ML20147H033
| ML20147H033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/06/1986 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147G863 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-847 NUDOCS 8803080369 | |
| Download: ML20147H033 (19) | |
Text
~
Cf.or Fyr s
5
(
June 6, 1986 MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert D. Martin, Regional Administrator Region IV FROM: James M. Taylor, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement
SUBJECT:
ASSESSMENT OF REGION IV PERFORMANCE Enclosed is the integrated assessment of the Region IV implementation of IE programs. This report assesses ten selected areas within the IE programs for the 1985-1996 Assessment Year: July 1985 to June 1986. During the course of the year, my staff provided yours with an interim report addressing formal programmatic assessment results and an evaluation of interactions on routine and special projects.
I would be happy to discuss the particulars of these assessments with you. I also encourage your division directors to discuss any questions they have with
,the appropriate IE division director.
[ Original Signed by J. M. Taylor)
James M. Taylor, Director Of fice of Inspection and Enforcemnt
Enclosure:
as stated cc: V. Stello J. Sniezek CONTACT: Barry Zalcman, IE x2-4905
\
l l
1 8803000369 PDR FOIA 080304 CONNOR87-847 PDR
i
- s. . .
< i i
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REPORT OF REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF IE PROGRAMS I
ASSESSMENT YEAR JULY 1985 - JUNE 1986 REGION IV
[ Original Signed by J. G. Partlow]
James G. Partlow, Director Division of Inspection Programs
[ Original Signed by E. L. Jordan]
Edward L. Jordan, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response
[0riginal Signed by 8. K. Grimes]
Brian K. Grimes, Director Division of Quality Assurarice, Vendor and Technical Training Center Programs
[ Original Signed by J. Axelrad]
Jane Axelrad, Director Enforcement Staff
[ Original Signed by J. L. Blaha]
~ James L. Blaha, Director Program Support and Analysis Staff I
l
,v-e
l 2
< s l
Regional Assessment Report i
Region IV l
Introduction Assessments of regional implementation of IE programs were conducted in accordance with IE Office Procedure 0200. Assessment criteria and/or guidance for the selected segments of the program areas were provided to the regions and used as the basis for the assessments. During the course of the planning process, an effort to integrate the assessment for IE programs was undertaken.
For those situations where a particular activity was assessed, the region was given ing eachtheassessment opportunity visit.
to respond to the assessment findings during and follow- ,
Those individual assessment reports were transmitted to the regions under separate cover. An interim assessment report s
i was compiled to provide feedback to the regions and encouraged establishing the necessary dialog to ensure that an acceptable level of implementation could be achieved. ,
A table summarizing the rating of each of 10 program areas assessed by IE follows.
,praisals:The rating scheme used in this report is the same as that for 0- Outstanding E- Excellent FS - Fully Successful I
MS - Minimally Satisfactory U ' Unsatisfactory Those are to be taken as the overall region's performance of the selected IE I programs. i
\
t 1
I 6
k .
i v-w e-
, . 3 (I g61e.: 4 3, po'r$ 3pcb 1 Wfib d N R Summary of Ratings of IE Programs hyohy n naJ WJb-R 1 gion IV Program Areas Rating b (M me b bo )k IN[
g rcriiM
- 1) Operating Reactors FS
- 2) Reactors Under Construction FS p> d
- 3) Fuel Facilities and E Materials
- 4) Events Reporting
- 5) TMI Action Tracking h6N > M-FS
- 6) Incident Response E
- 7) Emergency Preparedness E Enforcement MS 4 Y M-
- 9) Technical Training FS
- 10) Resource Utilization MS ( 7K i
1 e
=
6 R'EACT0[tS CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION RATING: FS
( The reactor construction inspection program for Region IV was assessed based on the CAT inspection performed at the South Texas facility during October-November 1985.
s J. G. Partlow memorandum The to results Region of IV this assessment dated May 2,1986.were discussed in the The summary includes:
The completion status of the inspection program does not correspond to the reported stage of construction.
The CAT findings do not support the improved performance SALP ratings in the areas for Corrective Action and Reporting and the Design and Design Change Control. The remaining areas were in general agreement.
There was evidence that the Region was aware of some delays in the implementation of the inspection program and was working to correct these deficiencies.
Overall Region IV is rated Fully Successful in this program area.
The implementation of the construction inspection program at South Texas is generally adequate. The CAT inspection findings were generally in agreement with areas.and supportive of the regional inspection findings in most construction It is recognized that the CAT inspection sample in various areas was findings that were not covered by the smaller region samples.large re However, the CAT C did identifywhere onstruction, a number the region's ofinspection different concerns program in the is essentially area of civil and st complete.
ihe CAT also identified some weaknesses in the mechanical construction area which in thisthe region did not identify during their inspection of the construction area.
The regional and their inspections reporting has beenthat have been detailed performed appear to have been thorough and concise.
hardware is consistent with the current program policy.The inspection However the emphasis on completion completion status of the program of construction for thedoes site. notThis correspond to the repor,ted ;. age of apparently is partly due to the previous assignment of inspection resources to other regional NTOL priorities and the region's schedule for program completion based on the view that the licensee's estimate for completion of site construction is optimistic. The region's current reevaluation of the status of program completion and trescheduling of inspection requirements should assure the completion of the remaining elements of the construction inspection program.
The CAT findings also support the most recent SALP evaluation in the areas of Piping LicensingSystems and Supports, Electrical Power Supply and Distribution, and Activities.
However, they do not support the improved performance indicated for Corrective Action and Reporting and for Design and Design Change Control.I d wdl
t \
15 EMENT PROGRAM RATING: MS
[. e enforcement packages submitted by Region IV have declined noticeably in !
recent months, with extensive rework required on many cases. Enforcement actions at Severity Levels IV and V from inspection reports in the i
security / safeguards area lacked sufficient detail and several examples were i found of failure to cite violations (e.g. , Inspection Report 50-458/85-67.)
Inspection Reports in the reactor operations area generally conformed to the ,
enforcement policy, guidance and precedents. The Region has submitted a number !
l of cases recently, particularly in the safeguards area, that were substantially '
in excess of the six-week timeliness goal (e.g. , EA 86-82, Fort St. Vrain - 31 weeks; 86-44, Cooper - 30 weeks; 86-82, ANO - 26 weeks; 86-81, Fort St. Vrain -
24 weeks; and 86-84, Wolf Creek - 22 weeks). These delays have seriously affected the Region's timeliness performance since the Interim Assessment. The 1 overall rating for Region IV in this area is Minimally Satisfactory.
The performance of Region IV in submitting escalated enforcement packages has slipped considerably in both timeliness and quality during the assessment period. Many of the cases required significant rework. For example, EA 86-3, Cooper; EA 86-44, Cooper; EA 86-74, River Bend and EA 86-50, Waterford required significant changes. Notices of Violation frequently had to be rewritten to create supportable citations and remove extraneous material. As discussed during the Management Meeting in November,1985, we strongly recomend additional involvement by the Regional counsel to improve the quality of the packages. Supporting documentation frequently did not accompany the packages and was not forthcoming af ter several requests. EA 86-55, Comanche Peak, was submitted as a Severity Level IV, although it fit an exp, licit example
- l. in the policy for a Severity Level III. No explanation was provided for the ] :
ategorization nor had an inspection report been written or an enforcement ,
conference been held. Efforts to expedite enforcement packages which were already submitted late by the Region to Headquarters have been hampered by the Region's refusal to approve minor changes by telephone._Further, in the %
Jrea of enforcement for willful violations, even af ter havi_0_a a problem in~ a
_ case and receiving an EGM on the subject, the Region issued as a Severity Level IV violation a case that was wilitut on its face and naa been referred to 01.
3n another instance, tne Megion was directed by IE manaaement to transcribe '
_ninutes of_ an enforcement meetina and, without informing IE manaaement, decided l
not to transcribe it. Despite repeated efforts by the Enforcement Staff to -
' cbtain minutes of tfie meeting, they were not provided until four months later.
These enforcement instances indicate program that in Region IV.additional attention needs to be devoted to the i
, Inspection Reports
. A review of 10 inspection reports selected at random from reports issued by Region the reactor IV during the period operations area.November 30, 1985 - May 15, 1986 was conducted in This review of enforcement actions issued at Severity Level IV and/or V indicated that most of the findings were usually supported by the facts detailed in the inspection reports. In Inspection Report 50-382/85-31, the licensee was cited for the failure to adequat61v ;
qaluate and recort a datact in l acenrnance with 10 CFR PutJ1.
report - details explain thatx the licensee evaluated this f ailure underHoweve Q he !
i l
l l
I f h 16
^ CFR.-Ra.r_t 21 and determined the de f pH m not po7Ta~b b he details as Indicate thatto why the license s evaluation was inadequate are not orovided, except to failed to report a legitimate defect, the violation should have beenLnis d characterized as a Severity level III. -; I Inspection Report 50-458/85-77 cites a failure of the design control program Notice was misleading and difficult to follow. at River Bend in that a Field Change This same Field Change Notice was cited in Inspection Report 50-458/85-69 because of its use contrary to site procedural requirements.
Two Severity Level IV violations for the same deficient change notice are not appropriate, particularly when the second violation was cited during the period of the licensee's response.
A review of enforcement actions (5 inspection reports) isst.ed by Region IV during was the period July 1 - December 31, 1985 in the security / safeguards area conducted.
This review of enforcement actions issued at Severity Level IV and/or V indicated some apparent violations that some werecited violations may be under-classified and that not cited.
The lack of detailed information in the inspection this was the case. reports made it difficult to determine with certainty whether Specifically, Inspection Report 50-267/85-24 involved an unlocked, unalarmed and uncontrolled door to a vital area. Although the circumstances was categorizedfitataSeverity Severitylevel Level IV.III example in the policy, this violation The inspection report did not provide details III. to explain why this violation should not be considered a Severity Level Another example, Inspection Report 50-458/85-67, of a contractor employee (who was badged for escorted access) without aninvolved the d escort.
which involved failure to control key card badges.That same inspection
[
( report contained little more detail than the Notice of Violation.However, it could not be determined whether the key card violation was appropriately categorized.
the inspection Therefore, Several Inspection examples Report of apparent failures to cite a violation were observed.
reporting violation concerning an unsecured vital However, area door.50-458/85-67(
the enforcement action did not cite for the unsecured door.
Timeliness ~
The Commission has established a goal of issuance of escalated actions within an average of eight weeks from identification of a violation. To meet this !
goal, packages must be submitted by the Regions for IE concurrence within six !
weeks of identification of a violation. The average time for submittal of i
' g escalated not come close enforcement actions to meeting to IEoffor the goal sixconcurrence weeks. was 12.56 weeks which does j
.part icularly in safeguards cases i
Delays have been increasing, j cid year review. , and they have more than doubled since the they shoul~d not delay the earlier cases, particularly cince precedei available cases. in other Regions which Region IV could have followed to resolve the I The reflect this decision. Region persisted in its approach and the timeliness statistics 1
{ 1 l
)
i e *e*$
[
[' In Reply Refer To: 4 1
Dockets: 50-445/83-49 .M 2 2 m 0-J !
50-446/83-23 jr;1 k
Texas Utilities Electric Company ATTN: N. D. Spence, President, TUGC0 Skyway Tower
'400 North Olive Street
' Lock Box 81 1
_ Dallas, Texas 75201 '
Gentlemen:
Report of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric The SALP Station, Uni W facility for the period October 1,1982, through 31, 1983. The OctoberBoard m v performance analyses and the resulting enclosed SALP Board Report. evaluation are documented in the with you at the Comanche Peak site on MayThese analyses and 25, 1984. evaluations wereI I should like to emphasize that this report covers an appraisal of your performance for a limited per.ad of time and may not be indicative of current conditions k .
.t is my view that the Texas Utilities Electric Company's overall regulatory performance question. at the Comanche Peak facility is satisfactory for the period in As the attached report indicates, your performance in five functional areas received the highest performance category . In rating of 1 i addition, Category 1 to Category 2. I note that in three functional areas your performance went from !
i concerned because the changes are in the wrong direction.Although the rj I hope that these assure that this trend does not persist. changes will cause you to see One functional area received a rating in performance Category 3.
This area fuel storage, and the Category 3 rating indicates a need management attention and oversight on your part.
i Your letter, dated May 29, 1984, in response to the SALP , andBoard findings the SALP Board report with two errata, appear as enclosures to this lette '
which issues the SALP Board Report as an NRC report. r, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, of May 30 and May 22, 1984, your letter of May 29, 1984, our letters letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.a copy of the 1983 SA 8/2 h RPB2 ORSS 0 LMHunnicutt EHJohnson pA 6/g/84 6/1) /84 RP0enise PCh k JT llins 6/g/84 qja4 6/.& /84 a e-M m e A r f M yy ~q 1 - - (g
'r.* '
1 l
i e I 32
- 2. Preoperational Progress ,
The startup testing is approximately 67% field complete, and the preoperational test procedures have essentially been written, reviewed, and approved. The writing and approval of initial
. star. tup procedures continues., .
A sign'ific' ant reduction in testing activitiss occurred after hot functional testing (HFT). At this time, the testing activities have not reached their previous level. The reduction was the result of a large amount of rework initiated by the licensee )
.- after HFT. Testing activities are not expected to attain their '
previous. level before the end of 1983.
, C. _ Inspection Activities ,
- 1. _
Construction Appraisal Team Insoection During this appraisal period, an inspection by the Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) was perfonned at CPSES on January 24- ;
February 4,1983, and February 14-March 3,1983, (NRC Inspection l Reports 50-445/83-18 and 50-446/83-12). The areas inspected
[ '
and results are listed below:
- a. Electrical innd . Instrumentation Construction -
Three potential enforcement findings , , .
- b. Me'chanical Construction'
. Three potential enforcement, findings, , ,.
- c. Welding / Nondestructive Examination -
One potential enforcement findings j
- d. Civil and Structural Construction !
One potential enforcement findings
- e. Procurement, Storage, and Material Traceability One potential enforcement finding
- f. Quality Control Inspector Effectiveness Two potential enforcement findings ,
- g. hJalityAssurance Three potential enforcement findings
- h. Design Change Controls and Corrective Action System Two potential enforcement findings l I
\
20
-- Failure to implement an effective QA program for the installation of the HVAC system in that supports had significant quantities of undersized welds duct system joints had numbers of instances of loose an;d missing
,(Severity IV - 8318) bolting; gaskets were missing or incomp
-- Failure to implement a QA program in regard ot' the fabrication of support posts for undentater lights installed in the refueling pools and fuel storage pools.
(Severity V - 8303)
In addition, the licensee reported two deficiencies in
. . accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e). These were as 'follows:
-- By letter dated May 31, 1983, the' licensee informed the NRC that it had been discovered that the anchoring of the new fuel storage racks had been improperly implemented.
was developed and installed and was examined by the SRICA new des prior to use of the storage racks.
-- By letter dated September 26, 1983, the licensee reported
( that during startup testing it was found that temperatures in excess of established parameters were experienced in the reactor vessel annulus. The licensee reported that it is planned to increase the cooling capacity for the area and +,o remove , air flow restrictions in the area. .
In response to the first violation above, the licensee ins HVAC support welds to determine the worst case condition. The pccted HVAC designer has in turn determined that under worst case the allowable strength limits. loading, the load on the worst c this analysis is required. As noted below, NRC review of joints were attributed to lack of proper interface between th startup organization and the contractor for HVAC installation.
- 2. _ Conclusion he licensee's performance in the functional area must be considered to be in Category 3 since their audit programs failed to identify the HVAC problem discussed above.
(
f 25 k
The NRC inspections in this area revealed two deficiencies as follows: .
Failure to follow procedures for design review in that
, ,', mathematical calculation packages contained errors that were not identified in the check review. (SeverityV,8230)
' Failure to remove obsolete and illegible drawings from -
construction work areas. (Severity IV 8318)
- 2. Conclusion 1.,
While the licensee has made significant im . .
Dy *\ y .
design and design change control programs,provements in histhese impro only began.to be effective in the latter portion of the revjew period. '
- Taken as whole for the review period, the licensee performance is considered to be in Category 2.
- 3. Board Recomendations _
- a. Recomended NRC Actions The NRC through the should "as-built"continue to evaluate this functional area i assure that the licensee (room turnover) inspections to meets his comitments. -
b.
Recomende'd Licensee Actions The licensee should assure that the design drawing package program continues to be practiced without compromise.
Mh licensee should also continue his efforts to update the The ' .
parent design drawings to reflect field changes CMCs. l N.
Quality Assurance - Preoperational Testino
- 1. Analysis The for the licensee has established preoperational a separate quality assurance plan testing phase. !
The preoperational described in the CPSES Startup Quality There Assurance P were no specific inspections of the licensee's startup quality '
assurance program during this reporting period. However, of the various preoperational testing activities. quality
+
. ..- . , _ L ,.
s .
/
.o ;
a l
e l
26 f-i There were no this reporting violations issued in this functional area during period. !
However, it is felt that had a final quality assurance review of records transfer been required, the occurred. associated with the startup records would not have violation ;
1
- )
, 2. . Coriclusions '
There is evidence of management attention in this area. Audits and test reviews activitiesbyare theadequate.
Quality Assurance department of preoperational
.assurance performance area.
is being achieved in the preoperational qual
. The licensee is considered to 'be in performance Category 2 in this area. '
I
- 3. _ Board Recommendations
- a. _Recomended NRC Actions
\
NRC inspection will continue at the present level in the preoperational testing area. Specific attention will be !
. given to final records retention and transfer since the '
function is expected to increase as testing nears completion.
i b.
Recomended t.icensee Ictions '
. i The overall implementation of. the preoperational quality assurance effort is considered' adequate and should be .
continued at the present level. However, a more vigorous involvement t in the form of an independent review, of the final preope, rational test data packages to ensure that all required documents to support test accestance are retained for permanent storage should be underta ten. 1 O. _ Quality Assurance - Construction
- 1. Analysis "
T as The u nNRC ce. did not co_nduct spec.ific inspections dedicated to qua '
All of the NHL, inspections however, examining various facits areas tional of therelatinglicensee's QA program as,it affects the~above func-to construction.
These inspections included O examination of such items as the qualifications of the QC personn the control of nonconformances, the distribution of documents, etc The NRCoffindings indicative in eachinofthis the perfomance thearea.
preceding functional areas also a The licensee has had 0/F m> +
-~
29
(
- 3. Board Recomenations
- a. Recomended NRC Actions The NRC should continue to monitor the licensee's activities
.' . .in this area at a. normal level. Consideration should be
- given to the fact that most of the efforts in this area .
will be directed toward replacement or spare parts for already purchased components,
- b. Recomended t.icensee Actions The licensee should continue his e'fforts to train and upgrade the personnel in the vendor procurement control
. section of the QA department. The licensee should also -
devote effort to identify those quality elements of various products that are most likely to be over looked by the vendor.
Q. Manacement Controls and Involvement
- 1. Analysis
( The licensee has placed TUEC employees in the key areas of site operations, including engineering, construction, and QA. As an examp.le, the suparvisors of each of the onsite. discipline engineering, engineers.' groups are licensee employees, who ar.e also degreed
- The license.e lias also placed onsite a cbrporate officer to -
manage the site activities. This officer. is the vice president - -
and genen) manager for the project. This officer has an assistant who is also the project engineering and construction manager as well as the n.anager of startup testing activities.
All of the persons in various supervisory positions report to the assistant project manager except for the site QA supervisor who reports to the QA manager in the corporate offices.
The project general manager and his assistant provide a weekly briefing to the corporate officers. These officers have been observed to frequently visit the site to view the status of censtruction and to assist in the resolution of major problez.I. *
- 2. Conclusion The licensee's level of involvement and the degree of hvd A(3 h control over the site activities is considered to be in performance Category 2.
( %)
LAh
l . .
~
. i
- JAN s y g3 Dockets: 50-445/82-24 50-446/82-12 Texas Utilities Generating Company l
ATTM: R. J. Gary, Executive Vice President & General Manager 2001 Bryan Tower ;
Dallas, Texas 75201 1 Gentlemen: i
)
This refers to the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) Board Report of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2. The SALP Board ;
met on November 9,1982, to evaluate the performance of the subject facility l for the period October 1,1981, through Feptember 30, 1982. The performance j Report. and resulting evaluation are provided in the enclosed SALP Board analyses These analyses and evaluition sere discussed with you onsite on December 3, 1982.
( For MRC scheduling purposes, there are 3 months not included in either this report or the 1981 report. The NRC staff has reviewed the data for the period and has noted nothing that would change the conclusions of this review.
The SALP Board evaluatien process consists of categorizing performance in each functional area. The categories which we have used to evaluate the performance of yout facility are defined in Section II of the enclosed SALP l l
Board Report. As you are aware, the NRC has changed the policy for the conduct of the SALP program based en sur experiences and the recently implemented reorganization which emphasizes the regionalization of the NRC staff. l This report is consistent with the revised policy.
We have reviewed your letter of December 27, 1982.
We would recommend continuing discussion between site management personnel and our Senior Resident and Reactor scheduling of Inspector tests. fcr Operations in the areas of nuclear experience We will continue to follow your efforts in the area of improving inspections of vendor supplied welds.
The December your operations.8,1982, meeting was productive and gave us a better insight into It also gave us the opportunity to give you the perspective of how we viewed the conduct of your operations from the regulatory viewpoint.
RPS-A 878 M RPB[ ORRP&E fpq' y TWesterman/dsm GMad en JGagl 6
( 1/ #/83 JC6 lins Id/83 1M /8 ( 1 /83 w
, ,, n . .-, a _ - _
I /y> O W g, -
l Appendix I
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Region IV Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfonnance l l
i Report: 50-445/82- 24; S0-446/82-12 Dockets : 50-445; 50-446 1 Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, TX 75201 Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 i Appraisal Period: October 1,1981 - September 30, ?.982 I Appraisal Completion Date: November 9,1982 Licensee Meeting: December 8,1982 SALP Board: G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Project Branch 1 S. B. Bumell, licensing Project Manager, NRR T. F. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Project Section A
- 0. L. Kelley, Senior Resident Inspector-Operations R. G. Taylor, Senior Resident Inspector-Construction Reviewed: [6 ///2 y/f 2.
T. F. Westerman, Chief Qate' Reactor Project Section A Approved: - Ad h G. L. Madsen, Chief ' ///2 9/f 2.-
Date Reactor Project Branch 1 SALP Board Chairman h3fZi 3h
i u-I
. i
( In addition, SALP Board members considered other criteria, as appropriate.
Based upon the SALP Board assessment, each functional area evaluated is
/ classified in one of three categories. The definition of the performance
/ categories are:
Category 1: Reduced NRC attention may be appropriate.
Licensee management attention and involvement are aggressive and oriented toward nuclear safety; licensee resources are ample and effectively used such that a high level of performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.
Category 2: NRC attention should be maintained at normal levels.
Licensee mar.1gement attention and involvement are evident and are concerned with nuclear safety; licensee resources are adequate and are reasonably effective such that satis factory performance with respect to operational safety or construction is achieved.
Category 3:
Both NRC and licensee attention should be increased.
Licensee management attention or involvement is acceptable and considers nuclear safety, but weaknesses are evident; licensee resources appear to be strained or not effectively used such that minimally satisfactory performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.
III. Summary of Results
(
The licensee's performance in each functional area, as applicable, was determined by the SALP Board and are as tabulated below:
_ Performance Category Functional Area 1981 1982 A. Plant Operations - Preoperational Testing B. N/E 3 Construction Activities j
1 Soils and Foundation N/E N/E
- 2. Containment and Other Safety-Re'ated Structures N/E 2 i
- 3. PipingSystemsandSupports(includes i welding, NDE, and preservice inspection) 1 2
- 4. Safety Related Components (includes vessel, internals, pumps, etc.) 1 1
- 5. Support Systems (includes HVAC, radwaste, fire protection)
[5 2 N/E
- 6. Electrical Power Supply and Distribution 1 1 7 Instrument and Control Systems 1 1 endor Procurement Cycle Controls N/E
. Licensing Activities 2 1 Note: The notation N/E indicates that the functional area was not evaluated for the reason indicated in Part IV of this report.
( b. Conclusions_
control efforts in this area demonstrated to be effective and the licensee'and hav are well de quality is, therefore, considered to be in Categorys performance 1
- c. .
Board Recommendations The Board recommends that NRC inspection resources be 7
redirected to this critical area when more active w undertaken in Unit 2.
Instrument and Controls
- a. Analysis extensive inspections of this period. se functional are wo Those inspections concentrated on the physical installation tubing of instrument runs as distinguished devices from the ngand electrical impulsethe connecti cabling previous functional ca tegory. connections since the latter during the period,No violations or deviations were identified in thi s area
- b. _ Conclusion The licensee's procedural controls for athe install ti on and c.
place the licensee in Category and1 from a perf andpoint.
B_oard Recomendations The Board would 'ote of instrument sysseas has been and will be perfor}
licer.see by directly the construction through forces. the plant operations er th group rath '
ment sheuld be evaluated by the NRC.The effectiveness of this arrangean
- 8. ,
Vendor Procurement Cycle Controls '
- a. Analysis \
r conducted onsite during the review unctional period.There area h'
, Region IV Vendor Program Branch haspections conducted at insIn addition, t s
vendors on either a generic basis or on a site-specific asis b
t I that provide program. indications of the effectiveness of the licensee's One violation was detected within the scope of this L _- area as follows:
/y
~
g- - Inadequate Control of Procuremant Document and Purchased Materials (Severity IV-8203) e O "8 In addition, there have been two other instances involving substantial questions relative to this functional area that did
% ot result in violations but have consumed considerable NRC dresources.
These are the problems associated with pipe whip g restraints (fabricated by Chicago Bridge and Iron Company and Reliance Electric Company).by NPS Industries) and the main c 5
w$ integrity of the componentsInwas .
in questionwas each case, the
] $ licensee source inspection organization had documented acc h j welds which,inspection g of source in turn, were not reinspected at the site by reason acceptance, I f b.oJConclusion J
g . h this functional area since it appears that not e.
4 ,A resources have been assigned to this area or thost resources N c.
that were directed were not fully trained arid indc:trinated.
Board Recommendations
% The licensee has committed to an extensive reinspection program 1 involving other vendor-supplied ondetected welded components to detertaine if yet problems are existant.
this reinspection effort closely to its conclusion.The NRC should follow
- 9. Licensing Activities The NRC Office of l Nyclear Reactor Regulation has provided the Boarc with an evalation Ll/ of this area is very involved atPeak.
a management which level to assureindicates the safe n1that the l reliable ;
operation of Comanche able as demonstrated by appearances before the ACRS an) or through discussions with NRR persor..cl. i diligent responsiveintoresolving outstanding technical issues and has beenThe licensee NRC requests.
The only exception to an otherwise high performance level has been in the area of plant staffing for operations where the personnel may not have enoug: !
at the time of fuel leading. "hands on" operating experience this matter have been made by the licensee.Committments for corrective action an overall rating of Category 1 The licensee was given l
I i
M/ See Attachment A
~
l I
~
(
In Reply Refor To:
Dockets: 50-445/81-20 f/ [k 50-446/81-20 l
Texas Utilities Generating Cospany ATTN: R. J. Gary, Executive Vice !'
President and General Manager 2001 Bryan Tower i Dallas, Texas 75201 i l
Gentlemme:
l This refers to the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performanca ($ ALP) Board Report of the Comanche Peak Fact 11ty, Units 1 and 2. Constructice Perwits CPPR-126 and CPPR-127. The SALP Board met on September 1.1981, to evaluate the parformance of the subject facility for the period Jely 1.1980, through June 30, 1981. The performance analyses and resulting evaluatten are dacumented in the enclosed SALP Board Report. These analyses and eval-
- j nation were discussed with you at your office in Dallas, Texas, en October 3 1981.
The areas: psrfor:nnnce of your factitty was evaluated in the following factional l Electrical and Licensing Power Activities. supply and Distribution; Instrumentaties and The SALP area.
functional Board evalentica process consists of categort:1sg iMrrformance la each i The categories which we have used to evaluate the performance
- of your facility are defined in Sectica II of the enclosed SALP Board Report. ,
i
- As you are aware, the NRC has changed the policy for the conduct of the SALP
' program based en our experiences and the recently implemmated reorganizattee
- which esphasizes the regionaltzation of the 10tC staff. This report is the product of the revised policy. '
- c ,
- Amy comments which you may have concerning our evaluaties of the perforshnce j of your facility should be subettted to this office within 20 days of the i
date of this letter. Your comments, if argy, and the SALP Board Report, will
- both appear ar, enclosures to the Region IV Administrator's letter which issues the SALP Report as an NRC Report.
- In addition to the issuance of the report, a
to the status of your safety program, the NRC position on matters relattog this letter will. if appropriate, state i
/
k RP5-B RPS-A RPS-A
. RP81 DRRP&EP WCrossman:je RTaylor AD/IES RA - RIV RStewart GLMadsen i 3/ /82 3/ /82 3/ /82 3/ /82 11ardo JGag/82 3/ t lias 3/ 3 82 i
4 t
=
APPENDIX
(
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION IV i
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE :
Report: 50-445/81-20 !
50-446/81-20 t Dockets : 50-445 & 50-446 Category A2 l Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company l 2001 Bryan Tower !
Dallas, Texas 75201 j 4
Facility Name: Comanche Peak, Units 1 and 2 Appraisal Period: July 1,1980, to June 30, 1981 Appraisal Completion Date: September 1,1981 i
Licer.see Meeting: October 9, 1981 SALP Board: i G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Project Branch 1 W. A. Crossman, Chief, Reactor Project Section B )
, S. B. Burwell, NRR Project Manager R. G. Taylor, Senior Resident Inspector R. C. Stewart, Reactor Inspector Reviewed By: _
.d[3 7/e*t_
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Reactor Project Section B
~Date Approved By: t ,i 66 "
'G."L. Y29/f "L---
itadsen, Chief , deactor Project Branch 1 -
(SALP Board Chairman) Date
(
U fY W WJ."jl.?f}
py J/ ,n l
4 a
-e~
c .
.1 , ,
=
- l. Introduction Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (StiP) is an integrated NRC staff effort to cellect availacle observations and data on an annual basis and evaluate licensee performance utilizing these data and observations as a basis. The integrated systematic assessment is intended to be sufficiently diagnostic to provide a rational basis for allocating NRC resources and to provide meaningful guidance to licensee management.
II. Criteria The assessment of licensee performance is implemented through the use of seven escluation criteria. These criteria are applied to each functional area thet is applicable to the facility activities (construction, pre-operation or operation) for the categorization of licensee performance in these areas.
One or more applicable of the following functional area. evaluation criteria are used to assess each
- 1. Management involvement in assuring quality
- 2. Approach to resolution of technical issues from safety standpoint
- 3. Responsiveness to NRC initiatives 4 Enforcement history
- 5. Reporting and analysis of reportable events
- 6. Staffing (including management)
- 7. Training effectiveness and qualification Attributes associated with the above evaluation criteria form the guidance for the SAlp Board for categorization of each functional area in one of three categories. Performance categories are defined as follows:
Category 1.
A combination of attributes which demonstrates achievement of superior safety performance; i.e., licensee management attention and involvement are aggressive and oriented toward nuclear safety; licensee resources are ample and effectively used such that a high level of perfor-mance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.
Reduced NRC attention may be appropriate.
Category 2.
A combination of attributes whica demonstrates achievement of satisfactory safety performance; licensee canagement attention and t involvenent are evident and are concerned with nuclear safety; licensee resources are adequate and are reasonably effective such that satisfactory performance achieved. with respect to operational safety or construction is being ,
NRC attention should be maintained at normal levels.
Category 3.
A combination of attributes which demonstrates achievement of only minimally satisfactory safety performance; licensee management !
i attention or involvement is acceptable and considers nucidar safety, but
(
2 1 l l
l
. o
. a weaknesses are evident; licensee resources appear to be strained or not i
effectively used such that minimally satisfactory performance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved. Both NRC and licensec attention shoulo be increased.
III. Summary of Results Functional Areas Category
- 1. Soils and Foundations NA
- 2. Containment and other NA Safety-Related Structures
- 3. Piping Systems and Supports 1 4 Safety-Related Components 1
- 5. Support Systems 2
- 6. Electrical Power Supply and Distribution 1
- 7. Instrumentation and Control Systems 1 1 8. Licensing Activities 2
, IV. Performance Analyses
(
The of SALP July Board 1,1980, to obtained June 30,assessment 1981. data applicable to the appraisal period The data for the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES) was taoulated and analyzed and a performance analysis was developed for each of six functional areas.
The SALP Board met on September 1,1981, to review the performance analyses and supporting data and develop the SALP Board Report.
Functional Area Analysis
- 1. soiis and Fcandations All activities completed.
- 2. Containment and Other Safety-Related Structures Very limited activities during assessment period.
- 3. Piping Systems and Supports 1
j Three violations issued to the licensee in the review period were '
concerned with malfunction in this general area. Two of three involved vendor furnished support / restraint components. The first '
3
l Westinghouse and Gibbs & Hill.
(
station operations staff.is in an increased participatio approachas fuel loading. We expect this to improve as the station Application of evaluation criteria in this area resulted in a Category 2 level.
g,4 Conclusion Ib]g 4I I(b W
- The SALP Board concluded that the combination appraisal of attributes exhibi 'ng Category Iteensee has d monstrated an period.
This evaluatio q s base erformance during the on the three primary effort, were directed; i.e., piping, electrical, and in installations.
were devoted to these three basic areas.The Board noted that 1069 of the Board was that the licensee has manag Category 2 mode.
Board Recommendations Category level for construction 1,bethey changed.did not recommend to ; on the Programmatic changes for constructie inspection for havesites.
all construction been made that will effectively reduce inspec V. Supportino Data and Summaries
- 1. Report Data a.
1.ER Numbers Reviewed (Not applicable) b.
Construction Deficiency Reports Deficiencies that he or his agents had iden appraisal period.
These are summarized as follows:
(1)
Engineering failure to consider the thickness of architec-tural concrete depth of anchoronbolts.
floors when specifying the embedment
(
6
""D n i
/
UNITED STATES 7
y *
, \ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$?
" f REGloN IV
.f 611 RYAN PLAZA oRIVE, SulTE 1000 "k , ,
8 ARLINGTON. TEXAS 79011 November 12, 1980 In Reply Refer To:
RIV Docket No. 50-445/Rpt. 80-25 50-446/Rpt. 80-25 Texas Utilities Generating Company ATTN: Mr. R. J. Gary, Executive Vice President and General Manager 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Gentlemen:
This refers to the meeting held by Messrs. K. V. Seyfrit, W. C. Seidle, W. A. Crossman and R. G. Taylor with you and other members of your staff on October 30, 1980, at your offices in Dallas, Texas, in regard to the regional evaluation of your performance as an NRC licensee.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," part 2.
( Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If the report contains any infomation that you believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you submit a written application to this office, within 20 days of the date public of this letter, requesting that such information be withheld from disclosure.
The application must include a full statement of the reasons why it is claimed that the infomation is proprietary. The application should be prepared so that any proprietary information identified is contained in an enclosure to the application, since the application without the onclosure will also be placed in the Public Document Room. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
Should you discuss themhave with any you.questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to Sincerely, gl Q'< < .
l W. C. Seidle, Chief Reactor C6nstruction and Engineering Support Branch i
[ g y p, or 2 m in m ~uywn ia ,
l
r i.
l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
( OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No. 50-445/80-25; 50-446/80-25 Docket No. 50-445; 50-446 Category A2 Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Facility Name: Comanche Peak, Units 1 & 2 Meeting at: Dallas, Texas (October 30,1980)
..m i NRC
Participants:
4!N 'Y -W.< // ' '-
K. T. Seyfrit, Direct egi'on IV Date b '^'
///f/fD W. C. Seidle, t.hief, Reactor Construction and Date Engineering 'upport Branch m =-
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section
//fff80 Date n_ --
R. G. Taylor, Resident Reactor Inspector, Comanche Hff/8D Date Peak Station wha.0$dw ft.- / t//o/ s<e '
p S. B. Burwell, Licensing Project Manager, NRR Fite Approved: m-_ = -
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section g/f//6 Oath !
c tf> t ? tode on y < ~ g[9(h 1
1 OETAILS
(
). Persons Attending Meeting Licensee Participants R. J. Gary, Executive Vice President and General Manager, TUGC0 L. F. Fikar. Executive Vice President and General Manager, TUSI B. R. Clements Vice President, Nuclear Operations , TUGC0 J. B. George, Vice President and Project General Manager, TUSI
- 0. N. Chapman, Quality Assurance Manager, TUGC0 R. G. Tolson, Site Quality Assurance Supervisor, TUGC0 NRC Participants K. V. Seyfrit, Director, Region IV Office of Inspection and Enforcement W. C. Seidle, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section R. G. Taylor, Resident Reactor Inspector, Comanche Peak Station S. B. Bumell, Project Manager, Licensing Branch 2, NRR 2.
Meeting With Texas Utilities Generating Comoany Management
- a. Purpose of Meeting The purpose of this meeting was to describe the regional evaluation under the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfonnance program.
This evaluation is an intergal part of the Systematic Assessment Perfomance with the com(SALP) program which is being implemented in accordance itments of the "Action Plan for Implementing Recommen-dations ofThe Accident." theattached President's Commission and Other Studies of Appendix B is the perfonnance evaluation for the TMI-July 31, 1980,the Comanche Peak facilities for the period August 1,1979, th Board. compiled by the NRC participants and a Regional Review !
To begin the meeting, the Regional Director outlined the following objectives for the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfonnance program:
i Identify exceptional or unacceptable licensee performance Improve licensee performance Improve the IE inspection program !
Provide and achieve a means of regional consistency in evaluating licensee perfomance l
1
s *'
,d a Enforcement Action Responses - The NRC personnel indicated i
that the licensee's responses have been concise, effective and to the point.
- g. Effectiveness and Attitudes of Licensee Personnel in Complying with NRC Requirements Licensee Quality Assurance personnel - The NRC personnel stated that the overall impression was that the licensee had upgraded the quality of their personnel at all levels during the past two years.
Licensee Construction and Engineering Management - The NRC cersonnel stated that it appears there is a continuing tendency
_ to enoineer away construction oroblems rather than enforce
_ compliance to drawinos and specifications. The licensee stated that he is taking several management actions with the engineering and construction personnel to alleviate this situation. The NRC personnel stated that there was no specific regulatory concern since safety does not appear to have been compromised as yet but could possibly be sometime in the future if appropriate actions were not taken as indicated above.
Brown and Root Quality Atsurance - The NRC personnel stated that overall abilities of the Brown and Root QA personnel appeared to have been improved during the past year, in part because of much improved procedural direction being given to them.
Brown and Root Construction Supervision and Labor Force - The NRC participants indicated that their impression of this area indicated that there is a need to make this group more awars of nuclear power plant construction requirements. That there is a considerable difference to those of a conventional fossil plant. The licensee responded that he has issued instructions to Brown and Root to reduce the labor crew size reporting to foremen and the number of crews reporting to general foremen. The licensee stated that it is expected that this will provide increased control over the quality affecting actions of the labor force.
- 3. Sumary of Licensee Perfonnance i
The Region IV Director, at the conclusion of the meeting, emphasized that the licensee has the principal and legal responsibility for all matters regarding the construction and operations of a nuclear power plant as specified in the law and in the Regulations. Corporate management is essential in all phases of the project to P.ssure appropriate execution of the licensee's responsibilities. The licensee responded that he is aware of his responsibilities and that in response to these responsibilities,
' he continuously increased his involvement in the project during the past three years until he is now essentially in complete control of the project except for the imediate line supervision of the labor force. The licensee indicated that as new or additional involvement becomes necessary, he will respond accordingly.
(
, ar s 4 ,:
+
The Director stated that the region's evaluation'of 'the licensee per-fonnance is that it is gene
- ally acceptable although continued improve-ment in certain areas, already discussed, would certainly be desirable . ,
The Director stated that, on the basis of the evaluation, Region IV does not currently see a nead to make any adjustments in the IE inspection program as it relates to the Comanche Peak facilities.
h I
i
\
\
i
[
l j 2
I
UNITE D STATES
/ ,7 ,La c a cq'%, .
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
~ NNo * . $iN?t "
% ..... July 21, 1980 '
Docket No. 50 498 50-499 ,
MEMORANDUM FOR: . C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch
@NW. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section FROM:
H. S. Phillips, Resident Reactor Inspector, STP
SUBJECT:
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT INVESTIGATION 79-19 LESSONS LEARNED Past history, including QA history, is only valuable if it leads to an improved present or future condition. Team members stated, after the investigation, that NRC managers, supervisors, inspectors and investi-gators should be made aware of lessons learned from the subject investi-gation which started on November 2, 1979 and ended January 24, 1980.
The following are my observations based on 22 years of QA and technical experience, as well as, the past few years working / observing the NRC inspection system. These coments are constructively offered so that the NRC might improve future investigations and so that the NRC might detect QA program breakdowns at the earliest possible time. Some of
(
the comments are specifically related to the conduct of the investigation while the QA program coments address more generic issues relative to the NRC inspection system.
- 1. Lessons Learned Relative to OA Programatic Breakdown The saying that, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" mhy well apply to the STP South Texas Project QA program partial breakdown.
I believe Region !Y did the best they could to identify the problems at South Texas Nuclear Project, but were unable to conclusively show a QA programatic breakdown because they did not have adequate manpower to perfom a lengthy and in depth review. It was a very difficult task for the investigation identify the problems.team.which spent nearly 3 months on site,to after the investigation documenting the results.The team also spent considerab After extensive
- evaluation of the results, the parts of the puzzle came together to ;
give a clear picture of a partial program breakdown. I It is important for NRC managers to realize that QA programs can only be adequately in the past, evaluated by more extensive reviews than have been the practice
- a. Needed Improvement:
The NRC does a fair job of evaluating the licensee's establishment of a QA/QC program durin i ruction Permit (PRECP) inspection phase, however,g thethat after Pre the Const-NRC's inspection system shifts it's primary attention to random
A. PROJECT HISTORY _
- 1. Chronological Project Milestones The application for construction pennits for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2 were docketed on July 20, 1973.
The construction pennits (Nos. CPPR-126 and CPPR-127) were issued on December 19. 1974. An LWA was granted to the licensee on October 17, 1974, and ground breaking occured on October 18, 1974.
There has been no change in principle contractors. Unit 1 is presently in preoperational testing. Precore hot 4unctional testing began on February 20, 1983. The licensees' present projected fuel load date is e
September 1983. The licensee was granted a license to receive and storefuel(SNM-1912)onApril 26, 1983 and began receiving fuel on May 4, 1983. The process will continue over the next several months until all of the 193 fuel elements and associatedinserts are received.
The fuel is being stored in the new fuel storage facility and spent fuel pool for Unit 1 in the fuel building. ,
- 2. Principle Contractors Gibbs & Hill, Inc. (G&H) is the architect-engineer, and Brown & Root,Inc.
is the constructor. Construction management is being perfonned by Texas Utilities Services, Inc., a wholly own4d subsiderary of the owner.
Texas Utilities. The nuclear steam supply systen vendor is Westinghouse Electric Corporation. ,
B. QUALITY ASSURANCE ORGANIZATIONAL STURCTURE The licensees present QA organization is shown it. Exhibit 1. The present structure has not appreciably changed from description in The SAR. The licensee has recently undergone review of the QA program persuant to 10CFR50.55(c) No reduction in the QA program were identified.
C. SALP REVIEW Three SALP reviews have been conducted to evaluate TUGCO's perfonnance.
- The SALP periods were:
August 1,1979 through July 31,1980(Reports 50-445/80-25 and 50-446/80-25)
July 1,1980 through June 30,1981( Reports 50-445/81-20 and 50-446/81-20)
October 1,1981 through September 30,1982( Report 50-445/82-24 and 50-446/82-12) l
~
x P.. h bi 3 A u, c ,
c6 .9 OrvdligTo l
[d 6. .k RPr h er ru in h ,.
f .ut c m eai4 ca.un , H vo4csecu o',
ArpWt -
No 9 i us are Pr# c / .t. ,g a g coot ri 0 1- V ca u ~
x cP u ag as o o o 2- 7u o s. LL 0A -
3r -
AE 0A o oo 3 pt o t w OA -
I - Si [& Pr C f 4 5'
/
>p <l L tV A- L ,9 c 00 0 + 7 ti- 03 K OA -
3Z x M < P L sg 5 o e o .r 74 04 M C/t -
'IZ-
. 88-h/ %,a-< hoi h t.
ti Ae u L.-~y 6 .
I t h h i a p_ A>.
o oo l, 75-o i' V Y;I - -
$4 i
Cw (c) gl. L,pd 2, s h/ c ooc 7 75-oc V OA I 3[ - -
Bt CA y,2 - -
84.
ooo8 7y oc V OA I;x - -
g i, cv3.
3 .w JuA a n M C->
ooo 9 7 5 - o f- M CA -
II. 5- OW pps -
'DC M tci J
%a s. -
X n TJGt Sorv
(~ -
M A n. v O s 'p: y%
.L -
0A -
~2' -
M h As ooe0 y s.t o V t -
T -
bl Ni .J F. kt(o e
- L tv<.(-<.~h 7 ~ Tv.7 60,t 9 T-t o R C -
Y' '
W f'tv e'~4j htg i v > W I ^' '
C - s7 9%..i .
]GC;E 8 64
'?S-r3 O. e mt &
o o ( 1.- V C 77T. -
x ed 6h \ Y r g4P 4.,b6 As --
00e3 $L o t V C V - -
An Pyforn %<si t<y'o km 00t4 16-ot V Oh IT,Y Fn.s J fe H u r ><
9 46 %so; L faset* h v QA .t I v - -
.u t/ .
Oct 5 u
.C4 c.-s-- /Esf w /4 7 74 oi O A- -
1 -
64 /2-r 4, d c '
0 S o. u MtH a./ 6 N -
o ut to '7 G- 0 sf U-5 -
Brt de ~~ b e -
5 d- C s 4 ) .Q ) t o
0o t 1 , G-o > v C- E,G - -
D '(Pr ust o c?u- 4S.L . <-
ooiY 76-o'1 OA E -
X D d.Mol 5 6,q .ituh h (icc,9 74- o 7 W OA -
V' -
C6 L.w 4 AcAW LJi>
l 001o '] t. - 0 ? V Qh 2 - -
co-fo <m i s< d '
M << !ABf s, , e L e v. De Suou D -
W
+ -
x t,t uws.*.>v . .:;a y tu -
002s 'IG-oY k O^lC -
~Xi'f- '
b p>- ?hc
P tr Typ p,g g y po C, b's C <. 4 <i Cs a a c. c.
cock. 'Ds</
- m. % o.. v. u ,4 u- ,,, a a m. c- m.,
C x III' ' T x - w v4A7 sic 4 S o 2. s % of R (9 A[M 6#. .
F b P. u w[o A 5 : u p.y _c
^
So t t- 76 09 M Cl; -
3ZIE t% ,
rH s.,r e.,
g, A . ,,:
0N *
~
I% ~
6A. -
- af de 514 the s A 4.< (/ e-DC7L3 76 to LA. GA ~M-d bd. ./ . cc. w T
. V D u.,34tM ooty 76- It 4 112 fL p C.
,c w,au r<. w 00 t 'i' 7L+- t 1. k QR H .
6L ca y, oot.G 77-os M <_
.E -
f A.
".I Leve (th, 0 0 3.~1 77-0 2 V C- NJE ~ -
W 8 ve t- 1 <s is De nd 60 2 Y 17 *D % E ~ -
bl. ,
us c:
- 77.o2- u 3Z' 1.n.I,d'[.
o o z. '1 OA -
6t
- mw 00'50 77-o4 a C.
~
JCC.
br ' ,, o n;%
005 , 7 7- o r R. E n vi< n. - V .x - - -
32 77-0(o R EIE x - j, ^
c.,
gg x -
D_t
- S'h..e k_-
3,S
- 0. 3J 77-07 cA e n. >
00'5 4 77-o ff R CA/'A1 p]I. '[ y -
-p 0 0 3 5'~ 77-07 M C y_. -
6A. ,. ,
8-.
- t- 9f 0 0 7 t, 77- oct 4 C.
^ g fg q 0037 7,'7-IO \/ M I ~ g $4N '
gg.
003Y 37-IO V yh TX ,g' - -
ff'.' ,
77 ro q m -
XDT -
R ,s%<w ss8 ;
003$
vfce--at
.Trr 6nAa</ii 8040 7 '7 - t 0 M. M -
3Z3I. gc r/,Q x -
- uf,ff g p Ag,7 j 00 VI 7 7- it M r% -
T/IT[ x
, h. 8,ys t
o o 9 2. 77 - ,t a % -
m* " -
f4!%M.:v D_e s . .!, ._u ~
0043 7'1 - n LA h -
Lu-- v -
f,((2),My 00'l4 '77-/.5 % C-IIL x 8A Uc.
poQw l j-[ j 40 5- 77-t3 M lh -
_T*, IgII -
44.
g 5' p" fp'" l C 4(, 7i-o+ LA mac smr -
6047 7y of tA Q I\
32IE, dd x 6L [27;.'ZFC;1.!
~
do 4 Y l '/- 0 7 V M X,E -
D $'E N .I ,
4.I,I o0di 7Y o7 .D C- XI -
l
i
'c. , k. R,PT Tp b c./ C v i 4 e /.
- C /. b < .' <- Cha vge b,d'y To I
{ No ru a, ,4 r r a. Vsetdel unres.>lvel A f p c.6 %%
~
ioso t y. o 7 a E -
V BL
. c Q sbc,9 %
'Oy 1 7 t- 07 Q C4 '
M* A.
Ait
\fc a f . b M It E All M J
s o s 2. 75.s y Gvts). V - n - '~
'053 '77 01 M 0- -
E '
Ed ka-Mv.h c1
%.fm +4 % t( H
)os 4 ?Y-It Y' Th y - ' V ct < .a. n t . ~ u Pra t oSf i f- l 2. Y Fr.if ) TU u.ut4 M .E. , ~Z - '
F) L H f(* cs.d+
k e
'O56 7Y-t L V %fE ~ -
AK ncas % .Avr r n Us /d fruth-
.TlZ W 57 T Y- t z- V 6 hL F . t - to a 4 - <
~52 - -
wy c -
> o sY p y-i 2 a c. -
X -
b t. h* %W
- n. u +. n1.-
20s 4 7 Y-13 V M 3~r., 3C th v)*Ie %*u L <n n, u.,< tv c. > . ~
'>O 6 0 7 P-t 3 t' C. ~XI ,3C - -
r3 A ce <n t. i e 3 7 h 1' x tur ed. % 4 , ,j 206I *1 Y- l 3 (.A fr\ ~
'TLE } t d rL co e f > un +... M 0 9 ' t 6 2. 7 P- / G V At.L loUst so.SSle)
X .-
I lw R .3 a 7Y-t6 1) c. gr - -
s 2. G.b4 u, , a.k
.c. t. ,
1o6t{ 2 Y-t f a. Os -.
E -
fA. Do'3 0<>l*f M S's.. LL/ t.o F~y w 0 6 65~ 7 P-I V V M .I5C - '
d4. to.<lJ,(b, A V a.~4.,r /c,&
b O to k 2Y-20 ~9 1% ~DC ,505. ~
7 r u e. 4,5Clc
- << J soG7 7$-o( M (h 3DI. t -
.ss:[
o m-4 (%
006f #
i9-03 V t I - -
ip d k'M 1 d06#7 A,iv s ciw >
75-o 4 v' &\ Tiir ,'E ~ -
A s , pt < , -da, Arp - s h4C r't,'
00 7o 79-04 D E Y,III a A R v, ro b can, e < a is. ',
90 11 79 of M C. -
~IE - 6^ f2e s 4,c a A 00 2 L i4~ o 6 a 5 -
Sc
- 7 ' '
$* <c N,A sJc 1 z
o c.
. , mw,;,. n.r.,y
. ,v,.
3073 79 n V e .I , Z - -
8x c t, 4r n am m.3on .W]w
- 1. 0 p
- r 0074 7'i-07 M. th -
'iIt x p 10 "l [ 7 j c-) (A. M -
R c Vg,j ([r)'h ,h4 )
(
% ~29- @ W yh -
3D1' ,3C ~x (4- 1 nit cov 6 f~
pr,s o, 1 o n ly J, & ve/ c...- u 1 0027 1 4 ~ 11 V C/On E -
- Udt L~ t l' wAJ '
60w 79-ir v m .m ;cc -
D O'$',3D,j, 007$ ,
79-if V E X - -
6A. #j,fl f, ',. .%0 j
4 1
h e k. Ret 'i'y b c./ Criic a Ci i 4e ,'. e .
No hem ,Ay, vio (a d un us.Isd uv%o Oh i
2 g b , a <f E . . . .'
2't I Y V I>W '
l
$6 ooit 75-l/ / OA I a e. s w g., a s t o n '
$( '
our t- a T r . A (. w M 74-r P ~f -
4 t. T.,~ , b.4d es; CA/6 (.o c. M lJ 'tu L !
CCf3 ? ?- t i V dA I - -
M e-
/ ,
ooy'I ?9-/$ V ET E .XIiT ' T ' ' -
6it D.A. b c .
n p, do Ta, 77 23 R M 2 j.32 n-
' P -s <ef. & N. >
f, t eR.4T*A d
.$ g t far ,
0 0 y(, 71-%3 u. Th. t.- -
~5C '7 -
dll Tvr T* m WA?rA,uu.- d. -
C.m e r e44. b C01 '] 7'Y H V. C- X ~
6A on>4.,e J !> M 4th- u x M d o ff i q gh[G
.' D C. , M -
da Pyobd pa r. ,
cMi[ Et q l 7 9.ttk 00Y9 792g K i
E -
-R;L* ~T * -
16st Co. W k bRei .
6240 in'E rio Pvg 4 %
79-%1 V Gh E,JM - -
6st ludl.m % n o ss u l < o 6 ?>oe 0 00 hl ~l '8 L3 V 50.ST(e) $ i -
- /;lt OoSp H w- C l o s s b 11- t1l l
M '
th -
M (/L(pir) ;K - c K. Ld F Jin n T '
(. .B 79- W V' '
mf6 'J.J Z .
-P - S A.
TM <,, A e' ver
/t4 Ar u Aeg,,,s//
do W 7pf M l M A
%ul Pw h . u.kr uor tn 7g To j Z ;II -
E ca A 4 o + is ad 17 R 71 'L4 E -
.II '
x - N, bf..4bbi ql 604& 1*t-J l . y- th H ;
~
~ h 8. tk $
AE Iki E4 4417 S-o l M E -
lE A
x Br T
609 'l (0 -U ( l >= .X 94 (d. o.c
>,. u-f 4 H/kr d Sed
~ '
OR 4, l 0l00 h-Q3 Y E S ' '
O Pt O 10 t P-03 (A rq '
32II' iA, -
und o.s fl.e 7 4 d v,a. Iv.c i% m ,
6 to 2 80 0y V E X ,KT 6
%" 'To ca. b fglte f '?>g
~ -
- 64. \
ou03 to-0V V AsL. ~
r.t - T.,6
' x. -
k t ra te Ja. 4 1> a' l not.ra. sv.ssic) *Qir.' sto Cu dm a. . f An n R G M" x
~ a 6 l 0 '4 To-of % G -
Ts>f af G b,G. M u.
C (h t.4_ i+.i<
O iO f, kO-0V R t E -
E - 1,2 A. A t-
{ ,!b(v-09 w.Ls
.J.,% e -JG ~
n o V ' hv 1 -
X -
s V
i 5 a.(d3 L. 's M 6A 4 t O'? .
M XIIr_ -
Fr a 4t.s 6. J.C..
lT.;-in Wr 0 (0Y . tv- 13 M : N v>ei6 ?recsa '
j !
V - ~
M LL v
I f'u' se09 ,rs-,5 s x - -
sq c m.toce. n:-%.1 #v ~
4
- j. ., gn 7pdem Ws c./ Cribris Ci % ', Ch%e hd*f
- J e4e A,.s a V iotsli d trnes,imt A / p 4n 64v c g-
\
oA .H. 2.r o s 9 ,,, y s o o i <* r A si t o sv tf V 1% .TIL -
X R *- ~fJ am s de f . s.,s I .
5,gf A 6 W, 7,,h y .,
- II l su-ts" V In 3C
~ '
B6 .
h1 94 dr m (2 <. <. 0 /J 00
)ti t- lu t $' LL Gb '
X t3 A~ ^
- Y $ % ss I'. 4 L
- q u e
""f
)(13 90 -t 1 \{ lh K , ET ~ ~
@A P. % p w%s,&4td %.t
-)I14 If)*l'I Y ih 10 cf 4 50.if d -
X -
4' bI f
+ ~ < a ' w' ~- b. E - I
><rr 101Y v. m -
n -
u- w sa s c .' ,1. %
s%.6,. i.. t t
> k 0 *.i v
'll4 f(01 f l\ (- -
IIC X g it. Te m e <.t 9.e si e 4 c,.d.
N D Afgss e's D k
') ( l "[ t'd W Y 1% $ '
- W Ag ( si 05 Ursaes, pfe fc b '.
our n-u v m ~it - -
sk klNM
<< n L +Z .t 9 t t 't WW u. E E -
(3x. a,a/5. (4 c w.
oIzo $>-2o IA. tw -
rTTv -
g it.
sA s.6k.., .r .If M,
- 9. p v.3)n. p f.r s f r <s. <1s crit ra. 2,2 v' M II - '
(fL welA o g L.it P ~ f d
- p. HaI d Pos >< t.s As
- 1 e >~.
q 't- Ya19 W m -
.a -
8 "- woI4 ik is Co.~?d - Tv w I E,
- a x fa-2n k C-xtfm 1- ~ v<,-s.v % I % Fc-bt W ww . 'u Thli. us<
0t14 d -O & Y 1h J1. - '
\36 b Jc, [ p.4,, 3o 011f flof W c_
IIr set D'p tyi3 9 A oi.e J6 d (2.b ff. 0 ( W th -
31T.,III, -
- 3 A ." igg,3 e p , j 3,g g
. M rn /)c.
x stor' Ps A as, KT O ll *1 fl~ Q 's. k M -
M ~
6A c h e.a /s pz di2>/' pt-o [k C- -
.[It se G it. (P-1ky.r-Ash
,a p s %,gn ot2't M ~
= P. > f% n o - .P gp1w te c)(m f-I-r o C' 3C X-0130 (l- II % th -
20r, -
64 cc.., 3 g A5 6v, t D* ' 3 . (? 't )
oi31 il- l'3 W lh - -
ntr 8 jp(. <6)w A.) </ fo M or3 t rw -
nn 1.
y bes. % vs As Ssl[t ), pgg 1"i- t 3 W i3 A g6 w.,1 i
/ ,, f (,. ,1 4
OI3 b V'l- I tl Q M -
.l.E -
6N. % ,% t<.,j u) t 4 Ofo f '.
Cm a i b c o Jrd [s'k.
d3Y I'l- I f Y M[C- T, M 6d A/m o.if J /t:
C.W.
- iO4 c0% p%4 4 o f los,%
7 0t${ 8'l-If LA dW -
.EIT n ,e x -
% u ,. w . 8 3. e 0-d .
Il- !4
- 1,k6 ~
Z A . .< . G.,4 , , e a. .
. S f./
/4 t . I .
k 0a31 Pl I'1 % M -
IE ' -
I$t A5i.Sf.-4.-
TL 93f 66.,,.s m
- N P4s CA
- A ii e ai OIb[ ((* I 1 #
k h - '
b NJ => Lh w
MI3#1 T1-0 g Q M ~
l[.
E i
${Asme[t,g.v_wF'.5^*
D 4.l.e d $y 6d<- f
3 h'# g,,,, a ,1. ,5)
&* ' /(~ fq ) yrt';ga l
RPT 'ry
/ f' Af ,1u_f A ty ,
Y C N,,3 . 'W. f,< A te f ' ' ' ' " ' '" ' d
- 4 l
[ e. w, istilC,',4<,.h)C/. tut,,/AcesaA<
9 <rs gas s,,a .2 6 s }~ m ( .tr .e J w ,. i . u.v, 40 4 b ~[j 5, ,, ~
b A M l 3. 4 T- T'4./
4I
$2 04 p os LA, C' E' -
$11. "D [,'[ hw%
s i. , s ~ u > ,t c <-. + i . .-
I'll PIOS V th a VTt h mt FN,AJ Xmt* r. ./.e.,, b 3> ec u~1 w[d 1 60 Tboes ' u, rh -
MLiJI' - e.,' ob 3 4 A.,eu % 3 t Lw(b C
(p/ F1 oS q th - k nr. K - b.s
,vo ph Jh.. , .,G ae-./9 o t. I, k,
- h ,p% Po ta.,, G .-
[45 FA-si V sh I /- 834 Sv .s ym# *- c6I v % w o + / L > p ef.et i s/(, ri-** W tw - -
. N bf m - P. p u.> h.) f,3f,.
64] r2-tI W .ty\ h,H -
r3 tt f fl, s. % e f- P. p. A ) .-
't4 )' 12-s i tA m -
T ;tle>nr 45 ,t 45 ,3 vsi t- L , V f m Sv.s slj rz-r 5 %. rvt -
RIr, * -
W 4< nwr wags on m a,, /~
StS fi-09 u. m ~
VII.gr y ss c6 + v 9 L/4 4 a u cer h /4 3=. C % , ;
'Is t r2-14 k. m -
.X , V ~ 8 tt s. app s.m
<n w .e) n wa mk ,l
~
tz-u t V in E - -
6x y.,ot 1% hlal G<f m r l
) 5 ,, Y1'LL (.A m -
u-c M yd x -
n a w,.A
,% 4. 4 3 I)y 13 + 4 do w W --r5*40 >
v f. % i .s , p.cN. ., f '
)( $f P2-2z M E,I.
P* D4 f.'<. i Q As P 5 7 A 4 e D.,.4 % a.eafTTT
)I55 t 1.- S o y yn y 6(L c w , n e.t.) / N u e. S u.; Q A 5 y c-L<C4--77 f.c d -n. 4
)t S(, r2-2 5 \/ In .R.
M l M ir.,( o W W W i ;
ft'28 Y K
)tS 1 NL l-( M QJPC Nca '
10' , X m(s.>,(.
m T L ~,,,a n s 4
)ts %' T1 14 LA. 1%.
~ ~
t-e
>tss tz-z s. < 1. m ~ TL n t' Wind 3N2L ,
To k o. r-us
')ll 0 IW A % '
N * ~
Ru.bs(.c*J
- f S tr.
2 (,l 7 2 '% k. % -
III, A '
$D.4
+ 9- W t: le,/ c- - >fu 6 .ll toc o <. a } 9 . s MGs .i p, !
)Ib L T2-zo (.s. m -
V s -
cq a,s ,
C<> < w m o .) '
l >Ib3 F 2 -4 (A- % '
E.7' A
~
c c - z - o (. P- u t - / 9 V3 l Af st D'. &,( b-5 StG'[ "-R M ^ '
- 4. -
I.u- P. /5 f.s 6~ M K4- l 3 , r, ( rt- n e, m s liI. A -
5 " "h> l f3 03 V 1E F . M To A p -17 I l
%G ,
g -
c i s . 3lG t' H6
'34 to r \ 6 %; #T ., t. Cr eu L) ;
of67 ho? V' M. lf-. - ~
o[bV F5 o 7 %. (- V- 2- - 54 Cp aA up k M & '.'<,f
..Adh.~i l
[, \coci.T..: ~ Jcs < e 1. ~ 1 g l(,$ I)* 0] % C.-
l pr N 7 p,3 ,,f cr. b . c r.4,:o cA*-y >tretip 3 ,, g , ,,,1 *
( '
Ho M 4 t o. < V ofsl<4 W sal ,
A p p Co n1<.ct u
, p s c o 0_ c ev a % h6 too Nn V C/ m JTT M. v. o r a 4 / 6 ro A - 41, L.
't) I T+ 2 L V M. III.
E ,.T- ~ '
L6. s ie% %-
L rh th.d / 2ca$r. , 3 < t 7 .r,4s a f
.~f, a <,,
sis t o gm.nu:sj h./y su i s go, 4, wt r+ n R c e -
.2II , E u !
A: ru t
/ TonM.
443 N 21 4. yd -
111-7' s . 4 ,- .
% 3. w H31 l
T,p.5cfu,. ,. cv.I ak w..'a, w<>m
'z.6Y N- z t. v E,V -
l Sk Pro .,,
1- ,, . Mn a f cw< ra.s .c
'zof t+ t t, v E X ~
st hLs
'24 8' /+ 26 G F. = id. 34sh W SV 4 6 A u - ,11E. # # -
6it oat 1 sh A d ths 8 v I t-S 8- we t4 % % p s. Te~f .
'20% N 2't (/ IM 11 - '
vi e u +<-4/ .
h .2 , g . T.e I. A. ( I 1%
nuS tt 3 4 \f M TL' , T - -
8IL
.sw,.h 2.
e oc. e ut. jp.t $,
t a.-f a, a n,& t scm.,
e,,, hte tmD<
>w? N 14 \l so.sstej y -
46
,,,, m.4, c ,, ,_ tv . t M a, a .,. r~
^ _
N's e. /As l wce a ro.
c .u d,, e6dL p .i, L a s -
,'( . . .N- , "o
%. 6u ss7e> x -
,., , i. ~n p: ca.
E** x - %,9',,
OzO N- ucl u. F? -
E' x -
i"%I'f.*lx'sy',bQ, 0.ziy' N-@ w FP -
'I x. . Q(,} ?*~) g fp,'fg f Onf N 44 u. FP -
'nr x. -
Ng*,'-iA/,4,.2.,,a
- 02t4 tsa4 4. PP -
GE x -
f,',Q y,',j' .
- f. - < es., n.o e lL.<,,t o., t c 02/7 p.44 u FP -
Ir A -
ggg p, y, ,,,,j y 02# N-44 u, FF -
.DI +
- x- -
[f'l" I I " [g p ', 7 * ~ :
n-aq a re A o2 1 t x -
fL'<yg*gt"~'
ono o 2.;/ i l
() 7. $* b 8 M*) !
O3Zf
- I l
'e2,%
0.227 f bLW '
_ l
1 l
. l r > by tyn M c. Cv. h'. e < . k, . ',. w i *J o 3 Tee A t 64- A 4 ( a. (4./
b w sdf ed c6gg g y 3,,4cti.,
Ctw4fa der 3'h5*5I no (S.ts V m TL. - -
6 IL. 80& % M1 9',
int i5-1 f V M 'DC 8 A. >Jnc F, /~,. L ,, r.,
4.
111 SS-s c h n -
Ex.,351i! - GA spt -v71% ,J, L L MI t1) VV t s' a m _
Tr , t, r '
,$ n. si t>t. - Pr< say.jgo t ?n c 17 7 T 3. if, % . m -
.La., .IIII Stt uo5- L.<n /.Ili A l.
x *
)/7f 8'3-15'; u !
4 -
IT,E. -
VeQu 13 .$ o,y w A7 U.* =
)/7I, (3 '2.y; V M .Hr. - -
$rt a , r3 4 4 s d ' 4 *
'I17 rFM! V rh .2c.
% L$g./L,b.:I h wb ei7 r ri- n! u. E -
s^ u ha, hv.w v/, P w 3r. ,Cnr '.e",.,,.
17 f f31 u. C- -
is 4 In d il b d,,v % d s f<coJ'
'ITO (F n, u. QA -
I'# -
S it. L . w ? 4 / /. w p Pr
'tfl 15 1 k Qn -
ma k - k a;4 R.twll ne4 j
% e,- a c u.y - ,
IP 14 (4 E 2 -
55 b 9,. f. a u .
ffe
> J t, rW v' m y,m,I
~
- p; rt >Iu n t.-
,- 6, utg.L,gc otry t'r t4 a m -
E' -
a it. &l4lp ri Ti s s P<. .
9/ff f 5-W ve m .Tr,III I - -
rs x. 7,' ', .,
'Oh 'i mt t5- 18 v mje z.as ea n.y er. psue a s .,
w r3- w w c -
.IE sx ca.4 %cag, s_p ,..
d/fI [3-47 f.A C -
IIE. ,
- d -
M h,! ^
tY
)' If'l t+0V z
V m X - ~
v PJuc .G 0It0 N.oy v' M 'E - -
6 It Y'j*k Q,'"g,
- I * # ' Y' 3.,s -
7/4/ N 0T D M III K 6 R- 'D5 +v-e 3.[( 2 Sh/,M 7 n F*5or r ,
ein ra ot u m -
xx -
sa. [ .*.,,"'i';L W,M '
3H
'li) l'I lO. k M ~
-LPElY 8 It. Fe t) .rt' e'tDoo a t,,, Ra y %f - ) u. po>
)t'1] $4-Its V E *I, 3 - -
$L f';(f(l[gdj' 4
>nc g i.iu v an. - -
e *jp'ch'cr5,
- d. wm; 4 c- -
Ir
,m "
st f#vfa % 5t"3l mina. a m -
- w tg::,&c.%; e1a u v ..., w..
~b"\l LU s ,-t
/j @ f N- 2 2., V E. -
$6 pg ,3 , , e g ,,4 p u g ,,y,, i 1 100 P rt f'. .-l , . .e To 4 f .,i de Oc '
3thi W43; X V' A f L- S'a.f S't ,
~
to S.' /?i.n,m .0.0' 6 'W) 34 C.{iG .L 9 u y Ij es d s li-) o A 8. e , = A w s R. R< gM,w c. cl.,' i 5'//6 / r t' (1.i) F.- I D n. s 4 61 O f> I A E fI"f"al M. M et.h w oesh
.O c.d (.n 5 4 6O L (,c , %
a/pg,n.
65I)5'P' as> s. w. n 1 w.w a. .-
- N '
(i) (LO O I O ( Lo) C g y A y,, y g c,,$ p, g, L g 3 c, D-I-osu / <. e- a Q << 4 <~~~~- & va < p. , y g gj6<v'M G N /- N 7 e' < c f f4 D- i , o i g i ,- y D~ t = 0 l 3 L / /- k E f/* d es9
- f Mr=e.( )
/ < si zz Fo ** . 6 J% F< <<
- t' vs t. < .r
_D-r~ortt '" N N/ k Ci , m f- -
- $~O $ O V Y } l4,l/ ,> & ,, p Q & f D~ 1-0,1 4 Y s/ g Qbl.a. k a m (A. f% D< m a p s* J Te s /,
5~ ! ' O t t ? Y y [ klo Anjf1.)
_Q - l - O tt i / ,,
I rr-
/ / X C A-b\ t-j b+ b t h V W Y d 5'I D ~ l s () l 2.(o A % + r m s t r e, 9 - , . o 1 2.f v' p- y W A* W D$ - / p To D c'abk
). l -et Q ,/ / g G?lI-Q Tur6ec M p 4 en-em y
.2IZ. A dq,, I., , w4.< w/,
D i.oi2 3! / ,/ (4
'3C C-m M / /2. m C. h a r. T 7<,m . (6 D t ,g,7 t l /l ,f- 4 "* t' h % t- % aJ.
( ~ I ~ 612- ( l ll pt N
Q lfjt 'u l n ..; r < n ,'.,,.J Y)O y
- o. ,-,,,1 o! .
l- / a tt. r. s D-1 ~ o I t %! Vl l V' N lil' erssa F*!'.*d._
to.. % tu a .1 Tr* </ 6' w
.\
'D- I ~ Dr I 1' l l l v- V A WL hW'" "YL f *r-
- M d 4 +shel l O- r -QIl7 / v' y A. W O *M &s.N, uletJ < JJ w 5E h'h ta> u s k a X,3 1 n ~ I - or I (, l/l V g M Lgpgs[Q4 tom <
' E (
D~ I ~ OoI s ' ' vl v ** gl Q o,1 ,fA r N u d e / C A 4 ., u
,/ n .E Bs a k.s1.% H-< t* r* rs O- I -o to + r** / 'A cani ~
D- I - O le 3 V'" or g .gg IW}'(fgdfroy Jw %
D-1 o//2 +' .- A m c,ere 4, f] A.,i N AiB< /7y I
D. /~ ctrl / / ,/ g ur, c*.~ h & 8// Go /* ,
L ,. t f an f. ., . //. 4.J C.s 1 D ~ l- 0!! o / '
/ P.
- fi t 's;j b f f',Q :'M D- ! ~d/0 9 v' /
.**' R R. rr 'y'*,' R ( & .s c ,,Rx, yt ,
()- r otoV / / < < It. Cd% '7'*-j L/1 y D-r~cso'7 / \ / y R 'RQ f* ~ Afogh o-,.n.eu /' / a z wa, i--g,7 n ,m
,_ynor ./' ( g nr ^p-r/,,,.L,J l m b vi~yo por
( ,
O~1-O!04 l s/ k QCy, Q Iu {s t/* cf A.Vo skh V
" IL. 'ilhm "t&fizlb%a
.nl 4 7r) S~ M A ffLJ;.
D-nouoti m
.<' /{ \
'I>
.kOd.5@..) __ f. '.? ' M ( M f' ' d 5 5 l / d '
g) on a.e, v.- ' R. .
j- pg),ty, ,, g (L A F ~ ~ ( b ' s. v, _
f m. m ac u ,;.a,p
/4 d ) 5. psLit G sb di tu Cc. $ /hy (4 0) s:y:( e nd 0.o s.'r 1h r,e m ?<< b w a. p.
Tf('t k b - llA led U 1 O (I ti) C E M M A?fendiy & C,,h h kej,b d h 5' ,
D-\~o1m / V' 9 'Il1T - V s. - 4 w % s o t'ss & ?. a ,a '
'D- t<$ s L L / V H EW R.y \4s.4sk 6t.w Ava > f $4m '
D-f-DDL5" l V' V '
S TT XZ.Uw k ud r advs b . t . o u t. 2 f /* R snd.unaa<.u{gln).4v,n.g c D - t c s t. ' R Dr- Ud Ada .t .'Iva Es e At i 5d. '
D r.o1L% / v* 8 .T1 L. % 4<> , 1 2 d.II<; ,J.1 Pv a c D-s.6nLI V / R LY ll.hls L u (n % f Eoew,). E Q bos C D- t . C I (, D / v f .1TE Va kt wf) Uso J $fre.n Arse / 12 /fe, a f '
- D. i .0:s9 / / g III L p L . v l <.4 m +ri A / og.,i.v:. < ,
D-u-orsf d' y p X - El e s iv. < ( sBs
%w > +. . . sl>l Sp t . se .r +u t va r s 2 W. g g m, fig , T, , ,m ,u b d a l'o . a +> e J-t.oi57 Dwx ai et
'c-r.OlgG V V y* 'lIC - DG s., MrA* 3so,,
F. t k Bewt us<dw o s k.J sl R ,
D- # d is f / l r g j$ " Ne % .k 3 TM ta m .) ,,
f
( -t -oss y s' ' / y y- R M . So 4. s6*/ts . ., e ,.sA<rl,.0,nrenerr
, ;, sw
, \
D- r . nix 3 l V V v' g R . 3 Mr Das Di s. f, wo f. M <
O. r .c rg t_l <l< g R - %S'me >< f n.- 5* He sefa ra re.1
- d. r $r rr &
, \
\
Del-31$l l f g W= Y s
'!& y
. 0 - I -o rs o / \ \ .- .
< y zit. . v < ~ Jir- C.;< svm A ts.6 e t 0 D I ~otsl9 l v' /l g T I'. ~ M c < 't
- Ftw c ko m e w o t u n. , w 1 o f LlY / / g 60j 'sy J %f to 4 *W froms t D-, o iv7 ; < - a m ag g v.,,, sw n r e..,y .
9 ,.o,.u. / < - g a 9..u.,-:a - u.a ,, a,w l V p) N h* f. h ,f[' y k l D'","' & n< c O I -0 9 'l(~
/ g M ' ~ Q h di /i**s.~ h 4 //4 do MkA.
/ 1 n ~ t . O tt14
/ / is. s s, I s m, oy.y 4 D ' I -n t 45 / g. BQL M y g D l - oiw t- v' / r R. .LM /* M ce, Aw A --f e n g s ;
D.l~0ILll / y- g .E N'al Avs ru a /o f. oReinsy/ d Ka s 2.s $41-EG ) t Q~t-OtQD / \ l ,, - g l2D D A' r ty y* M D . f M 's~ skim n.r.nr3s /' '/ \y bh Pr< (esta b$$r, 'Y. f$
\ ( ,-a n t / < a a cmx er a, en ,, , . i. , c. ~ \
0-,....,,
/ y ur c c <a w s. ,n c. - -
e
} 'n u, r m
.' _ O-1.o t sc / / ,, cy.piA, ej.m o
, m ,c3 D~ t- o ts( / gF %d6 % nMa e i
, l
, N . S.)/,u , y, 5 0 S EL O W '*c_' M esj iWd s ,
r//6fyr (.4 ) o n a m a Jo n R. R< p k w c-- c '. fr.c t,Q 0- 4si k<f, 4 % E . a<s (L.i) (, , , ( W ,,1 m. M re w a cop
/pm
( (204)5.
(LJ) 5:yb1.ed T,cWp.os&G sb,% h hs Q,%h ?f<,,.n gp, f,sm 1 TS' N - IlA 6.0 ( u 0 ( to) C E M A s t, n g g C,,(',3 6LL1 %
D - I- o n M / / / a Q 4 " " & " * * 'd " s L f d cj Gre be us k m i- H F r e'c F N e 0- s . o n z t <. &# y27,gr
' / 5' c '
D- t - 0 t 3 L. k ff**'h e' 9 *' f *H' '.* p
_D-r~or11 / ., At Et EQ *
" i-s-JA>- F</<*r v*t.~s su I Le ca m M cl
/ / d E h ;(/4 /fm f4,,.g 4 Q c D- f ~ 0 f 1t h f v' y & ' Abh h a s is f% D< m s p z; D I~0rt 4 4<ca M b eh r*> vs Tes h y U- r - o u t ? / y f mn 3i ra c
_D -l . o tt y / / p g H t% t. B (
D - l ~ o 11 lo / / g
- Q_ Q M " *f ' "'t cl q) - r . o t 2.f /l r n W Ae u D-4. ',A To a ca b4 c b- t - 012 rf lVl / g M QW 7b'rh o cA++y Wo y <
/ R +,.-g n , k s w a se/o ,;
D t.o s 2 3l l /l P-p~ i , ,_, ,1 t l /l f g 'E Cm mt M/ AnL /4*cJC. h<< s. T 7< < -.. * (6 e
-I~ cr1 I 'h l l N Q ?'j'R*ft/* J Do y c
( /
l st ZZ- Me5 / 'Ved riJa l.r l' D- i n,1 o . l' v c D-I ~ o o r 4l Vl s/ 'I Et F*treer:ea so. - e. .
Tr m o tv w
. tu a r
z b- l ~ diI Y \/ y v p. W. % LYL f o rm. 7144 'c M e q 0- t -0II7 l/ y- y g. 4 ukraa k os.4n Gn w &,u u<hm A $ L fj)-
t c1 b ~ 1 - or a l, l/ / g M LgIQQ,p letam el O~ I ~ O r t s' v v v g ~dL Q el,t%g Musfc /CA4nse. e O- I -o to + l f / R ZL Q ,g g o tf Cero n l D- I - o ll3 /* / f B. led & l'ed f Q J**4*~ c D~r-etit.
/ / g y c,*re,as
, s As; M k /ke/Ty ( ,
D ' # " ' ' 'l ' K 'E T 2 2 W E l .
- E l ) d '
/ v p. A fpTfr% Gfps&
- re n _1 h/oWVe/g c D - /- 0110 ,
L o t h.o r D- I -d/0 4 v' / / k [ W<
kbL t *% (.t.a t +,,.enu.,~ ti fsitA ch,
% r,(sa c h- t Ot0V / + v <1 tt. S GA G '71s-j Mf* A y (
D- t - e s o"7 l l / '
yR 'jj f,* ~ 1}y {+ e 1>->. n , a /' \ / wz u~ o w n , p ,siy e 1
( * , e r oC j l f glM Jfh,'*'af of Ar V Nfo sint u 0- , -o f a '
/ / g eg,y ra tu ~a u e D-'- ' c . 6- % 1 k m "i d d 5l b % w o-no, o u / / ,q \ x a>e T<.;r s~ u u t.J;. e
- 4. % Pa ' ' i r > 50. 6 5M.L DeOc' %' Tve d5 '
~
U / # 4) oA th e, a Jew w
- I, j'(('4, ,g M F. % ( Mt f m. ,m a .,,,,.p
( (4 i.o s. p.tiJ G sb, da to Q. $ /hy (Ls) 5: y .1.'e si o w d'a r,e m b< E< ~ u- V <..
Tru.k4. /a 6.0(u 0 (tA c e en na A7t, A B c..tl e, P.b6 4 7o 5' ~
D - s ~ n tm / / p His -va~ %o th a ?. yu
- 1 1 5 = b l L (. V Y $ = $Y 06. h hw b L AA s f blow D~ r otL C / / V R. TT _ W ~ Ursna h m a o[ b are'v.s
D. I DIL 3 V V R Un n e<. % $ 90 n ]
- Avs a. **d D- t o i t.4 '
R IIr. Ud&d,I fNluu Es F oc1 Swl.
- D- t-oiLz
- F- 1R . L d,~ 12 .t 1W a, t A< a,k e
_D-e.oiti V / R I L CII. D ) A o C, s k i & % ,J . E Q Des'. m l o
9_ , , g , g n ; / f 1TT' Valv4 wl> vso.t sfrest Mrre l s2 fle~en.-Il
- y,,,g,, / / g m % ~, p h . V* f *-< rMrs H f ev.r!.fot , ,
D-'-QtSY v' - f T' E{Q'l& i }.f Sf f
- 42 M*f N r' o D - r . r; f g 7 2 - W. e d m4te r Tv e m 4 a y . d a ('o . H b o on 1 s Vl v.1.o1Sc l ly y M- M f<'r
- F. IV, Bewt u&
- a fed o l
. R & ossura _
D~ I ~ n ts s** /l l y- g l* "'**" W.sy D w urm .y ~ ( ~ r ~ois y V l /* y y- g Itt. S 4O S*
- r /ts
< ,,sA<
f r. r/r o
+
, uo n t enre t
;, /% < s
. 1 D - i . n r 4: 3l 7lV V! g .III . 3 He J< De re De s. .(% v. f. +<.4 .
D.r.0isr0 V l' ,
~ A A ~ '* *'sHn f .K*era*ye,ia
- 4 e!** 3*l* *
- te s v D.I~01SI d' l / y x0 - N ,A Q ^g G ;je g , ;
_0 I-otso l / l - .
,,- y m. . v% Jo'a- 6< sr m f.,ts,f;et a D -I ~ o eat 9, l <- <l g 4x - TMwe >< c < T o Flex c kca., n s l
<IL t A, i u rA D-t ~ or sly / / y & M 4y fr/* 9 J bef to ds. AW res9 f e b- t o Ian i V V y) Q Q Preoa sus su f Pem t .
D , .or n. / < < R a n.d.' .u ., - . c a.i. a , c...+ a . D- I -01 *H" / V g 2 5*@.h 3, ll'y f5fk*" d 4N o n~r.Otu4 / l- g El' ~ Qb e t /t* * - 5 s. f/4 6,iv6d,. ,, D~ t nias / / / g & m- ' g a p y > ,.,,, w e ,
/
D . I ~ or 41.- v' y p, W. la.M crets y 2 4 ess y~ o
- p. l . 0 t t4 l ,/ s el g lit Ns n a Av i e. # ,R*/*7 s i k*
n <,st % t- o
~
D-i -ot 40 /' l l l- g dlil m w p a r A* - w e. <a M*r 9 J M < w e.tru 4ifac ) C-
>A fu r.
l l D p A 9 3 c, l '
'/ g $ llc be y 'Tegi.,9 0 f~e t,g /fo e s% 0 ' o
, _oit / .' / g EZI Cg x E/ es Co ,+<</+r G ~
( . v - , . ,. 3 7 - l y ur e c as m s. p, c.~ ., 3 l 1 0-t orsc / / a m eg.y A ,~r , m e;n ~ t nur i n . ., e .1 D'l.OlW v' yf A( hh4 c, i l l
L40<TIf2. T">!3<1*ou sessikf w n\et,% F. o o , a c. I-4' o T o M U P'
- b *
- u d ' c h f 4.o w Riv REPa"73 "H
_.. {l"aNd Ya;,$@,N aaiam e7 F*'
). e \t. _ .Rpr
.. _ _ . . . . %.pe D se,. Caata.A /Cn.u n, A A,o d +
,J c, . g, It a m 6. . y # v ius rcy / vo acs,ue,o ' py, cp n ,g og coot 7 b o t. V CA II x c P 2. ,p og 6 0 o t- 7u o x- U QA -
32' - At lk C ! kg Q A ocos ;w o r. u OA - 3C - 81 Pr4 t WA L ,9 C 000 + 74 03 R OA -
\ 5Z x M R -< C P L s g 6 4 eloi iMLe esof ~14 6J % Co -
T St- I %, \ h o n&yL o oo ', J% w w p , fo, 75-of V Civ (c) Y;I - - 84 ooc 7 75-06 V CA
"[L bpd bi bi c I;I {
St CA I;r l
$s.
ooot 7y. o c. cyg. e n M Cet V OA I;y - - g( % ,LA. 000 6 7 5 - O t. 4 QA -
'LL s. QW Not -
) 2X -
04 /Jo n ( %a a. -
*X-. n TJSI Sora Aw -
l
.L -
61 or p p % OA - E - M M A3 i NiJ b. M(o u oo:0 7s-to V t -
- 'T -
R4 c_ ww &M.-s? 7~ 11 p.w 00,< g r-i o a C - k .2 ' - - t:4 9eMj C&l ut! : c - 4g g p 87 @ "i-
- p. a vet can ut'
'?S-t3 ETT ooit ooi3 76oi V
V C C x en ngg g!
.Y. V ,r,A gup Aw an
( vnssJ te ., 00t4 16- o t V On iTC,~d \t y nt A,
% V; tb p.a @r on V X,v %*
.nn. .
Art /tf ,Ar 00 5 74oi u OA -
]E -
GA /2 4,d e / 4 /f ( !
- 5. u A.f 9 .l O oi t, '? 6 o f R C ~
Z - sa ce ~ 9, .
~
ooi, 7 c-o, v C. 2,u- 5 d- CA 4 M. cv/ I
>A Prow T v.s t cp 4 s s ooiY 76-0 1 D OA IE -
8 b.d.sM g ic'# nA ( i 74- o 7 w oA - V - c c, ,
- 22./
a. wvntsd' oozo 76-oi V OA Er - - g ,c. L u. Pet.s. m A m J c<-
$ f f y h;f0 W l
#* b l ~T ocu 9t, - or a -
RL - U% OAlC .
.~
par,k. Ret- Te yp C,, b 4 C < . 4 + < a, cu a n, p, n em y h
% sc. /
f m, . % am v.oua ae ,..a on. c, 0,,
- x w u A 7est c3l, 0 0 2. t '1l o b' w 6@ -
E'X - 4 .
, Psie m P. Le L,.
Oo 2 t- 76 o$ M CA - F_II A r ., - 6ft , : OA ~ : a s ra , sa.a . Y '*2 ~ 6L . pa t au 5.t
~ iW s k c.,(a/ au .
but3 76 ro (A OA XVd- ' 6( t. / . cc wT( cotV 4 C
.IE ' F Du.Wt w 76-Il /)l I Cowd Proc 4 h 001 Y 26-i t. k 04 '
'll' ~
6L cm. 00t 6 77-ol d C '
.E -
fA. L 1, s M v C ) Lese oo17 X1JB m f- ( t 4-77 o t - f.t1 i v ..,.,. % 4 - co 2.y 77-oz. 3 m .E - - bA ,
,)sn < * "
0 0 n. c3 gy.o z g cp -
'I -
ht ; W. oo do 77-o# u c. 20C. 6A
!. r% w% est#1 I.
, . of,W-v oo s a 21- o r k En as<n. - 0 x - -
5 5; '
~'2 - 7 7- 0 (> u. k -
RIr
- x -
eYddu 3J 77-07 u C x "* TII". per.,php N oo 3 4 7 7- o s' R oA/m yIE,T4 / - 9w , oo 5 8 ,,-01 q C _V. - 6L ;,3 *pyg 00 7 t. M C- - I.* so, s s . " Y <-.~r'Atat. 0o37 7 7 - c 't 7 7- I o V M I - - 6A
- k. Y p) Su a
003Y 77-so V A TI,E - - 6A h d,$ , 0o33 7'7 r o 4, M - gig - 6(, 7. , #3 E'& d 0 'io 7'7-io M. M - nfc e .ot Trr On ~ r/ h.
.321 L c t g , g ,x jf g/,//. v'fa Jef,c.
Pe 1. pp t
; 00 4/ ~77-i M M -
VTT . > X Ca [$. A t 5.. p I ooyt 77 - is a % - III
-x
/; ADes!D.h7*# D \
CoH3 T1-It LA Oh ~
.LLL. '
~
Pre <elctm nl o d y 'f '7 7 - /.3 % C. - III. k w A 6A cut t Q!/. "i 1 n k s%-han 60 45~ 27~t3 htte.er M k h - DC, MLt. sL Do % fa 4 i (- t r., 7f-of R M$E
.XIII
~n O,. #pI b!
ce~ 1 j oo 4 7 ? b' o f (A OA ~ 32II,Kiza x 6L Uw;, c o < pose.ua ; coHY V
- n .s.a par w J Y- o s- % ~Z , 5C bl F u Preauc n 60 % -]s-o? .9 c. ~
gr - Ul
4 7c Iqt. RPT Tp b c./ C o 4 e ,'i a Cr' blc. Chayge b dl3 lo f ( No IW m Ares _ t/ s ol ai r 1 4n vosolv el A p p conivo M ?oSD a # ' 7y o; E - V , BL GQs
.k% \ p.9 Q
oos t , s- o, u. On - H.lW x. $"4 t+ At' v4 l 3052. 75.s y J Cw. V - s - -- 7063 '/ t.0 $ M 0 - E - Ed b Ad v.h c[ b 905 4 \l y %.fm 4-b %% 9t-It Q - - V Cle a n t < ~ u t e. Fr.il,n) To twi d $0 S S ] f- I 2. Y M E. ' Z F> L f,f & k e neu $ . A.UT ) 0 5 la 7 Y-1 L V 1% f & Ijf - M rn lJe fd 20 5~7 2 Y- I 2- V 6 H ~ - hL
%st a to 36 J-
%,y.s 00 W 2 y- t 2- a C. -
X - bL h %> 00S*H 7 Y-13 V M ~ ni u +. %.h ' J T-., ' E - M u)s I e %.e aM n,~s ,< r-o r-. a . a 0060 7 P-t 3 V C. ~.ZE , X - - i3n cecnt, io f 16
* >c- unsi.1% k,a 006I 1 Y- t 3 V M -
tLU. , X r H. co eb ugt A arl ay
2 *)y-t( V A t-L s ovst s o. site) Y :-
c s3 J Y-t 6 ,D C. E - - M Fu lw 4 M as,t.4 g.c. g. g c 406t{ J Y-I f & Qn - Y - AA. DW3 00l*S U 0665- 7P-lV V m .II - - tu Co o (4 u./ ha.A6t0w 00ek D S gr- zc) % ac ,m. - 7 r o o c. ; -%ot M (h 3DI.
- v. -
Do .E4c $ < &k"W 606f dO6 9 59 03 79 -o y V t/ c_ ih 3E' - ip A
.u[h.
#)[
/
['j N ,[h j,'.Dj ! l
' X T i r ,' E 007 o 71-o4 D E ~f,'iIrd#- A ?( $f M "'
c~,-, 00 ]I }4 0$ % (-- - [ - 0A 4 en k ju v s p.osNe c A s~hn 6027.- 34-0 6 a 5 - Dr Se,,nie sy < V a c. >-os, ,e,n 60 73 79m e 1)Z - - En c,a,7,gtg,.J 0074 79-o1 tr m - JIr
- x p ",0.,M 4% -
E 3015- 71-o-7 (A M - E < Ut.1 .irP $ f[i k (o dU77
%-QT
_9 i -/i W V VW 3r VIT' ,T x @~ 1 n .ft.c n b f ~- 4pr e s y,,%v,.4-4
,6J, C/06 -
x at .7 l son 74-tv v m .m ,1c - bn $ l f ,j k d l 0029 29-11 i E X - - 6f- #h ) f!llj ) l 1
i l Tvr.ck. Rei h< bc./ Criie 1 C 4e <. u . I { tl o lie m .Aye Vio(Ad tu u s Ived l U\ OA I hydsk,Mo1 %.... coyo Jyrf V I , YELT - 1 66 1 60tt Ok a t. s%p do t u t JL < 2%l b' v' 3C - - 6t j % A t.u. M.<.4 6OVt 74- t V tA. .T - 8L %, k.cf &,, CAlG (9 c. %t iJ 'to &J 0083 91-14 V QR .3C - RL s e T)(c o D@co4e. 1 . ). oOF4 7')-I$ V E N, .XIiT I '
; - 6L H. M n -
~ D s.P.-s Me b . . 4r a' -h i].
00 YS~ 11~ 23 -
.~E.,2 f> t OTv & .5nstfrrG 7 b d m 4.ct ? - : A 00yG 71-13 (A. A t- -
3C - 6ft fw Trd ' . u u./4 00 1'] 7T H 1A C- X .
~
6A
%erde.L.g(G[
Cor>4.e4-) h l f
! x *' E d OW 7 9.zg gA yp[g g ygy, -
g,t PyoM N ,, , cg','p 00F1 79.If; I, ~1T M c-," R E - 16st
\ ' r.t. M s . t . ~ o-00 V l 7%V1 i \f 1%lG V , JGE - '
bA W a l. y %
#oiI ~7
- V GA 50.S5'le) _k' I - -
/jA o ss ou 4 o hm> ous k H ct e ss r d OS ~k ~? t- 11 t
M W1 fE I p A- ) ;K - b N F J+K vs M
*T& w h et unt '
s 3 i 7't- WI
~
V' M I6 3[.l X T - 6A. 47 46 60 W 79f , M lM I j 3C J II A - To h At vor 47 To.E Eca e q,o sj 0+ % 00 W l 19 21) 1 W l 2 - E x ~ Mo No%Li%6 604& s 7 *t-J I . y-s M M --
-bL t&T$ iu,4 e i E4 '
b E ddi7!Id*0( M E M. As P8 7 UMhd! T+5T l k[& 009f Td-OL M !M - iE*
- 64. b(5 4L., M h .t Fs /n l l6 G C- o.c y 1 4 bod c49 'l I fu -c)! / .X. ,- -
bz wo rd,n 4 14, LeJ l l (.) g o o R)-a3 V G Z $ ' ~ 6A h%L~ D.d s o f fr #I O l0 t i fD- d M M . 3ZII* K - I N T M valva . I
. %" 'To Q 610 2 l 8 0 0)(. \/ E T ,IIT. -
- 84. fwlled @ug
. 1
- r. . t 'r. 1 dio3 ! tv-o y V' I A c t. ! ,ourt se.ssfe) -
x - 4 c ra te o,.4 h Wu i 5 Aot h,A u..(L % ; d ioy l To-of % i E I
;M x -
Tef4 GJG ' Eteu41 l l C Q tr. .ir E 0 i o $', fr 0-N M E ! - - 15A Ato t c 0 - v-
% l co-o*)! ! V ; Cmv l.y
- X -
w.4
& dr- d C W !
I. ' S a. L. p .h Fix t3 msW i 4 d'r o'? ' ru - i. I' V M Xg - - 6A b$ Lur wtA6 % 1 0 (OY to# l.3 ' V M $ -
- LL j l
V & X - - 6 rgi to c,p.cf G R4 T g.mlr.;/ A f
# ( d c7 go-t3j j
~
- g. .- gn tp Wsc./ Crihr'a Ci i%'. Ch%e d* N' U'8 l
{ Wo bem A,.s > cp A V iolds d une,het A p p c4,druiv<
.iI.
u 2.r o o A( e no t ,~# A- ) i SII o tv tf V M M ~
^ (L *-
h . fork se-ftI. 5.,1 1-
$.,q p h b ev/o To;/ m <.e.,
d II l go.g g' ; y M f - - 66 Olit- Jt). / f t.4. $$ ' I t3 A- D1! M St-* 4.iMv l'. M Dha Ae.og e c i /J P. p.e W ld Ev t.g A4 o f O (13 FD -I '? d th 13' , EE - - Syt b Q43.h Otly Id
- l'l 'l th lo c.F A so.sg
- X -
Y L bi l.
- 4* R ~f r A, u.r <.B b.b., n an O t I S~ M-tY U. (A -
'if Krt- Mo n % cfct.'p To Gl w .,
A L 0 6((, fo-t f W c. - IIr X B If- r, m e <. t iL. bt L >+4. tki
.. c,.<cw N N /ta**s D ,%1 ott i tu.zb \/ m W - -
Gk L c d I.T un u e php w ta. ot(Y to-2 0 t/ m 7_. - - 6x h ,, y h h d. Y O H't W.20 u. E - E - can k k ot r3r u,4g, f fb c.w. s N ,.y e f M oI2o p-zo lA. M - rTrr - g it. g c. k. 3 , . M '
- p. m. p 6.5 ott ( To 1a v' 1% ~
(.C1. we.plL o*T (t("AJ,? 1 ~1, & os. Mol d fos n t.) 1 aw n Yo sf w. m - TX - 8 n- wi(4 pa k cud -Twd
.mr , * ,
10-2n LA G - XEfall * ~
vnse %I CW f G-bk T w $. a)
- hs .(t V) i otSt k $X. k uJ a A-,) d h % df
- ~
- t O f f,l 7 2. '% (A. % -
- hgpl.
- s y}.s tw WXL-l%g b it, f r t - u. a m s .HI. A --
- 11. , M l - 6 T. ppf - U 'sk o, J ,
- u. C- -
- f. -
- sn. s +,.
- tt. V s ..e to 9. p d pe<tc il's $ t'l*23 V S95Ct Y
- u. ,,efu, % % % )* s k P 4
- s~ %:tgf<M~.*~"'"""
- f
- T" '
- Gr x. .
- k fori ,
- 4A7 0227 bDV
- p xeexxesexx ih *089 x 0@* BG x0 x x6 B x8 xOe M K@@@@b_@eK
- f. /~ ' '
- 1. D-157, Weld 48 - Crack in weld approximately 4 inches )
- 2. D-153-1, Weld 23 - Crack from base metal at toe of weld prppagating into the weld. The crack was originally {
- 3. ~ D-138-1-D, Weld 221 - No evidente or crack indication.
- 4. D-140-A (West), Weld 23 - Cracked tack weld not evaluat-ed. Tack should not have any effect on the structural integrity of the component.
- R.E. Ballard
- CLnYOR I \ J se n ar Re s,a nf Tap <b :
- 2. Dra 4 f Il go,fs es-i1/it . 74kie e/,& f/ q u f, do m m f se<,'ou , c4 Oc < 4 ce s ,;r e d eenfys/
- 5. Da ff Q uils f(G - o tt o c. . 7Ls.< dra ff l r<fu Ls re f b cloa f i a .y ec fio,i w Ac'cA 9o ,
- s. n g u<b h fm /vok m % <.
- 1 1 is pol
- icy By BRUCE MILLAR names uere obtained from other sneiation for Sound Energy, a Dal-sur.Telepsto u tder sources. las based group opposed to the A federal inspector said he was In the suorn statement he rna h plant, said she was shocked by Tay.
- de scription of NRC policy.
- lack of sincerity" on Atchison's pa rt, the statement said An NRC internal report re!cated in MarchsaidTaylor resca:ed Att hi-son's identity to a plant offatal by saying. "%(re goes pur inn al-leger." The re[ ort relused by the N RC l.ad names blacked out.but the}}