ML19270F255
| ML19270F255 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/19/1978 |
| From: | Mcneill W, Lester Tripp, Whitesell D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19270F234 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900005 NUDOCS 7902050215 | |
| Download: ML19270F255 (19) | |
Text
VENDOR INSPECTI0tl REPORT U.S. flVCLEAR REGULATORY C0totISSI0tt 0FFICE OF ItlSPECTI0ti AND ENFORCEMEtlT REGI0tl IV Report No.
99900005/70 01 Program fio. 44010 Company: Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Nuclear Fuel Division Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Inspection Conducted: May 22-26,1978
\\
\\h
{
b-l9-78 Inspectors:
W. M. McNeill, Contractor inspector, Vendor Jate Inspection Branch
\\
(l-/9-YS L. E. Tripp, Sr., Mecnanigal Engineer, Date Division of Reactor Construction Inspection
. / ' / c-.b Approved by:
J W Q ) f M > & 2 /'s.
6-19 78 3
D. E. Whitesell, Chief, Components Date Section I, Vendor Inspection Branch Surinary Inspection on May 22-26, 1978 (99900005/78-Oi)
Areas Insoected:
Implementation of Topical Report and other applicable codes and standards, including: action on previous inspection findings; design controls, and audits. The inspection involved fifty-six (56) inspector hours on site by two (2) NRC inspectors.
Results:
In the three (3) areas inspected, no apparent deviations or unresolved items were identified in one of these areas. The following two (2) deviations and two (2) unresolved items were identified in the remaining areas.
7902050a15~
. Deviations:
Design Controls - ANSI N45.2.ll was not fully implemented in the areas of identification of calculations, performance of verifications, and documentation of verification in accordance with the Topical Report, section I, (Enclosure Item A). Audits - Audits records did not contain the checklist used in accordance with Topical Report, section 18, and the Produci. Assurance Department Manual 2.18.1 (Enclosure Item B).
Unresolved Items: Design Controls - Full implementation of procedure E.O.P. 4.10 could not be verified because Westinghouse is currently revising the distribution matrix of the design manuals (DetailsSection I, paragraph B.3.b).
Design Controls - Compliance of the Mechanical Design Manual to requirements of E.O.P.'s could not be established because of the late delivery of the complete document (DetailsSection II, Paragraph C.3.b).
. DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by W. M. McNeill)
A.
Persons Contacted C. L. Bennett, Nuclear Design Engineer
- E. S. Boyko, Product Assurance Engineer D. J. Caldwell, Product Design Engineer E. J. Domis, Product Assurance Engineer J. B. Mayer, Product Design 2 Manager K. R. McAtce, T&H Design Engineer A. F. McFarlane, Nuclear Engineering Manager
- H. F. Menke, Engineering Product Assurance Manager
- H. L. Russo, Product Assurance Manager K. D. Sheppard, T&H Design Group I Manager
- Denotes those attending the Exit Interview.
B.
Design Controls 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that these activities were controlled in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC requirements:
a.
Analyses covering different functional areas (mechanical, thermal-hydraulic):
(1) Are legible and in a form suitable for reproduction and filing.
(2) The analytical technique employed is described including reference to required codes, design margins, sources of empiric'l data, assumptions used and justifications, ar.u literature references where applicable.
(3) Are sufficiently detailed as the purpose, method, assumptions, design input, references, and units such that a person technically qualified in the subject can review and understand the analyses without recourse to the ori inator.
J
. (4) Calculations are identified in such a manner that they are readily retrievable.
(5) Have been properly reviewed or checked.
b.
Material or component specifications are consistent with the manufacturer's procedures including:
(1) Proper identification.
(2) Appropriate review, approval, issuance, and distribution.
(3) Revisions have been subjected to the same control as the original.
(4) Identification of status including effectiveness by contract and date.
(5) The proper storage and control of master copies or originals.
(6) That the design parameters, dimensions, materiais, etc.
utilized can be traced back to analyser. such as those listed in Item a. above.
c.
Fuel assembly and component drawings are consistent with the manufactin ar's procedures including:
(1) The
.tiization of drafting room standards, standardized symbois, tolerancing and notes.
(2) Proper identification and indication of status.
Effectiveness by contract and date.
(3) Checking, review and approval, issuance and distribu-tion.
(4) The proper storage and control of master copies ir originals.
(5) The proper handling of revisions.
(6) That the dimensions, toleranc.es, parameters, materials, instructions, etc. contained in the drawings can be traced back to analyses and/or specifications such as those listed in Items a. and b. above.
. d.
Design verification procedures describe:
(1)
Decision responsibility for determining the extent and type of verification, i.e. independent calculations check or alternate calculations, design review, or qualification testing.
(2) Documentation of verification.
e.
Calculations checks (alternate calculations) are used for design verification / document:
(1) Record of checker.
(2)
Check method used.
Computer calculations used the version of the code that has been verified by comparison with earlier code versions or with experiment.
(3) Assumptions and input data have been checked.
Computer programs, code input are independently checked.
f.
Design reviews are used for design verification document that:
(1)
Documented records exist of meetings, reviews, corments, action assignments and followup.
(2) That the basic questions of Section 6.3.1 of NISI N45.2.ll were considered and addressed, as applicable.
(3) That the design review was performed by persons or groups other than those who performed the original design.
g.
Testing used to verify scme design features such as fuel assembly fretting or wear characteristics, flow-mixing, fuel assembly structural tests or DNB tests document:
(1) The tests were performed in accordance with written procedures which incorporate or reference the require-ments and acceptance limits contained in applicable design documents.
(2) Test procedures assured that prerequisities were met, that adequate instrumentation was available, and that the necessary monitoring was performed.
. (3) The model test work was subjected to error analysis and the appropriate scaling law application.
(4) The test configuration was clearly defined and docu-mented. Test results are documented and evaluated to assure that test requirements were satisfied.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Verification that analyses are legible, sufficiently detailed, and described; by the review of the Thermal-Hydraulic analysis THB-747 and Nuclear Design Analysis FPDF-10 for a recent project.
b.
Verification that specifications are identified, reviewed approved, changed, and controlled properly.
Design para-meters are traceable back to the analysis; by the review of Zinc Material Specification, 31006, Grid Product Speci-fication, 31039, Grid Process Specifications, 80314KA, and the design manuals, and analysis for the above components and materials.
c.
Verification that drawings are identified reviewed, approved, changed and controlled properly.
Design parameters are traceable back to the analysis; by the review of Fuel Assembly Routine, ll89F46, Grid Assembly, ll37E50, Fuel Assembly,1101E76, and the desi-manuals, and analysis for the above components.
d.
Verified that the design verification procedures describe, the extent, and type of verification, and the documentation requirements; by tre review of the following documents:
Policy and Procedure, Product Design Reviews, P-310, Revision 0; Product Assurance Procedure, Formal Design Res ew Activities, 2.3.1. Retision 1; Engineering Opera-tion Procedures, Procedure for Documenting Design Calcula-tions, 4.2, Revision 3; Verification and Qualification of Computer Programs used in Engineering, Analysis, Design, or Safety Analysis, 4.3, Revision 2; Design Review Procedure, 5.1, Revision 6; and Tests for Design Verification, 5.2, Revision 1.
. e.
Verification that the calculations identified in Item a.
above (THB 747 and FPDF-10) identified the checker, method used, included the checking of the inputs etc., by review-ing the alternate calculations.
f.
Verification that the design reviews a'.e used to document meetings, action assignments, follow-up, questions, and are conducted by personnel other than the original designer; by the review of design reviews 77-7. 77-12, and 78-01.
g.
Verification that the Design Testing Program documents the test procedures, the acceptance criteria, the test conditions, reporting requirements, etc.; by reviewing the 17x17 414 Fuel Assembly Test Report and the Test Prospectives for Phase III - testing of the Zirc Grid and Optimized Fuel Rod.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations See Enclosure Item A.
b.
Unresolved Items Full implementation of procedure E.0.P, Preparation and Use of Design Manuals, 4.10, Revision 2, could not be verified because Westinghouse is currently revising the distribution matrix, Appendix II. This will be inspected during a later inspection.
C.
Audits 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that these activities were controlled in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC and ASME Code requirements:
a.
The audit system is established by management policy statements or procedures and that adequate manpower, funding and facilities are providec.
b.
The organizations responsible for internal audits are identified and the scope of their responsibilities is docu-mented.
c.
There is a planned schedule of audits with applicable elements of the Quality Assurance Program audited.
d.
The audit personnel are independent of the activities audited, are qualified based on experience and training, and had, or were given appropriate training or orientation for developing their competence for performing the audit.
e.
An individual written audit plan is utilized which identifies the audit scope, the activities to be audited, the require-ments, the schedule and written procedures or check lists.
f.
Audit reports are written which provide a description of the audit scope, identification of auditors, persons contacted, a summary of audit results including an evaula-tion of the ef.ectiveness of the areas audited, details of nonconformances, and recommendations for correcting nonconfomances or improving the QA program as appropriate.
g.
Audit results, including an evaluation of the portions of the quality assurance program covered by the audit, are reported to responsible management.
h.
Management of the audited organization or group:
(1) Reviews and investigates any adverse audit findings, (2) Determines and schedules appropriate corrective
- action, (3) Responds to the audit report in writing within 30 days (or as specified in procedures) after receipt giving the results of the review and investi-
- gation, (4)
Indicates a scheduled date for corrective action if corrective action has not been completed at the time of the response.
i.
Internal manufacturing audits cover the following areas:
(1) Special processes, (2) Quality control records, (3) Calibration of inspection tools and measuring devices,
. (4)
Drawing and procedure controls, (5) Receiving inspections, (6) Materials control, (7) Nonconforming matecial control.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The preceding objectiv' were accomplishes by:
a.
Review of the Product Assurance Manual, section 2.18.1, Revision 1, and the current organization chart, to verify whether the organizations responsible for internal audits are identified, and the scope of their responsibilites are detined, and that an audit system is established, imple-mented, and adequate.
b.
Verification that a planned schedule is followed by review of 1978 Engineering Product Assurance Audit Schedule and 1978 Operations Product Assurance Internal Audit Schedule.
c.
Verification that auditors were independent and qualified by review of the auditing personnel that had conducted three recent audits.
d.
Review of three division audits,1) EPA March Audit, 2)78-003 and, 3)78-005 and the 1977 Corporate Quality Program Audit to verify whether the audit reports described the scope, idenWic' the auditors, findings; and also to verify whether the..udit results were reported to manage-ment, and the findings were reviewed, responded to properly, and appropriate corrective action initiated.
e.
Verification that manufacturing audits were sufficiently comprehensive in scope; by review of the schedule identi-fied in b. above.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations See Enclosure Item 3.
. b.
Unresolved Iten None.
D.
Exit Ihterview The inspectors met with management representatives (denoted in paragraph A) at the conclusion of the inspection on May 26, 1978.
The inspectors sumarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The management representatives had no comment in response to each item discussed by the inspector.
. DETAILS SECTION II (Prepared by L. E. Tripp)
A.
Persons Contacted E. S. Boyko, Engineering Product Assurance H. F. Menke, Manager, Engineering Product Assurance R. R. Cost, Manager, Operations Product Assurance B.
Action On Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Deviation (Report No. 77-04):
Lack of acceptance limits or test conditions in some Chem Lab Manual procedures. A review of this area established that acceptability limits for the standards run are now included in procedures COCL-15 and C0CL-17. Other Chem Lab Manual procedures have acceptability limits. Wes tinghouse personnel made a verbal commitment to revise Section 11.2 of the Chem Lab Manual to clarify that acceptability limits will be identified for procedures which do not reference NBS standards.
Corrective action will be verified during a future Westinghouse Columbia inspection.
(0 pen) Deviation (Report No. 77-04): Measures did not provide for documentation that optical pyrometers used as secondary standards have a known valid relationship to nationally recognized standards.
Westinghouse has committed to documenting the traceability of the subject optical pyrometers by including them in the Tool and Gage Calibration Report. A file is to be maintained showing evidence of traceability to nationally recognized standards.
To prevent recurrence, the appropriate QCI is being revised to include the requirement for documentation of traceability of Maintenance cali-bration standards with Quality Control Standards Records.
Correc-tive action will be verified during a future Westinghouse Columbia inspection.
C.
Design Controls 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that these activities were controlled in accordance with the QA Manual and applicable NRC requirements:
. a.
The design control program procedures cover the following:
(1) Responsibilities of the groups involved in fuel design such as physics, thermal-hydraulic, mechan-ical, fuel management, project management and accident analysis.
(2) Technical information exchange between fuel design and other internal groups such as plant design, licensing, and accident analysis as well as external interfaces.
(3) Control of design documents including review, approval, release, distribution, revision, maintenance and retention.
(4) Training of design personnel including their familiarization with design QA procedures.
(5) Identification of appropriate design criteria, standards (such as ASTM) and other requirements.
(6) Preparation of design documents such as materials specifications, drawings and design reports.
(7) Specifying quality levels and acceptance standards to manufacturing such as dimensions including tolerances, specifications including upper or lower limits, sampling frequency, confidence levels and measurement techniques, as appropriate.
(8) Selection of fuel design verification methods and how verification is performed.
(9) The auditing of design activities, their reporting and followup.
(10) Corrective action when design or program deficiencies are encountered.
(11) Making fuel performance (primarily irradiation) reports available to cognizant design personnel.
(12) Control of design changes.
. b.
The design / manufacturing /QA interface is covered by appropriate procedures and they are adhered to for drawings, specifications or instructions including the following:
(1)
Standard method for transmittal and receipt to manufacturing of the above documents generated by the design groups.
(2) tianufacturing/QA participation in review and con-currence in these documents.
c.
Procedures exist and are adhered to, which govern design changes including:
(1) Design control measures for changes are commensurate with those applied to the original design, including evaluation of effects or changes on all design input /
output data, design analyses and applicability of design verification tasks.
(2) Reviews, approvals, and documentation of changes reflect the same attention of the same design groups as involved in the original design.
(3) That transmittal control of design changes to manu-facturing and other interfacing groups is in accord-ance with governing procedures for drawings, speci-fications and instructions, d.
The design input establish the following:
(1) Basic function of the fuel assembly, fuel rod, grid and other key components.
(2) Performance requirements such as maximum fuel heat rating and burnup, minimum DNBR or CHFR, maximum fuel clad temperature, power coefficients, shutdown margin and maximum cladding strain.
(3) Standards and Regulatory requirements including applicable issue.
(4) Design conditions such as core pressure, inlet temperature and flow rate and coolant chemistry.
. (5) Design requirements and Jads under normal and abnormal conditions incitding postulated accidents.
(6)
Interface requirements with other fuel assemblies, existing fuel, control elements and incore instru-mentation.
(7) Material requirements including corrosion charac-teristics, irradiation performance and compatiability.
(8) Mechanical requirements such as vibration, bowing, fretting, and wear.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
a.
Inspection of the design control program procedures verified that they include the following:
(1) Responsibilities of the various fuel design groups were found to be covered in the Engineering Depart-ment Charter in the NFO Policy and Procedure Manual p!us the following procedures in the Engineering Department Operations Manual: E0P 2.1, " Engineering Department Organization Chart," Revision 5, May 4, 1978 EOD 2.3, " Engineering Section Charters,"
Revision 1, July 3,1975; E0P 2.3.1, " Nuclear Enginering Charter," Revision 1, October 17, 1977; E0P 2.3. 2, " Product Engineering Charter," Revision 1, October 37,1977; E0P 2.3.3, " Fuel Performance Engineeri.'g and Evaluation Charter," Revision 2, August 22,1977; E0P 2.3.4, " Engineering Administra-tion and Coordination Charter," Revision 1, May 17, 1977; and E0P 2.3.5, " Advanced Fuels and Process Development Charter," Revision 1, August 22, 1977.
(2) Technical information exchange and interfaces were found to be covered by E0P 2.5, "NFD Engineering /
PWRSD Nuclear Safety /NFD Fuel Projects Safety and Licensing Interface Responsibilities," Revision 0, March 4,1976; E0P 2.6.1, "NFD Engineering /Manufac-turing/Pr] duct Assurance Interface Requirements and Procedures," Revision 4, March 16, 1977; E0P 2.7,
. 4 "NFD Engineering / Fuel Projects Interface Responsi-bilities," Revision 0, January 31, 1975; and E0P 3.7, "NSSS/ Core Design Interface Document," Revision 1, June 2, 1976.
(3) Control of design documents was found to be covered by the same procedures that covered their prepara-tion. These included E0P 6.3, " Preparation and Use of the Westinghouse Bill of Material /Keysheet,"
Revision 3, March 15,1976; E0P 6.5, " Preparation and Release of Engineering Drawings," Revision 3, October 17,1977; E0P 6.6, " Preparation and Use of Materials Specifications," Revision 2, June 16,1975; E0P 6.7, " Initiation and Approval of Process Speci-fications," Revision 2, August 22, 1977; E0P 6.8,
" Preparation and Use of Material Test Specifications,"
Revision 2, June 15,1975; E0P 6.9, " Preparation and Use of Product Specifications," Revision 1, June 16, 1975; E0P 6.10, " Preparation and Use of Equipment Specifications," Revision 1, November 18, 1974; E0P 6.11, " Preparation and Use of Engineering Change Notices," Revision 4, May 4,1978; E0P 6.13, "F-Specifications," Revision 0, November 18, 1974; and E0P 4.2, " Procedure for Documenting Design Calcula-tions," Revision 3, February 2,1977.
(4) Training of design personncl was found to be covered by E0P 1.1, " Engineering Department Operations Manual,
" Revision 5, January 23, 1978.
Sections 2.6 and 5.0 cover the training of new employees inc1rding the use of the E0M in that training.
(5)
Identification of design criteria, standards and other requirements was found to be covered by E0P 4.10, " Preparation and Use of Design Manuals,"
Revision 2, March 14, 1975, and E0P 3.2, " Design Initialization," Revision 3, March 27,1978.
(6) Specification of quality levels and acceptance standards to manufacturing was found to be covered in E0P's 6.5, 6.6, 6.8, 6.9 and 6.10.
Speci fically, E0P 6.5 requires product design drawings to incluce or reference required Quality Control inspection characteristics. Appendix I of E0P 6.6 covers these areas for materials specifications.
E0P 6.8 covers materials test specifications for destructive tests
. (e.g. mechanical tests : corrosion tests, metalio-graphy, etc.) and nondestructive tests (e.g. leak, radiographic, ultrasonic, penetrant tests) and requires specification of acceptance criteria, E0P 6.9 on product specifications includes provisions in the recommended content for visual acceptance standards, plus requirements for documentation of acceptance criteria, sampling rates and test methods.
E0P 6.10 requires vendors to have a program that assures that fina; acceptance inspections of the product are to be to Westinghouse NFD approved drawings and specifications.
(7) Design verification was found to be covered by NFD Policy and Procedure P-310, " Product Design Reviews,"
plus E0P 5.1, " Design Review Procedure," Revision 6, March 27,1978; E0P 5.2, " Tests for Design Verifi-cation," Revision 1, September 29, 1976; E0P 4.3,
" Verification and Qualification of Computer Programs Used in Engineering Analysis, Design or Safety Analysis," Revision 2, August 29, 1976; and pro-visions in E0P 4.2 which provide for verification by independent checking of design calculations.
(8) The auditing of all phases of design is covered by Product Assurance Department Procedure 2.18.1,
" Internal Quality Assurance Audits of NFD,"
Revision 1, Febrt.ary 9,1977.
(9) Corrective action was found to be covered by E0P 7.2,
" Field Discrepancy Reporting Procedure," Revision 3, July 15, 1976; Fuel Projects Department Procedure No. 4.12, "In-Service tionconformance Reporting,"
Revision 0, February 1,1977; Product Assurance Department Procedure No. 2.16.1, "n inccnformances and Corrective Actions," Revision 1, July 30,1976; Policy and Procedure P-710, "Iden;ification and Reporting of Significant Deficiencies, Unreviewed Safety Questions and Substantial Safety Hazards,"
Revision 3, January 6,1978; and E0P 2.7 which covers review and disposition of design discrepancies.
(10) Section 3.E of E0P 2.3.3 of the Fuel Performance Engineering and Evaluation Charter covers how fuel performance experience is incorporated into design.
. (11) Control of design changes is covered by E0P 6.11,
" Preparation and Use of Engineering Change Notices,"
Revision 4, May 4, 1978.
b.
Inspection of the functioning of the design / manufacturing /
QA(QC) interface was performed as follows:
(1) Verified that distribution of design documents such as drawings and specifications is per standard dis-tribution lists.
A list of current specifications is issued at least quarterly to the standard distri-bution list. The bill of materials (8071) is changed each time a drawing is revised.
Design, manufacturing and QC approve all ECNs which authorize design changes.
(2) Verified that NFD interfcce procedures for design document handling had been adhered to for two product specifications covering nuclear fuel assemblies (NFD 31035) and uranium dioxide pellets (NFD 31029).
(3)
Inspected the DNDR (deviation notice disposition request) log.
Verified for three DNDR's that the responsible design groups had properly reviewed and concurred with disposicions including any approval for utilization.
c.
The implementation of design contro! procedures for design changes was verified by inspecting the ECN status report and log plus the documentation for four ECN's to verify the following:
(1) The effects of design changes had been considered by appropriate design groups in disciplines affected by the change.
(2) The design change had been reviewed and approved by the same groups as the original design.
(3) Transmittal control of design changes was per the standard distribution list.
These ECN's were as follows: ECN 21860 which represented changes to 15 x 15 nozzle drawings, ECN 21849 whicn changed acceptance criteria for the 17 x 17 grid strap, ECN 10734 which updated the as-loaded drawing (core loading plan), and ECN 22078 which changed the fuel rod assembly specification requirements for certain NDE tests.
, d.
The design input for the basic 17 x 17 fuel design and one reload were inspected.
It was established that:
(1)
Basic functions of various fuel components were found to be given in the report "17 x 17 Fuel Assenbly Design Report - Volume I:
Fuel Assembly,"
Revision 0, November 25, 1975.
Section 3.0.2 of this report included the design bases for fuel rods, fuel assembly structure, fuel assembly, nozzles, thimbles, grids and other components.
(2) Performance requirements and design conditions were found to be covered by several inspected documents.
These included the Contract and Technical Data (CATD) document dated flarch 9, 1977 (Revision 0) and August 17, 1977 (Revision 1), the Design Power Capability Para-meter List (from PWR Systems Division), Core Design Parameter Manual (per E0P 3.3) and the Reload Safety Analysis Checklist (RSAC).
PCWG/TGX/2, " Core Capa-bility Parameters," November 30, 1976, included core pressure, coolant temperatures and flow rates. Water chemistry was defined in Standard Information Package, Volume 5-3, " Radiochemical Procedures for Pressurized Water Reactors," and in Standard Information Package, Volume 5-1, " Chemistry Criteria and Specifications for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors."
(3) Standards and Regulatory requirements were given in Table 4-4 of the 17 x 17 Design Report.
(4) Blowdown and seismic loads are transmitted to NFD by the PWR Systems Division via the Plant Addendum to the NSSS/ Core Design Interface Document.
Inspection of this document for one plant showed that it also contained handling equipment loads and core pressure drops.
(5)
Interface requirements with reactor internals and coupling with centrol rod drives, refueling equipment and in-core instrumentation were found to be in the
~
Plant Addendum to the NSSS/ Core Design Interface Document for the inspected plant.
(6) Material requirements were found in Sections A.13 and B.13, Table 4.2 and each report section of the 17 x 17 Design Report.
f J.
t
. (7) Mechanical requirements were found to be listed in the 17 x 17 Design Report.
These included require-ment B.27 (prevention of fuel rod buckling), B.23
(. fuel rod clad fretting) and requirement F (vibra-tion analysis).
3.
Findings a.
Deviations None.
b.
Uriresolved Items Parts of the Thermal-Hydraulic, Nuclear and Mechanical Design Manuals were inspected as sources of design input.
E0P 4.10, " Preparation and Use of Design Manuals,"
Revisinn 2, March 4,1975, lists requirements for such manuals.
E0P 4.10 states that the Tianuals shall consist of a collection of design procedures, techniques, methods, computer programs, data, and other design related infor-mation, which, when considered together, will describe standard design practice.
It also states that a Fuel Assembly and Core Component Design Manual will be pre-pared to ce used as a guide for routine design activities and as a source of design information.
In response to two separate requests for such design manuals, Westinghouse personnel supplied twa volumes entitled "17 x 17 Fuel Assembly and Core Component Mechanical Design, Volume 1, Fuel Assembly" and " Volume 2, Core Components," dated November 25, 1975.
A possible deviation in this area was discussed at the exit meeting.
These reports did not meet E0P 4.10 requirements in that they were design reports rather than design manuals. They had been intended to be used as a companion to the Fuel Assembly Design Manual.
At this point, Westinghouse personnel supplied another manual entitled, " Fuel Assembly Mechanical Design Manual,"
Revision 2, June 1977.
Since time did not permit verify-ing whether or not this manual meets E0P 4.10 requirements, this has been designated as an unresolved item.