TRC Quality - Power/EG QMP

• Document No.

• Audit Title

• Client / Site

• Conducted on

  Date

• Prepared by

• Location
  Address

• Personnel

• Business Confidential -- For Internal Use Only

GENERAL AUDIT INFORMATION

• Project(s) Reviewed, Project Number and Name:

• Audited Organization/Project Representative:

• Purpose and Objective: To evaluate the implementation of the Power Sector Quality Management Plan (QMP) and to identify opportunities to improve the quality systems and procedures.

• Scope: This audit reviewed the project(s) referenced above to evaluate conformance to the applicable procedures in the Power Sector QMP and to evaluate the effectiveness of quality procedures used on the project.

• Describe the activities, processes, and/or aspects of the project(s) reviewed.

• List any aspects of the project(s) excluded from the audit.

• Date of Opening Meeting:

  Date

• Date of Exit Meeting:

  Date

Power Sector QMP COMPLIANCE - Do projects adopt applicable quality procedures in the QMP?

• Use the questions below to guide your review of objective evidence to evaluate whether the project conforms to the applicable quality procedures and/or requirements in the Power Sector (EG) QMP. How effective are the project procedures with controlling quality of the project?

1. Project Set-Up and Launch

• 1.1 Do project team members have the skill sets or qualifications needed for their assignments? How were they selected?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.2 & 5.3 Examples for Evidence: experience matrix, organization chart, resumes, other documentation of qualifications Notes/Comments:

• 1.2 Are budgets, schedules, and cost controls adequate for a successful project (e.g., sufficient to complete the scope of work including quality controls and reviews)?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 3.2, 5.3 Examples for Evidence: project schedule with level of detail to track individual activities, budget breakdown, records on cost controls Notes/Comments:

• 1.3 Did the Discipline Leader or Project Manager: - Communicate project objectives, requirements, specifications to the project team? - Confirm that team members understand what they are expected to do? - Monitor work progress confirming it will meet client expectations (e.g., technical, engineering, regulatory)?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.3 Examples for Evidence: team meeting minutes or agenda, memo to team, review comments on these topics, work instructions Notes/Comments:

2. Requirements and Risk Management

• 2.1 Did/does the project have a process to communicate applicable requirements to the project team and confirm conformance during the project? - Client contracts and/or MSA - State/Local laws and codes - Professional Engineer Standards - Energy Codes and/or specifications - Client codes and specifications

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 3.1 & 3.2 Examples for Evidence: project records listing project-specific quality-related requirements, in a location accessible to the project teams Notes/Comments:

3. Work Procedures and Quality Control

• 3.1 Did the Operations Manager (or designee) designate the appropriate QA and QC procedures to include in the project? How was this communicated to the team?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 3.2 & 5.8 Examples for Evidence: project instructions (or equivalent), reference to applicable SOPs in team communications, team meeting agenda/minutes Notes/Comments:

• 3.2 Are computations, drawings, reports, letters, or other project deliverables prepared in a clear, logical, neat, accurate, complete, and precise manner?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.9 Examples for Evidence: project work products, in-progress drafts and/or client deliverables Notes/Comments:

• 3.3 Were identification and traceability conventions and procedures followed? - Naming of underground utility routes (existing & planned) - Naming and revision tracking of drawings or data models - Benchmark monuments for horizontal & vertical accuracy

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.10.6 Examples for Evidence: project records of drawing numbering/revision tracking, naming or IDs of utility lines, notation of benchmarks Notes/Comments:

4. Engineering Design Reviews and Controls

• 4.1 Does the project have written, client approved, design criteria? - including client approved modifications, if any.

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.10.2 Examples for Evidence: approved design criteria in project files Notes/Comments:

• 4.2 Were design changes communicated to the design team? How?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.10.3 Examples for Evidence: records showing design change communication to team Notes/Comments:

• 4.3 Were design output checks performed following discipline-specific written procedures? - TRC Power Delivery Engineering Design and Checking Procedure Manual - To determine whether completed designs are constructible, functional, and meet the requirements of the client and conform to established regulatory standards.

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.10.4 Examples for Evidence: markups of the item showing review comments and resolution Notes/Comments:

• 4.4 Are designs backed up with complete, legible, and logically arranged engineering calculations?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.10.2 Examples for Evidence: calculations in project file Notes/Comments:

5. Peer Review

• 5.1.a Was the proposal (e.g., cost estimate, scope of work proposal) reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.b Were conceptual design phase (e.g., 30%) work products reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.c Were design phase (e.g., 60%, 90%) work products reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.d Was the final design package (e.g., 100%, IFC), or equivalent, reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.3 & 5.2 Examples for Evidence: project records showing peer review prior to delivery Notes/Comments:

• 5.2 Are the Peer Reviewer(s) independent of the work activity or work product(s) reviewed?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.2.1 Examples for Evidence: peer review records, compare who produced the work product with who reviewed Notes/Comments:

• 5.3 Do Peer Reviewers have qualifications / skill sets needed to understand the material reviewed?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.2.1 Examples for Evidence: Peer Reviewer qualifications (e.g., resume, examples of prior experience) Notes/Comments:

• 5.4 Was the schedule for peer review adequate? - For an adequately comprehensive review? - To address review comments?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.3 & 5.3 Examples for Evidence: project schedule allocating time for peer reviews and responding to comments, records showing how comments were addressed Notes/Comments:

6. Procurement and Subcontractor/Subconsultant Management

• 6.1 Was procurement documentation consistent with TRC Purchase Order and Procurement Procedure requirements on TRCNet? - Example: POs processed in Vision (materials & subcontractors >$1,000) prior to invoice receipt. - Example: Required approvals included.

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.4 Examples for Evidence: PO records (materials & subcontractors) in Vision/Sceris prior to invoice receipt Notes/Comments:

• 6.2 Were subcontractors selected based on their ability to perform he services required? - technical/engineering expertise - safety record and procedures - quality standards and procedures - financial standards

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.4 Examples for Evidence: records showing review of subconsultant/subcontractor qualifications and/or basis in selection process Notes/Comments:

• 6.3 Did the Discipline Lead (PDE/DEG) or Project Manager (EFF/TEC) (or designee) monitor quality of subcontractor services to confirm completion of established scope of service? How?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.4 Examples for Evidence: project records (e.g, deliverables status list, meeting minutes) showing review of subcontractor services Notes/Comments:

7. Project Deliverables

• 7.1 Did the Operations Manager confirm final review and approval of all deliverables, prior to delivery?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.2 Examples for Evidence: project review records Notes/Comments:

• 7.2 Are dates printed on the work products (e.g., drawings, documents) transmitted to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.5.1 Examples for Evidence: project records - file copies of project documents, drawings, etc. delivered to the client Notes/Comments:

• 7.3 Is a copy of each client deliverable, including CADD drawings, in the project file (e.g., ProjectWise)?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2- Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2- Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.5.1 & 5.11 Examples of Evidence: project records including copies identified as each set of deliverables Notes/Comments:

• Additional Comments or Notes

• Business Confidential -- For Internal Use Only

QUALITY CULTURE - What motivates quality-influencing behavior within TRC?

• Use a few of the questions below to guide interviews with project personnel. Listen for indications of potential quality issues, improvement opportunities, and strengths or weaknesses in TRC's quality culture.

• General Questions for Anyone on the Project

• Briefly describe the project and your role.

• What were/are the top quality issues on this project?

• What recommendations for improvement do you have?

• Describe a best practice others could learn from, or a success story from this project.

• Questions for Project Managers and/or Discipline Leads

• How do you identify and manage risk specific to this, or any, project?

• How do you capture requirements and communicate them with your project team?

• How do you handle inter-discipline handoffs on the project?

• When changes occur (e.g., design change, change in scope of work), how do you communicate them to your project team?

• Do the people on your project team have the right experience and/or skill sets?

• How and when do you select Peer Reviewers?

• In hindsight, would you propose on the project differently? (e.g., revise work plan, schedule, budget)

• Any issues with invoicing?

• Questions for Project Team Members

• How do you know:
  - What your project assignment(s) are?
  - Your roles on the project?
  - What is expected from you?

• How are your budget and schedule communicated to you?

• Describe the QC checking process on this project, or other quality procedures used.

• Are the QC checking procedures sufficient? Why or Why Not?

• Where do you run into quality impacting issues?

• Questions for Peer Reviewers

• How did you know you were the Peer Reviewer for this project?

• Describe how the project requirements and objectives were communicated to you.

• Has anything limited you from providing substantive reviews? (e.g., schedule, budget, skills or experience)

• How do you communicate your peer review comments to the project team?

• Were your review comments resolved to your satisfaction?

• Have you had any quality-impacting challenges on this project within the role of peer reviewer?

• Additional and/or General Comments or Notes

Positive Observations, Strengths, and/or Best Practices

Non-Conformance Reports and/or Opportunities for Improvement

• Non-Conformance Report (NCR)

NCR

• Grades of NCRs<br> Major - systematic breakdown / requires corrective action <br> Minor - violation of QMP or standard / requires corrective action <br> Observation - warrants management attention

  Major

  Minor

  Observation

• Describe the activity not meeting applicable requirements and/or the observed quality failure. Include a reference to the QMP Section or source and the requirement not met.

• Opportunities for Improvement

Opportunities

• Describe your findings or observations of the potential quality-impacting issue and/or area for improvement.

Audit Conclusions

• Report Distribution:

  Select Project Manager Sector Director Practice Leader Discipline Leader Operations Manager National Quality Director

  • Project Manager
  • Sector Director
  • Practice Leader
  • Discipline Leader
  • Operations Manager
  • National Quality Director

• Lead Auditor Signature

  Sign

• Select date

  Date