repairs and other deviations from the intended design or manufacture. Produce a relevant defect- and structural integrity analysis (DoS) for each component that is included in the qualification. The Licensee may also choose not to use a DoS as a basis for the qualification. Instead the qualification can be designed as a performance test, where the qualification parameters are chosen to match the expected performance of the inspection system. In this case the DoS must verify that the inspection performance is acceptable for the actual plant conditions. Specify detection targets for each component that is included in the qualification. Produce a technical justification (TJ) adapted for the qualification to be carried out. The TJ should normally follow the guidelines in ENIQ Recommended Practice 2 and 3 [3], [4]. The Licensee always has the overall responsibility for the TJ, but is at liberty to contract the competence he finds necessary to carry out the work. AL has a natural role, among other things to describe the inspection system and technique. Carry out required investigations in connection with inspection for repairs, manufacturing or site erection, to determine if the concerned inspection systems can be regarded as well-tried. If this is not the case, also to determine the scope of qualification that is required. Contract the Qualification Body (KO) to carry out inspection qualification. The contract should be agreed, so as to give KO reasonable time to plan and carry out its tasks and should include all information necessary for KO to fulfil its obligations. Relevant input information and time schedules shall be a part of the contract. NB! It is allowable for AL to undergo qualification without an order from the Licensee (see 3.3). Support the Accredited Laboratory (AL) in it s task to produce inspection procedures and other data which is required, as well as in other preparations for the qualification. Licensee should take an active roll in the contacts between AL and KO. Edition: 4

9 PBM2 Chapter 3 9(21) Monitor AL reporting during inspection on site to ensure that any deviations in inspection purpose, i.e. deviations from qualified procedure and/ or practice are promptly reported. Deviations in inspection purpose shall be reported to KO for review and possible corrective actions. Monitor AL reporting during inspection on site to ensure that any deviations in inspection scope, e.g. limitations in coverage, are promptly reported. Deviations in inspection scope shall be reported to AK for review and possible corrective actions. As a part of the general responsibility that the ISI fulfils the regulatory requirements, the Licensee shall also group all components to be inspected in inspection groups, specify inspection intervals and carry out structural integrity analyses. These tasks are not directly connected with inspection qualification, but rather to the operational status of the plant and are therefore reviewed by the Accredited Inspection Agency (AK). In connection with ISI and inspection qualification, the Licensee shall submit the following documents to AK for review: Defect-and structural integrity analyses (DoS), including defect descriptions, for all components to be inspected. Qualification certificates for those inspections that will be used for a specific ISI. The involved parties have agreed that KO shall send a copy of all qualification certificates directly to AK. 3.2 The qualification body (KO) The qualification body (KO) supervises and assesses inspection qualification in accordance with the requirements in SKIFS 2000:2. Within the framework of the regulatory rules and the approval of the regulator, KO shall carry out its tasks in a way that promotes time- and cost efficiency, without waiving technical quality in its work. It is very important to take full advantage of the positive effects on competence, for all parties, that well performed qualifications have. To fulfil the requirements of the regulator and the owners, the qualification activities shall be controlled by well adapted instructions. The Licensee shall be given the opportunity to comment on these instructions before they are reviewed by the regulator in their approval process. Technical instructions shall be prepared for at least the following activities within KO: Preparation of qualification procedure and qualification dossier. Review of submitted qualification documents, including technical justifications. Test specimens: Specification of defects, requirements for procurement, handling, secrecy, fingerprint and test specimen data base. Carrying out qualification of procedures, equipment, personnel and complete systems. Qualification certificates: Issue, revision, withdrawal, certificate data base. If deviations in inspection purpose, i.e. application of qualified inspection procedure/ practice, occur during inspection activities on site, these shall be reported by the Licenseeand reviwed by KO, who shall propose any necessary corrective actions. Edition: 4

10 PBM2 Chapter 3 10(21) KO shall pursue research and development (R&D) work in co-operation with the Licensee in technical fields relevant to inspection qualification. The purpose of the R&D should be to advance knowledge in these areas, develop new, or improve existing tools (e.g. mathematical modelling) and improve the reliability and quality of ongoing qualifications. As a consequence of the specialist competence that will be built up within KO, KO should, upon agreement, as a service to the other parties, make this competence available to them. This must, of course, be done taking into consideration the regulator s requirements for impartiality and secrecy, as well as other parties commercial confidentiality requirements and good business practice. 3.3 The accredited laboratory (AL) The Accredited Laboratory (AL) carries out in-service inspection in thelicensee s plant, with qualified inspection systems and shall: Make the equipment, procedures and personnel available for qualification, which are intended to be used for inspection in the Licensee s plant. Provide data and technical support, at the request of the Licensee, to produce technical justification and other necessary qualification documentation. Implement a quality assurance system, implement and document personnel training, etc. Provide the qualification body with accreditation, personnel certification and other personnel training documentation, relevant to pending qualifications. Comply to the procedures and other instructions of the qualification body, during qualification, The secrecy requirements are especially important.. Notify the qualification body and the Licensee of any changes in equipment, inspection procedures, personnel or tasks, which may necessitate supplementary qualification. Report any significant deviations compared to the qualification carried out, to the Licensee for assessment, found before commencing with or during inspection in his plant. It is permitted for an accredited laboratory to undergo qualification without having a commission from a Licensee. In such cases the accredited laboratory takes over relevant parts of the Licensee's tasks. For several reasons it is important that AL reports detected defects in an unambiguous and agreed upon manner. Otherwise both the qualification and the accreditation of AL could be questioned and the communication on site between Licensee and AK be jeopardised. Directions have therefore been written on Uniform Reporting Requirements for In service Inspections, see appendix 6, which are to be used both for qualification and on-site inspections. The most important points are: Irregular defects shall for measuring be enclosed in rectangle parallel to the component surface. The defect size is the height and length of this rectangle. Edition: 4

11 PBM2 Chapter 3 11(21) If any of the measured dimensions (without tolerance) of the defect are smaller than the detection goal, this dimension shall be reported as smaller than the detection target. Defect dimensions greater than the detection target shall always be reported as measured dimension and tolerans. Deviations, whether in inspection purpose or in inspection scope, shall always be reported in a non-conformance report (NCR). Defects found outside the qualified (planned) inspection volume (scope) shall be reported in a non-conformance report (NCR). 3.4 The accredited inspection agency (AK) The Accredited Inspection Agency (AK) has no active role in inspection qualification, but has tasks connected with the inspection carried out on site. The following tasks with connection to inspection qualification are performed by AK: Review the Licensee s defect descriptions and technical justifications regarding relevant defects that can occur in components to be inspected. Review defect- and and structural integrity analyses prepared by Licensee. Review inspection intervals specified by Licensee. Assess ISI on site and certify conformity with the requirements in the regulations. This implies that AK shall certify that the inspection on site is in conformity with the qualification and has been carried out by an accredited laboratory. Review and assess any deviations in the inspection carried out with regard to scope, e.g. physical limitations. Edition: 4

12 PBM2 Chapter 4 12(21) 4 QUALIFICATION FOR IN-SERVICE INSPECTION 4.1 General In the following, detailed instructions are given on carrying out inspection qualification for in-service inspection according to SKIFS 2000:2, chapter 3, 11. Qualification of inspection procedures for repairs, manufacturing or site erection according to SKIFS 2000:2, chapter 4, 10, are also qualified in applicable extent according to these instructions, see chapter 5 of this document. Detailed instructions for carrying out inspection qualification are written by the Qualification Body (KO) and are reviewed by the regulator in their approval process of KO. The Licensee shall be given the opportunity to comment on these instructions before they are reviewed by the regulator. It is the duty of all involved parties to have sufficient knowledge of the applicable instructions and to carry out the tasks involved in the qualification in a professional way. The issues of KO s instructions that are valid at the time the contract for a specific qualification task is signed, should not be changed for the duration of the contract, unless specific reasons warrant such a change. 4.2 Qualification procedure For each individual qualification KO draws up a qualification procedure according to the applicable instruction. The purpose of the qualification procedure is to give detailed instructions for the specific qualification. The Licensee and AL shall be given the opportunity to comment on the qualification procedure before the actual qualification commences. 4.3 Inspection procedure The inspection procedure, produced by AL, is the central input document for the qualification. Before it is submitted to KO,it shall first be reviewed by the Licensee to ensure that it is relevant to the inspection task to be carried out on site. It is important for the end result, that the inspection personnel who will be carrying out the practical demonstrations are well acquainted with the inspection procedure and are well trained in using it and the accompanying inspection equipment. 4.4 Technical justification The technical justification is the key document where all the necessary information which provides evidence that the inspection system can meet its stated objectives, is compiled. The Licensee has the overall responsibility in compiling this document, but important parts of it are produced by AL and other external experts. The technical justification is reviewed by KO according to applicable instructions. However it must be remembered that the review of technical justifications requires specific and broad competence, as it contains qualified material from a broad range of disciplines and that it is crucial for the assessment of the selected inspection system. See also Definitions, appendix 7. Edition: 4

13 PBM2 Chapter 4 13(21) 4.5 Defect specification KO prepares defect specifications for the blind test pieces for the practical trials for personnel qualifications. These defect specifications are secret. The defect specifications for the open test pieces for procedure qualification are prepared by the Licensee, but as they are an integral part of the qualification they have to be reviewed by KO. If the Licensee so requests, KO shall also be able to prepare the defect specifications and any necessary technical justification for the open test pieces. It is important that the defects inserted in the blind test pieces correspond closely to those specified for the open test pieces. KO shall therefore design the blind test pieces to the same prerequisites as the open test pieces. 4.6 Review of qualification documents The qualification documents shall be reviewed according to applicable instructions. These shall be designed to insure uniformity within the reviewing staff. Close contacts should be kept between KO and Licensee/AL during review, to handle any uncertainties or shortcomings in the documents as efficiently as possible. To avoid misunderstandings, all questions and responses regarding documents under review should be documented in writing. A final certificate of review shall be issued, where also the extent of practical trials necessary to fulfil the qualification requirements is given and justified. See also 4.4: Technical justification. 4.7 Equipment (manipulator) qualification The inspection equipment to be qualified shall be prepared for the task at hand and thoroughly checked and tested before the qualification commences. If the equipment is to be assembled in conjunction with the qualification, ample time shall be planned for checks and trial runs. 4.8 Practical trials for procedure and equipment qualification Practical trials for procedure and equipment qualification are normally carried out together. If several procedures are to be qualified with the same equipment the equipment is qualified for the procedure which imposes the greatest demands. If the inspection equipment (manipulator) is qualified separately, this should normally be carried out before the procedure qualification. When large manipulators are involved, especially if they are contaminated with radioactivity, separate equipment qualification is normal. The procedure qualification is then often performed with some type of lab. equipment. Practical trials on test pieces should be designed so that physical obstacles and human factor parameters, which are regarded as essential in the real inspection environment, are simulated. For the qualification of procedures and equipment, open test pieces are normally used. Edition: 4

14 PBM2 Chapter 4 14(21) 4.9 Qualification of personnel Qualification of personnel requires the existence of a qualified procedure and equipment. Practical trials for personnel qualification are normally carried out on blind test pieces. The qualification can apply separately to detection, characterisation, sizing, or all parts together. The qualification can also be separated into four steps; data collection, detection, characterisation and sizing. A qualification for an individual can comprise of one or more of these steps. In the case of qualification for manual inspection all steps may be included together or separately. In the case of qualification for mechanised inspection which is carried out by an inspection team, the tasks which require qualification shall be defined and the requirements for each such task shall be specified. Each individual shall be qualified for one or more of the specified tasks. Personnel who are to be qualified for evaluation shall be certified for at least Level 2 according to Nordtest Doc Gen 010, SS-EN 473/Nordtest, or other national standard with corresponding requirements. For other tasks in mechanised inspection, an assessment shall be made regarding necessary basic personnel training System qualification Equipment, procedure and personnel qualifications for one and the same inspection system may be qualified together and then constitutes a system qualification. If any part of the system is changed a new assessment of the whole inspection system must be carried out Assessment Assessment of the practical trials shall be carried out according to applicable instructions. For procedure qualification, this assessment together with the assessment of the technical justification make up the total assessment of the reliability of the procedure. For personnel qualification the pass/fail criteria shall be known to those being tested Requalification Requalification can become necessary for two reasons. AL or involved staff may either have failed the qualification, or changes in equipment, procedure, personnel or other prerequisites may call for an amendment of the qualification. In the case of requalification because of a failure, the customer (Licensee and/or AL) shall first show that appropriate measures have been taken to rectify the deficiencies which caused the failure. In the case of requalification/amendment because of changes, the original qualification procedure is followed in relevant parts. Edition: 4

15 PBM2 Chapter 4 15(21) 4.13 Result reports Results are reported to the customer who has contracted the qualification, if not otherwise specifically stated in the contract. Reports shall be made both verbally and in writing and be as full and detailed as possible taking into account secrecy requirements for blind test pieces. Reporting of results is most important when the qualification has failed. Reports to parties other than the customer is a matter between the parties concerned and is not a matter for the qualification body Qualification certificate A qualification certificate shall be issued for a qualification that fulfils the qualification requirements. The certificate shall include a detailed description of the scope of the qualification. Qualification of equipment and procedure are valid for an unlimited period provided no changes of essential variables are made. Personnel qualifications have limited validity, which shall be shown on the certificate Qualification Certificate withdrawal If reason arises to question an approved qualification, e.g. when the inspection purpose is not fulfilled, KO shall be notified with a written report and shall then investigate the matter and propose whether the qualification certificate should be withdrawn. The affected AL and the Licensee shall be given opportunity to comment before a decision is taken. The affected AL and Licensee shall be notified in writing of a decision of certificate withdrawal. The decision shall be properly justified Lessons learned At the completion of each qualification contract a final meeting shall be held, where all involved parties attend and have an opportunity to exchange lessons learned. Normally, this meeting should be held after the first site inspection. If the first site inspection planned to take place long after the qualification is completed or is delayed, a meeting should also be held in connection with the completion of the qualification Formal complaints Formal complaints regarding decisions passed by the qualification body (KO) may be addressed to the regulator (SKI). Edition: 4

16 PBM2 Chapter 5 16(21) 5 QUALIFICATION FOR REPAIRS, MANUFACTURING AND SITE ERECTION 5.1 General SKIFS 2000:2, chapter 4, 10 says: Non destructive examination for inspection according to 8 (repairs, manufacturing and site erection) shall be performed with well-tried inspection systems.the general recommendations for the same paragraph say: In this case well-tried inspection systems mean those that Those that are based on standardised methods, found in accepted manufacturing codes or similar rules for inspection of equivalent products with similar quality requirements, and have been used over a period of time, when experience of the ability to detect and discriminate has been documented for these methods, and whose practical application is controlled by instructions or procedures which include the necessary calibration- and handling instructions and also the appropriate technical and methodology acceptance standards. When such well-tried inspection systems are not available, the fitness for purpose of the inspection procedures intended for use should be demonstrated through relevant qualification assessed by a qualification body according to the principles of chapter 3, 11. In practice the above implies: 1. The Licensee must be in agreement with AK that the inspection systems used according to chapter 4, 8 are in fact well-tried. 2. If this is not the case, the inspection procedure that is intended to be used, shall undergo relevant qualification. 3. The qualification shall be invigilated and assessed by KO. 5.2 Assessment of well-tried If there exist any doubt that an inspection system can be regarded as well-tried, the Licensee shall make assessment according to the criteria above (SKIFS 2000:2, general recommendations to chapter 4, 10) and present it to AK for compliance review, well in advance of the scheduled inspection. If, in the view of the Licensee, the inspection system in any way is not well-tried, relevant procedure qualification shall take place. 5.3 Scope of qualification The Licensee (with the aid of AL) shall analyse the needs and produce the necessary documentation for the scope and purpose that is judged relevant for the specific case. The qualification documents shall be reviwed by KO with regard to compliance with the requirements in SKIFS 2000:2. Edition: 4

17 PBM2 Chapter 5 17(21) 5.4 Qualification With regard to the prevailing circumstances for the procedure in question, the qualification is carried out along the same guidelines as for in-service inspection, see chapter 4 of this document. Edition: 4

18 PBM2 Chapter 6 18(21) 6 DOCUMENTATION 6.1 Qalification dossier For each qualification a dossier shall be established. In this all the data, assessments, reviews and other information from the qualification in question are collected. When a qualification is completed the qualification dossier constitutes the complete documentation of the scope and application of the qualification. The dossier is kept on file by KO and is confidential. The quality assurance system of KO shall include rules which ensure that information from the qualification dossier is only made available to those parties who are authorised to take part of it. 6.2 Register of certificates The qualification body shall maintain an up-to-date register of all qualifications carried out. The register shall contain the information that KO, Licensee, and AL agree on and be designed to facilitate efficient updating and information search. The register should have links between personnel- and procedure qualifications. The register shall be updated frequently to ensure that its contents is always up-to-date. The register shall, in addition to KO, be available to Licensee, AL and AK. However, AL have access only to information about their own qualifications and AK only to information which is relevant to current contracts. The information to be found in the register, routines for updating and authority to use the register shall be controlled by an appropriate instruction. 6.3 Test piece register The qualification body shall maintain an up-to-date register of all blind test pieces specified by KO and all open test pieces Licensee or AL report to the register. The information to be found in the register, routines for updating and authority to use the register shall be controlled by an appropriate instruction. Edition: 4

19 PBM2 Chapter 7 19(21) 7 TEST PIECES Test pieces are designed to simulate inspection situations which a particular inspection system is to be qualified for. The geometric shape can be identical with a particular component in a plant, but should normally be more general and represent several components. Defects to be introduced in the test pieces should be based on defect descriptions and agreed by the Licensee, AL and KO. There are two fundamentally different types of test pieces: Blind test pieces, for which information about the defects which have been introduced into the test pieces is kept strictly secret. Open test pieces, for which information about the defects introduced may be disclosed to persons undergoing qualification. The Licensee is responsible for the acquisition of test pieces. On account of the secrecy requirements regarding defects in blind test pieces, all contacts with the test piece manufacturer regarding defects as well following up manufacturing is delegated to the qualification body. 7.1 Quality assurance Organisations which deal with test pieces (the manufacturer, the Licensee, AL and KO) shall have a quality-assurance system which ensure that classified information is handled correctly and that secrecy agreements required for staff in these organisations are adequate. The test piece manufacturer shall have implemented a quality assurance system which fulfils the requirements in EN ISO 9001 or Welding shall be performed according to the requirements in SS-EN Other codes that have equivalent requirements may be used after approval by the Licensee and KO. The Licensee shall audit manufacturers of test pieces with adequate frequency with regard to the scope of work being carried out. KO shall always be informed of planned audits and be invited to participate. 7.2 Fingerprinting and defect mapping For each blind test piece used for qualification, KO shall see that a fingerprint is performed as a base for an as-built map of all defects and defect locations. The map is used for assessment of the practical trials.for open test pieces fingerprinting is the responsibility of the Licensee. KO should, however, always be prepared to see.to fingerprinting and mapping upon the request of the Licensee. Fingerprinting does not substitute normal acceptance tests, but is rather a way to achieve a mapping of the test piece that is as unbiased and accurate as possible. Edition: 4

20 PBM2 Chapter 8 20(21) 8 QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE QUALIFICATION BODY 8.1 Quality-assurance system The qualification body shall have a quality-assurance system which meets the requirements in EN The quality-assurance system shall include necessary instructions for carrying out the intentions in these rules for qualification (PBM 2) and in SKIFS 2000:2. General review and approval of qualification bodies is carried out by SKI in accordance with the requirements in SKIFS 2000: Secrecy Instructions for secrecy with regard to customers' (the Licensee, AL) business secrets, blind and open test pieces, qualification documentation and qualification results shall be implemented. Personal secrecy agreements are required of all personnel, permanent employees as well as contract staff, employed by KO. Instructions shall also control what information should be classified and who may have access to it. Special restrictions for contract staff shall also be included. Routines shall be implemented which ensure that personnel not employed by the qualification body and persons who participate in qualifications cannot remove information in any form from the premises where qualification is carried out. Routines shall also be implemented which ensure that information stored in data media (hard discs, etc.) is destroyed directly after completed qualification. Edition: 4

21 PBM2 Chapter 9 21(21) 9 REFERENCES 1. The Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate rules for mechanical devices in certain nuclear installations, SKIFS 2000:2, December 2000, ISSN European Methodology for Qualification of Non-Destructive Testing, Second Issue; 1997, ENIQ Report nr. 2, EUR EN 3. ENIQ Recommended Practice 2: Recommended Contents for a Technical Justification, Issue 1; 1998, ENIQ Report nr. 4, EUR EN 4. ENIQ Recommended Practice 3: Strategy Document for Technical Justification, Issue 1; 1998, ENIQ Report nr. 5, EUR EN The ENIQ documents above are available at ENIQ s web site: Look for: activities, thereafter projects, thereafter networks on nuclear safety and finally ENIQ. Edition: 4

22 PBM2 Appendix 1 1(34) APPENDIX 1: KVALIFICERING AV OFP-SYSTEM - PROCESSANALYS

23 Dokumenttyp Sekretessklass Status Granskat ID-nummer / Utgåva Rapport Dokumentägare R4 Företagsintern Godkänt Richnau Anders / 2.0 Utfärdare Datum Alternativt ID Richnau Anders Nilsson Torbjörn Titel Elektroniskt godkänt Hansson Bengt (kontroll av avsnitt K11F, K11D och K11E) Ett förslag till Bör-process för kvalificering av OFP-system har tagits fram. I arbetet har det deltagit representanter från FKA, BKAB, OKG, RAB samt från SAQ och SQC. Förslaget innebär en del förändringar i förhållande till dagens arbetssätt (den s.k. Är-processen). De förändringar som krävs ligger inte i första hand i huvudprocessen, varför Är- och Bör-processerna vid en snabb anblick kan te sig relativt lika. Nedanstående punktsatser sammanfattar de viktigaste områdena där förslaget skiljer sig i förhållande till dagens arbetssätt. Uppstyrning och kontroll. Kvalificeringarna bör drivas som projekt, enligt en etablerad och av alla inblandade accepterad metod för projektstyrning, i större omfattning än vad som varit brukligt. Regelbundna avstämningar och kvalitetskontroller måste ske. Planering och samsyn. Kvalificeringsprojekten måste planeras bättre och alla parter måste delta i ett tidigt skede i denna planering. Erfarenhetsåterföring. Erfarenhetsåterföringen måste stärkas för att undvika upprepning av dyra misstag och för att successivt föra verksamheten framåt. Testblockens tidsplan. Testblocken har hittills kommit in i processen för tidigt. Samtidigt har de beställts för sent. Detta måste förändras och kommer att påverka hela kvalificeringsprojektets tidsplan. Utnyttja SQC s kunskaper. SQC bör anlitas för rådgivning och konsultation tidigt i ett kvalificeringsprojekt. I arbetet har inte utretts hur en övergång till Bör-processen ska kunna ske. Det bedöms dock att en sådan kan ske med relativt måttliga arbetsinsatser. Ulla Bergfors OKG, Ulf Sandberg FKA, Christer Rist Barsebäck, Tommy Zetterwall SQC, C-J Börjesson DNV, medlemmar TH-samgrupp, RT, RTP, RTPK, RTPT, RTPQ, A Richnau RTPL, T Nilsson RTPK. 1 (33)

24 ID-nummer / Utgåva Alternativt ID Status / 2.0 Godkänt 2 (33)

25 ID-nummer / Utgåva Alternativt ID Status / 2.0 Godkänt Den 1 januari 1995 trädde Statens kärnkraftinspektions föreskrifter om mekaniska anordningar i kärntekniska anläggningar, SKIFS 1994:1, i kraft. Föreskriften ställer bl.a. krav på att provningssystem för återkommande kontroll i kärnkraftverken ska kvalificeras för uppgiften. För att uppfylla dessa krav har omfattande regelverk byggts upp hos tillståndshavare, kontrollorgan och kvalificeringsorgan. Vid praktisk tillämpning av regelverken har emellertid en hel del svårigheter visat sig. Dessa består dels av oförutsedda behov som inte styrts upp i tillräcklig grad, dels av att de olika regelverken inte är harmoniserade i tillräcklig omfattning. Som en följd av detta bildades under 1999 Ledningsforum för provningsoch kvalificeringsfrågor (ibland SQC forum för provnings- och kvalificeringsfrågor, i dagligt tal GP-gruppen). Denna grupp består av representanter från tillståndshavare, kontrollorgan och kvalificeringsorgan. Gruppen har tagit fram en Är-process för kvalificeringsverksamheten, d.v.s. en process som beskriver hur kvalificering av provningssystem sker i dag. För att kunna identifiera förändringsbehov och på så sätt kunna komma tillrätta med de problem som finns i verksamheten har GP-gruppen beslutat att gå vidare och även ta fram en Bör-process för kvalificeringsverksamheten. Med Bör-process menar man en process som beskriver hur kvalificering av provningssystem bör ske. Uppdraget att ta fram Bör-processen gavs åt en arbetsgrupp ledd av Anders Richnau, RAB. Uppdraget till arbetsgruppen lyder enligt följande: 3 (33)

26 ID-nummer / Utgåva Alternativt ID Status / 2.0 Godkänt 4 (33)

27 ID-nummer / Utgåva Alternativt ID Status / 2.0 Godkänt Arbetsgruppen har bestått av följande medlemmar: Anders Richnau RAB (sammankallande) Torbjörn Nilsson RAB Jessica Fredson BKAB Ulf Sandberg FKA Ulla Bergfors OKG AB Tommy Zetterwall SQC Carl-Johan Börjesson SAQ Dessutom har Roger Wallfors, RAB bidragit med administrativt stöd och kunnande inom området processutveckling. Föreliggande rapport utgör resultatet av arbetet i gruppen och således ett förslag till Bör-process. Arbetet har, grovt beskrivet, utförts enligt följande: Insamling av synpunkter/flaskhalsar etc. i respektive organisation. Kategorisering av inkomna synpunkter. Endast de som har bedömts som relevanta för just kvalificeringsprocessen har tagits med i det fortsatta arbetet. (Som ett resultat av detta har bl.a. några värdefulla synpunkter på SKIFS sorterats bort. Dessa har dock tagits om hand i det remissarbete som sker av SKIFS 2000) Framtagning av övergripande processbeskrivning. Inarbetande av alla relevanta synpunkter i processbeskrivningen. Skriftlig beskrivning av processen på aktivitetsnivå med hänsynstagande till inkomna synpunkter. Rapportskrivning och granskning i respektive organisation. Steg 1-4, ovan, finns dokumenterade i RAB-protokoll /2.0. Denna rapports upplägg bygger helt och hållet på det framtagna processchemat. Detta visas översiktligt i Figur 1 och finns i sin helhet i Bilaga 1. 5 (33)

28 Nr 20 Nr 20 Rapport: Lista över förbättringar Utvärdera Utvärdera förbättringsförslag förbättringsförslag Provnings- Behov i kontrollgrupp A eller B Nr 1 Nr 1 Välja Välja handläggare handläggare Nr 2 Nr 2 Bereda Bereda och och planera planera kvalificeringen kvalificeringen AL4 AL8 OKG6 AL5 OKG3 BKAB2 Uppdragsbeskrivning OKG5 BKAB1 Nr 5 Kontrakt Nr 5 Nr 6 Nr 6 Upphandla Upphandla Granska Granska Ackrediterat Ackrediterat Defekt Defekt och och Kontrollorgan Kontrollorgan Skadeanalys Fastställd Skadeanalys projektbeskrivning Nr 3 Nr 7 Nr 4 (DoS) Nr 7 Nr 3 Nr 4 (DoS) Bestämma Upprätta Upprätta Genomföra Bestämma Genomföra preliminär objektbeskrivninbeskrivning Skadeanalys provnings- objekt- Defekt- Defekt- och preliminär och provningsmetod Skadeanalys metod OKG1 OKG1 OKG1 RAB1 SQC3 Prel. rapport: SQC3 Rapport: SQC3 RAB8 Kvalificeringsförutsättningar Sk adeanal Defekt- och ys Nr 20 Nr 20 Rapport: Lista över förbättringar Utvärdera Utvärdera förbättringsförslag förbättringsförslag Provnings- Behov i kontrollgrupp A eller B Nr 1 Nr 1 Intyg och acceptans DoS Välja Välja handläggare handläggare Prel. rapport: Kvalificeringsförutsättningar (Kvalificeringskrav) Nr 10 Nr 10 Upphandla Upphandla SQC SQC Nr 11 Nr 11 Upphandla Upphandla Ackrediterat Ackrediterat Laboratorier Laboratorier (AL) (AL) AL4 AL5 SQC5 Kontrakt Offert Kontrakt Nr 5 Nr 6 Nr 5 Nr 6 Upphandla Upphandla Granska Granska Ackrediterat Ackrediterat Defekt Defekt och och Kontrollorgan Kontrollorgan Skadeanalys Fastställd Skadeanalys projektbeskrivning Nr 7 Nr 2 Nr 3 Nr 4 (DoS ) Nr 7 Nr 2 Nr 3 Nr 4 (DoS) Bestämma Bereda Bereda och och Upprätta Upprätta Genomföra Bestämma Genomföra preliminär planera planera objektbeskrivning objektbeskrivning Skadeanalys provnings- Defekt- Defektoch preliminär och provningsmetod kvalificeringen kvalificeringen Skadeanalys metod AL4 AL8 OKG6 OKG1 OKG1 OKG1 RAB1 Prel. rapport: Rapport: Uppdragsbeskrivning OKG5 förutsättningar Skadeanalys AL5 OKG3 BKAB2 SQC3 SQC3 SQC3 RAB8 Kvalificerings- Defekt- och BKAB1 Utvidgning av befintlig kvalificering Kombination av befintlig och ny kvalificering Ny kval ificering Intyg och acceptans DoS Återföra Återföra kvalificeringserfarenheteerfarenheter Möte kvalificerings- AL4 BKAB9 AL8 OKG6 AL5 BKAB5 OKG3 BKAB2 BKAB6 OKG5 Provningsprotokoll och Erfaren het srapport BKAB7 BK AB1 Nr 27 Nr 26 Nr 27 Nr 26 Söka Söka likvärdig Upprätta likvärdig Upprätta Motivering Teknisk Motivering Teknisk [Alt.3] [Alt.3] [Alt.3] [Alt.3] Hittad likvärdig Nr 24 Nr 25 Nr 24 Nr 25 Upprätta Upprätta Upprätta Teknisk Upprätta Teknisk [Alt.2] Motivering [Alt.2] Motivering [Alt.2] [Alt.2] OKG7 Prel imi när Provningsprocedur SQC7 Nr 14 Nr 14 RAB1 RAB8 SQC6 Prel. rapport: Kvalificeringsförutsättningar (Kvalificeringskrav) Nr 10 Nr 10 Upphandla Upphandla SQC SQC Nr 11 Nr 11 Upphandla Upphandla Ackrediterat Ackrediterat Laboratorier Laboratorier (AL) (AL) AL 4 AL 5 SQC5 Preliminär Provningsprocedur Kontrakt Offert Nr 15 Nr 15 Upprätta Upprätta Teknisk Teknisk Motivering Motivering [Alt.1] [Alt.1] OKG7 RAB1 SQC7 RAB8 SQC6 Rapport: Teknisk Motivering utan behov av nya testblock Nr 28 Nr 28 Upprätta Upprätta ny ny RAB4 Behov Testblock RAB11 SQC7 RAB4 AL11 Nr 22 Nr 22 Anskaffa Anskaffa testblock testblock Slutlig Testblock Slutlig Provningsprocedur Nr 23 Nr 23 OKG7 SQC5 Utvidgning av befintlig kvalificering Kombination av befintlig och ny kvalificering Ny kvalificering Accepterad och fastställd Nr Nr provnings-utrustning Kvalificera Kvalificera provningsutrustning provningsutrustning Nr 14 Nr 14 Personal och/eller utrustning Preliminär Provningsprocedur RAB5 AL1 RA B6 RAB13 BKAB3 Nr 18 Nr 18 Kvalificera Kvalificera Personal Personal RAB5 AL1 RAB13 BK AB3 RAB6 Nr 15 Nr 15 Upprätta Upprätta Teknisk Teknisk Motivering Motivering [Alt.1] [Alt.1] Kvalificerad provningsutrustning INTYG Kvalificerad INTYG Kvalificerad Personal INTYG Återföra Återföra kvalificeringserfarenheter kvalificeringserfarenheter Möte AL4 BKAB9 AL8 OKG6 AL5 BKAB5 OKG3 BKAB2 BKAB6 OKG5 Provningsprotokoll och Erfarenhetsrapport BKAB7 BKAB1 Nr 27 Nr 28 Nr 26 Nr 27 Nr 28 Nr 26 Söka Söka likvärdig Upprätta Upprätta likvärdig Upprätta Upprätta ny ny Teknisk Teknisk Motivering Motivering [Alt.3] [Alt.3] [Alt.3] [Alt.3] Hittad likvärdig Teknisk Motivering Rapport: utan behov av nya Nr 24 Nr 25 testblock Nr 24 Nr 25 RAB4 Behov Upprätta Testblock Upprätta RAB11 SQC7 Upprätta Upprätta RAB4 AL11 Teknisk Teknisk Nr 22 Nr 22 [Alt.2] Motivering [Alt.2] Motivering [Alt.2] Testblock [Alt.2] Anskaffa Anskaffa testblock OKG7 Preliminär testblock Provningsprocedur SQC7 RAB1 RAB8 SQC6 OKG7 RAB1 SQC7 RAB8 SQC6 Slutlig Slutlig Provningsprocedur Nr 23 Nr 23 OKG7 SQC5 Nr 30 Nr 30 Prova Prova objekt objekt Nr 31 Nr 31 Accep terad och fastställd Nr Accepterad och fastställ d Nr provnings-utrustning Kvalificera Kvalificera provningsutrustning provningsutrustning Personal och/eller utrustning RAB5 AL1 RAB6 RAB13 BKAB3 Nr 18 Nr 18 Kvalificera Kvalificera Personal Personal RAB5 AL1 RAB13 BKAB3 RAB6 Kvalificerad provningsutrustning INTYG Kvali ficerad INTYG Kvalificerad Personal INTYG Nr 8 Nr 9 Nr 8 Nr 9 Inventera Inventera om Rapport: om Alternativa lösningar det det finns Välja finns Välja tidigare kvalificeringsalternativ tidigare kvalificeringsalternativ kvalificering kvalificering och och testblock testblock OKG1 BKAB5 OKG2 BKAB6 Nr 12 SQC3 Nr 12 Nr 13 Nr 13 Kontrakt Skapa Skapa kontrakt Informera Informera kontrakt berörda med med AL AL berörda Möte (Resurser) (Resurser) AL2 SQC8 AL8 OKG6 SQC5 RAB6 AL4 AL2 OKG3 BKAB2 RA B5 SQC4 AL5 AL3 OKG5 RAB13 SQC4 BKAB1 AL1 BKAB3 Upprätta Upprätta [Alt.1] [Alt.1] Nr 16 Nr 16 Uppdatera Uppdatera preliminär preliminär SQC6 Rapport: Teknisk Motivering (TM) Kontrollera Kontrollera Nr 17 & 29 Nr 17 & 29 Kvalificera Kvalificera Nr 19 Nr 19 Återföra Återföra kvalificeringserfarenheter kvalificeringserfarenheter Möte AL4 BKAB7 OKG6 AL5 AL8 BKAB2 BKAB9 OKG3 BKAB5 OKG5 BKAB6 BKAB1 Nr 21 Nr 21 Förbättra Förbättra processen processen Nr 30 Nr 30 Prova Prova objekt objekt Bättre kvalificeringsprocess Nr 31 Nr 31 Accepterad och fastställd Nr 8 Nr 9 Nr 8 Nr 9 Inventera om Rapport: Inventera om Alternativa lösningar det det finns Välja finns Välja tidigare kvalificeringsalternativ tidigare kvalificeringsalternativ kvalificering kvalificering och och testblock testblock OKG1 BKAB5 OKG2 BKAB6 Nr 12 SQC3 Nr 12 Nr 13 Nr 13 Kontrakt Skapa Skapa Informera kontrakt Informera kontrakt berörda med med AL AL berörda Möte (Resurser) (Resurser) AL 2 SQC8 AL8 OKG6 SQC5 RAB6 AL 4 AL2 OKG3 BKAB2 RAB5 SQC 4 AL 5 AL3 OKG5 RAB13 SQC4 BKAB1 AL1 BKAB3 Upprätta Upprätta [Alt.1] [Alt.1] Nr 16 Nr 16 Uppdatera Uppdatera preliminär preliminär SQC6 Rapport: Teknisk Motivering (TM) Kontrollera Kontrollera Nr 17 & 29 Nr 17 & 29 Kvalificera Kvalificera Nr 19 Nr 19 Återföra Återföra kvalificeringserfarenheter kvalificeringserfarenheter Möte AL4 BKAB7 OKG6 AL5 AL 8 BKAB2 BKAB9 OKG3 BKAB5 OKG5 BKAB6 BKAB1 Nr 21 Nr 21 Förbättra Förbättra processen processen Bättre kvalificeringsprocess ID-nummer / Utgåva Alternativt ID Status / 2.0 Godkänt.Ã'RNXPHQWHUDÃ2)3V\VWHP.Ã3ODQHUDÃRFKÃI UEHUHGÃNYDOLILFHULQJ.Ã.YDOLILFHUD 2)3V\VWHP.Ã) UElWWUDÃNYDOLILFHULQJVSURFHVVHQ Figur 1, Översiktligt processchema I rapporten har schemat brutits ner så att varje underkapitel behandlar en aktivitet. För att underlätta läsbarheten inleds varje huvudkapitel med ett översiktsschema där det aktuella avsnittet markerats..ã'rnxphqwhudã2)3v\vwhp.ã3odqhudãrfkãi UEHUHGÃNYDOLILFHULQJ.Ã.YDOLILFHUD 2)3V\VWHP.Ã) UElWWUDÃNYDOLILFHULQJVSURFHVVHQ Figur 2 Normalt ansvarar tillståndshavarna för att aktiviteterna i processen K11 utförs på det effektivaste sättet för hela processen K1. Det är resultatet av dessa aktiviteter som styr tillförlitlighet och kostnader för hela kvalificeringsarbetet. 6 (33)