Pourquoi La Sciences

Punch list items

Regarding the punch list items added after the protocol signature on auxiliaries of group 5, both parties on sites have agreed on the list.

As discussed in the previous meeting, in order for MCE to finalize their action plan, complete visits have been made this week between M, C, E and EDF to identify the last punch-list items that will be integrated this week (CW 45).

Therefore, punch list items are finalized except

on units 10-12,

on groups 6 and 7 of auxiliaries (such as SEH/TEU) where according to the protocol, punch-list items can be added until PVMSI + 1 month.

on systems or areas where works are still going on or need to be done (SES Retrofit, DeNox, some maintenance concept needs to be implemented on sites...), and/or commissioning is still going on both parties agree that punch list items related to those points can be added.

FOB P1

EDF have extracted some FOB among the list that are priority 1 and request to know the corresponding action plan. GG mentions that there is no matter on FOB P1 and that there will be treated. The action plan needs to be communicated by MCE.

Non-Attributed items within the Consortium

LJ reminds that during meetings held in Port Est at the occasion of the inauguration, it was decided that MCE should decide on attribution of these punch list items among the 3 partners by end of October. GG mentions that those punch list items can be divided into five categories: painting, doors deterioration, caulking, water-proof ceiling and steel work. MCE has come to an agreement regarding four of them, the water-proof ceiling remains a non solved category.

M, C and E will give to EDF an updated action plan and schedule on resolving all those punch list items next week (CW46).

Conformity Report

Today, CD mentions that EDF PEI does not have a clear view on what's missing, which documents are expected and what is the schedule of delivery of these documents. GG states that many actions are done but agree that an overview needs to be done.

Also for example, a third party comes and states on some non conformities. Actions are then being taken by MCE and in the end, EDF PEI needs a document with 0 non conformity. So does the third party need to come back? This is the case for example of FiFi system for which CNPP made a review on site and issued a list of “reserves”: how to make sure this system is in conformance with AFSAD rules?

CD mentions that a conformity report needs to done in line with the "Arreté Prefectoral" which requires many characteristics to be respected (floor of a certain type...etc)

LV gives the example of elevators for which conformity reports are done. AD asks to send them by e-mail.

Actually, on elevators, FJ mentions this is one of the line of the Excel file (the tool to follow the conformity reports through the Diesel Port) based on the list of the letter of M.Bertholom.

FJ mentions that what's difficult to obtain is the overall PV.

...