ML20236M735
| ML20236M735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1987 |
| From: | Collins G, Kevin Johnson, Russell J TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236M702 | List: |
| References | |
| 80503-SQN, NUDOCS 8708110208 | |
| Download: ML20236M735 (188) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: REPORT TYPE SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER: TITLE: 5 Document Distribution Control PAGE 1 0F 16 REASON FOR REVISION: To incorporate resolution of NRC comments. 5 Revision indicators are in the right margin on each affected page. Note: Sequoyah Applicability Only PREPARATION PREPARED BY: G. A. COLLINS
- k. . a 7k 3/f7 SIGNATURE 'DAIE' !
l REVIEWS
.P t/ ///jtx fI fl '
F ' YlGNATUllE DATE I
/<A' Mn7/93}'(y ,
SIGNATURE DATE CONCURRENCES 1 CEG-H: tu l7 SRP , ,., ;; H Q / 744T7 SIGNATURE DATE " SIGNA'TURE DATE APPROVED BY: LRM ECSP MANAGER
,- n a, DATE uiA MANAGER CF NUCLEAR DATE
[/ V POWER CONCURRENCE (FINAL
. REPORT ONLY)
*SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
B70 30 kfff 0.50 y
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 2 0F 16 Document Distribution Control 1.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUE 1.1 Introduction This report per tains to the Quality As sura nc e Category Evaluation l Group (QACEG) investigation of an issue derived from eight employee concerns which were identified by the Quality Technology Corporation (QTC) during the Watts Bar Employee Concern Special Program. This issue was evaluated at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) because the concerns were considered to be either site specific or generically applicable to SQN as identified on Attachment A. 1.2 Description of Issue These concerns are grouped together into this issue because of their similarity; they each relate to the issue of Document / Drawing Control , adequacy at SQN. The concerns relate to: mainte nance of vendor ' drawings; document tracking; improper issuance of drawings / documents; the use of a master card file for control of drawings; and the correlation between drawing revisions listed in the Drawing Management l Systems (DMS) and the drawing revisions located at TVA on-site and i off-site Document Con!;rol Centers (DCC). l l \ l 2.0
SUMMARY
I 2.1 Summary of Characterization of Issue l The basic issue derived from the eight concerns is Document / Drawing Control adequacy. The concerns identified specific instances where the document / drawing control program, procedures and instructions and l their implementation were alleged to be inadequate. 2.2 Summary of Evaluation Process The methodology used to evaluate the issue consisted of:
- a. Reviewing the following documents to determine the requirements and commitments applicable to this issue: Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, TVA's Topical Report, Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual (NQAM), specifications, procedures, instructions, reports, and corre spond enc e ,
- b. Researching of Employee Concern Files including the Confidential
. Files for any additional information pertaining to this issue.
l c. Reviewing and evaluating Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) reports I-85-472-NPS, I-85-46 0-NPS , I-83-13-NPS, R-85-07-NPS and I-86-129-SQN to determine their validity regarding document / drawing control adequacy. These reports were used as l
TVA EMPLOYEE C0hCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 , TITLE: PAGE 3 0F 16 i Document Distribution Control the basis for the Summary and Findings sections of this report. ' They are included in Section 6 of this report as attachments B thru F respectively.
- d. Holding discussions with cognizant personnel that manage or supervise the document distribution control system to determine if applicable requirements and commitments are being implemented.
- e. Reviewed 212 as-designed drawings listed on the DMS data base to l compare the latest drawing revisions identified on the computer l l printout and aperture cards at on-site and off-site Drawing l l Control Centers. l 2.3 Summary of Findings The concerns of record regarding this issue are substantiated. The following negative findings were identified pertaining to the issue of document / drawing control adequacy.
- a. The SQN master index system is not a reliable drawing control system.
- b. There are no implementing procedures for drawing control at the off-site Drawing Control Center (DCC) as required by NQAM, Part I, Section 2.6, Paragraph 5.1.
- c. The revision of as-designed drawings identified on the DMS data base did not reflect the latest drawing revisions at on-site and off-site DCCs as required by NQAM, Part I, Section 2.6, Paragraph 5.1.
- d. QA Staff Surveillance Section performed an inplant survey and i issued report IC-85-S-002 which identified deficiencies regarding s the control of vendor drawings. A Corrective Action Report (CAR) l SQCAR-85-03-005 was initiated as a result of the deficiencies j which established corrective action that revised the NQAM and i implementing ' Administrative Instruction to define more l restrictive controls"on vendor drawings. Corrective action was not requested or performed for the actual deficiencies of vendor drawings identified in the survey,
- e. Vendor manuals and drawings contained in Environmental Qualification (EQ) binders do not agree with plant controlled j vendor manuals and information identified in the DMS. TVA's !
upper and lower tier procedures were inadequate to control vendor !
, drawings.
1 1 l 4
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REVISION NUMBER: REPORT TYPE 5 Element Report PAGE 4 0F 16 TITLE: Document Distribution Control
- f. On-site Drawing Control Center (DCC) personnel failed to follow established procedures regarding drawing distribution as required by implementing Of fice of Engineering Procedure (OEP) OEP-08.
l
- g. De ficiencies regarding mic ro filming , indexing and retrieval of I the Quality Engineering Branch (QEB) and Office of Construction (OC) documents have not been identified and documented on a CAR as required by NQ AM, Part 1, Section 2.16, Paragraph 5.1, 2.4 Corrective Action Taken and the Results Achieved to Date I
A Corrective Action Report was initiated by Qunlity. Assurance identifying deficiencies regarding Vendor Manuals and Drawings. Certain problem areas still exist and are being tracked for completion by TVA's QA Staff. QACEG discovered other dis crepancies during the course of the l investigation and documented them on CATDs 80507-SQN-01 through -07 (Attachments H through N). TVA has responded with an acceptable j 1 Corrective Action Plan. 3.0 EVALUATOR (S) G. A. Collins 4.0 EVALUATION PROCESS This section describes the general and specific methodology used in the evaluation of the issue dealing with document / drawing control adequacy. 4.1 General Methods of Evaluation The Employee Concern Files (including the Confidential File) were researched for additional information pertaining to this issue. The basic contents of the files were K-forms, various NSRS investigation reports identified in Section 4.2, " Specifics of Evaluation", and various memorandums pertaining to the employee concerns. Upper tier programs and lower tier implementing procedures were reviewed to determine requirements and specific responsibilities. Standards, instructions, audit and surveillance reports, and correspondence were reviewed to determine the extent of the issue of . Document / Drawing Control. Discussed the employee concerns with 26 individuals involved in the Document / Drawing Control Program to determine if requirements and commitments have been implemented.
)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERi4S REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN I REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 5 0F 16 Document Distribution Control l 4.2 Specifics of Evaluation Reviewed the applicable requirements and commitments pertaining to Document / Drawing Control program:
- a. Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 dated January 20, 1975
- b. Topical Report, TVA-TR-1A revision 8 I
- c. Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual (NQAM) dated December 23, 1985
- d. Inter Divisional Quality Assurance Procedure (IDQAP) ID-QAP-6.1,
" Document Control", dated December 31, 1984 and June 18, 1986
- e. ID-QAP-6.2, " Configuration Drawing Control", dated December 31, 1985 and June 18, 1986.
- f. ID-QAP-17.1, " Transfer of QA Records", dated October 1, 1984 and June 18, 1986.
- g. ID-QAP-17.2, "QA Records for Design and Construction", dated October 1, 1984 and June 18, 1986. ]
- h. Administrative Instruction (AI) - AI-25 Revisions 10 through 15,
" Drawing Control After Unit Licensing"
- i. AI-23, revision 21, " Vendor Manual Control"
- j. AI-08, " Drawing and Reproduction", dated September 10, 1985
- k. Office of Engineering Procedure (CEP) OEP-08, " Design Output"
- 1. Nuclear Engineering Procedure (NEP) NEP-5.1, " Design output",
dated July 1, 1986 Reviewed and evaluated previous NSRS Reports because of their i relationship to document / drawing control adequacy and to determine their adequacy regarding this issue. I-85-472-NPS, dated December 26, 1985, " Drawing control Master Index System"; I-85-460-NPS, dated March ! 7, 1986, " Drawing Control at Of f-Site Locations and DMS Accuracy"; I- l l 86-185-SQN, dated March 5, 1986, "SQN Vendnr Drawing Control"; I ) 180-SQN, dated March 4, 1986, "SQN Drawing Control"; I-83-13-NPS, dated June 17, 1983, " Investigation of Concerns Regarding Quality Engineering Branch (QEB) Records"; R-85-07-NPS, dated May 28, 1985, l >
" Follow Up Review of Report I 83-13-NPS"; I-86-129-SQN, dated March 3, 1986, "Second Follow Up Review of QEB Records"; and documents and references identified in the reports. _
l l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ __.________._J
1 ( l TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 , l TITLE: PAGE 6 0F 16 i j Document Distribution Control l Reviewed applicable Corrective Action Reports (CAR) SQ-CAR-85-03-005, 1 and SQ-CAR-86-01-004; Significant Condition Reports (SCR) GENIMS-8501, 1 SQN SQP-8602 R0, and SQN SQP8604 R0; and QA Staff Survey Checklist Number IC-85-S-002, to determine if Corrective Actions (C/A) were in cespliance with program requirements and implementing l procedures / instructions. l l- Reviewed 212 as-designed drawings listed on the DMS data base to compare the latest drawing revisions identified on the computer printout and aperture cards at on-site and off-site Drawing Control Centers. l 5.0 FINDINGS 5.1 Finding on Is sue - Distribution of controlled drawings and revisions are not in accordance with applicable upper-tier QA program requirements. Several concerns were grouped together into one issue because they each relate to the issue of Document / Drawing Control adequacy at SQN. Discussion TVA's current system for drawing control is the Drawing Management , System (DMS) established in June 1984, not the master card file system I as alleged. TVA's QA program documents, upper and lower tier requirements such as NQAM, Part III, Section 1.1, " Document Control"; NQAM, Part V, Section 6.1, (ID-QAP 6.1), " Configuration Drawing Control (CCD)"; and Administrative Instruction AI-25, " Drawing Control Af ter Unit Licensing", do not allow the use of the master card file by Document Control Center (DCC) personnel for CCDs. The Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) conducted an investigation pertaining to the master card system for drawings at SQN and issued report I-85-472-NPS that identified findings with recommendations for corrective action. The SQN Site Director responded to the NSRS report stating that the recommendations could not' be implemented at the present time. The NSRS Director issued a memorandum on February 28, 1986 regarding the corrective action response which stated the SQN response was rejected for conflicting and inconsistent drawing control requirements. Ir addition, statements contained in the respense support the indication that distribution of controlled copies of drawings and revision controls at SQN are not being accomplished in accord ance with applicable upper-tier QA program requirements. Conclusion Based on the evaluation and investigation by the Quality Assurance Category Evaluation Group (QACEG) it was determined that the NSRS
l l TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 7 0F 16 Document Distribution Control report findings and recommendations were valid and are still applicable. The NSRS Director's rejection of the SQN Site Director's l responses for corrective actions have not been addressed. 5.2 Finding on Issue - There are no implementing procedures for the operation of drawing control at TVA off-site Drawing Control Centers j (DCC). Discussion l The NSRS conducted an investigation pertaining to " Drawing Control at l Of fsite Locations and Drawing Managemenc System Accuracy" and issued report I-85-460-NPS with recommendations for corrective action. The QACEG concurs with the NSRS report findings and recommendations; l howeve.r, inadequate drawing control requirements at off-site DCCs were l I not addressed. As a result of the NSRS report, the Configuration Control Task Force l initiated a DMS Interim Program Plan (Attachment G) to identify responsibility for implementation and schedule completion of the DMS program plan. The concern was initiated in August 1985 but could not be evaluated in that time frame. An investigation was performed at SQN on as-designed drawings for System No. 67, " Essential Raw Cooling Water (ERCW)". This entailed identifying 212 of the latest drawing revisions listed on the DMS. The list was verified in mid September 1986, against the latest computer printout, dated August 15, 1986 and the latest drawing revisions identified on aperture cards located at SQN Drawing Control Center (DCC), Chattanooga DCC, and the Technical Information Center (TIC) in Knoxville. The computer printout is revised monthly. The following discrepancies were identified: DMS identified drawing 17W600-4 Revision 3, Chattanooga DCC latest aperture card is Revision 2 dated 6/7/78; DMS identified drawings 47W450-28 Revision 3, 47W845-4 Revision 25, 47W845-5 Revision 13, 47W845-6 Revision 2, however, aperture cards were not available for drawings at Chattanooga DCC; DMS identified drawings 47B601'-55-23 Revision 1, and 45N706-1 Revision 22, where Chattanooga DCC and TIC in Knoxville has aperture cards with a later revision. Site DCC has an aperture card with a later revision for drawing 47N706-1 Revision 22, but no card for drawing 47B601-55-23 Revision 1. The investigation of Chattanooga DCC and TIC in Knoxville revealed that no TVA lower-tier QA approved procedures or instructions were available. The Chattanooga DCC had a Section Instruction Letter (SIL)
-3, dated February 21, 1985, which states in part:
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5-TITLE: PAGE 8 0F 16 Document Distribution Control I
"The DCC is designed as a self service facility that offers up to date documented information on as-designed, as-constructed and 1 vendor drawings."
Conclusion Based. on the investigation and evaluation by the QACEG it was determined that the NSRS report findings and recommendations still apply and that additional corrective actions are needed for findings identified on CATDs. (See Paragraph 5.6) j 5.3 Finding on Issue - Vendor drawings at SQN are not being maintained in an orderly system such that incorrect drawings may have been issued to i engineers for use in the field. l l Discussion l A survey was conducted by the QA Staff Surveillance Section during February 19 thru 25, and March 4 thru 8, 1985, on vendor drawing control. The survey was done to examine the control. of vendor drawings and to verify' the ef festiveness of the plants in implementing applicable requirements. The survey results indicated that controls were not adequate to ensure "as-constructed" vendor drawings were used in the performance of maintenance on Critical Structures, Systems, and Components (CSSC) equipment, Revision levels of drawings contained in validated vendor manuals did not accurately reflect as-constructed drawing revision levels.- As a result, the subject vendor drawings did not depict the plants' as-constructed configuration. Drawings in validated vendor manuals are routinely used to perform maintenance on j CSSC rather than the as-constructed vendor drawings. As a result of ; the survey, CAR SQ CAR-85-03-005 was issued. The CAR was completed j and closed out on April 11, 1986 by revising the NQAM Part III, Section 1.1, and Administrative Instruction AI-25, Revision' 13, to define more restrictive controls on use of vendor drawings. In discussion with the initator of the CAR, it was determined that no corrective actions had been perfomed or requested on tha actual deficiencies identified in"the survey. SQ-CAR-86-01-004 was initiated on January 30, 1986 stating:
" Contrary to the requirements contained in Al-23, Revision 21, and NQAM Part V, Section 6.1, dated December 21, 1985, cer tain vendor manuals and drawings contained in SQN Environmental Qualification (EQ) binders do not match with plant controlled vendor manuals and information identified in the DMS." i The corrective action plan provided by the Environmental Qualification (EQ) Project Manager for SQ-CAR-86-01-004 states in part:
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: j SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN 1 REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 9 0F 16 Document Distribution Control "A new vendor manual control program is being developed that not only solves.the problem at hand but is also directed at providing an appropriate framework to resolve the issues raised in the. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter 83-28. and this program will re quir'e a substantial commitment .> f resources through January 1, 1988. The NRC Generic Letter 83-28 requires that "for vendor interface, licensees and applicants shall establish, impleinent and maintain a continuing program to ensure that vendor information for safety-related components is ] complete, current and controlled throughout the life of their - plants, and appropriately referenced or incorporated in plant instructions and procedures." NSRS Report 1-86-185-SQN, "SQN Vendor Drawing Control", was is sued on March 5, 1986. The report addressed five employee concerns that identified deficiencies with the vendor drawing control program within the Division of Nuclear Engineering (DNE). Corrective actions were addressed throughout the report with no tracking document identified for the deficiencies such as CARS /DRs. The NSRS recommendations stated: " Corrective action concerning SQN vendor drawing controls is ] in progress through performance of a vendor drawing audit 'which began January / February 1986 and controlled replacement of drawings where needed." As part of the QACEG investigation a discussion was held with. the DNE Office Supervisor, and the document control clerk who is in process of doing an internal accountability audit on vendor drawings to verify l compliance with the computer printout and the DMS. They stated that forty percent of vendor drawings are in compliance; however, due to other priority tasks, the audit was suspended with no scheduled [ completion date. Conclusion ] l 1 l Based on the QACEG evaluation and investigation of the identified NSRS l ! report, QA Survey and CARS, it was determined that vendor drawings and l manuals at SQN were not adequately maintained. Upper and lower tier
^
! procedures were inadequate. to control vendor drawings to preclude j l issuance of duplicate drawings and drawings with conflicting j l information. 5.4 Finding on Issue - On-site Drawing Control Center p'ersonnel's failure ; to follow established procedures regarding drawing distribution. Discussion Regarding drawings being improperly issued, Significant Condition j Report (SCR) SQN SQP8602, Revision 0 was initiated.' -The SCR , 1 identified design drawings on Engineering Change Notice (ECN) ,' ECN 1 t E________________________________________.____________.__
TVA EMPLOYES CONCERNS REPORT 14 UMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REVISION NUMBER: REPORT TYPE Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 10 0F 16 Document Distribution Control L6027, that were issued on August 6, 1985, without tne Project Manager's release for distribution as required by Office of l Engineering Procedure (CZP), OEP-08. NSRS Report 1-86-180-SQN , "SQN l Drawing Control" was issued addressing the nonconforming conditions of i these design drawings. A review of the affected drawings by the QACEG revealed that the drawings were redistributed and initialed by the Projec t Manager. The SCR stated the root cause of improperly issued drawings was due to new personnel in almost all clerical positions. Conclusion l Based on the evaluation and investigation by the QACEG it was determined that the NSRS report substantiating the concern is valid. l Additionally, the basic problem appears to be the failure of personnel ! to follow established procedures. Corrective actions have been initiated by SQN to p?eclude this from happening in the future. 5.5 Finding on Issue - Inadequate system of tracking documents. Discussion In regard to TVA's system of tracking documents, the QACEG identified ; three (3) NSRS Investigations performed at SQN regarding " Quality { Engineering Branch (QEB) Records." j s The investigations originated on March 16, 1983 and NSRS report I f 13-NPS was issued on June 17, 1983, addressing extensive deficiencies j involving the retrieval of information from vendor QA records at SQN. 1 The document tracking system was considered by NSRS to be inadequate due to the poor organization, lack of completeness, low level of 1 indexing and lack of editing. A follow up review was performed by the l NSRS and report R-85-07-NPS was issued on May 28, 1985. It revealed { that corrective actions resulting from the original investigation had j not been completely closed. For example, QEB record s were not j adequately indexed and Records Retrieval Indexing (RRI) did not ) preclude the need to rely on individuals' memories to locate records. j The report recommended thiit Power and Engineering (Nuclear) appoint an ; upper level manager enpowered with the responsibility, authority and organizational freedom to assure that records associated with the procurement and installation of QEB source inspected equipment and materials are assembled, verified for completeness, indexed and stored for retreivability to include all past and future QEB records at SQN. A second follow up review was performed by the NSRS and report 1 ' 129-SQN was issued on March 3, 1986. The report revealed that corrective actions remained open; such as, indexing of records, j microfilming of newly discovered Office of Construction records, j manual indices, and rework of the RR1 System at SQN by Nuclear Power. {< I
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 3 TITLE: PAGE 11 0F 16 i Document Distribution Control ! I I A status report was issued by .the supervisor of Information Sys tems dated September 30, 1986 regarding SQN construction records which states in part:
"Because of problems associated with the retrieval of Sequoyah construction records, a uniform, computer-based construction records system for all plant systems and components is being established and will provide all levels of plant supervision and engineering personnel with immediate access to construction information. This program will provide a satisfactory method of tracking an item or activity in a systematic manner. Considering the volume of records and people we now have, it will.take until December 31, 1987 to mark the computer. printouts and another year to complete the data entry and verification into the computer." l Conclusion i Based on the evaluation and investigation by the QACEG, it was determined that the NSRS reports findings are valid and open items still exist such as: QEB identification, location, verification of completeness and microfilming of QA records; RRI of QEB and Construction records; and, as noted in the conclusion of Section 5.3, ~
the vendor drawings and manuals were not adequately maintained. 5.6 Corrective Action 1 A CAR (SQCAR 86-01-004), initiated by Quality As surance (QA) on l January 30, 1986, identified deficiencies regarding vendor manuals and drawings contained in SQN Environmental Qualification binders. I Specific site corrective ar. tion responsibilities have been defined for their resolution. TVA is also providing an appropriate framework to resolve issues raised in NRC Generic Letter 83-28 with a commitment date of January 1, 1988. Certain problem areas still exist and are being tracked for completion by TVA's QA Staf f. The investigation and evaluation revealed that the concerns identified on Attachment A are substantiated and could potentially impact safety. As a result of the conditions identified in Section 5.1 thru 5.5, tne QACEG issued the following Corrective Action Tracking Documents ) (CATDs) and acceptable Corrective Action Plans (as described below) ! have been received from the SQN Site Director. QACEG verification of all corrective measures will be completed at the corrective action f completion dates provided in each respective response. l) CATD No. 80503-SQN-01 (Attachment H) was issued regarding the NSRS } Director's rejection of the SQN Site Director's responses to NSRS j Report No. 1-85-472-NPS. t l l
l 1 l TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROCRAM 80503-SQN l REVISION NUMBER: REPORT TYPE 5 Element Report PAGE 12 0F 16 l TITLE: i Document Distribution Control l I
Response
NSRS RECOMMENDATION
- 1. 1-85-472-NPS Configuration Drawing Control Requirements l A. DMS be utilized exclusively by site Document Control Organizations for Configuration Control drawing I I information retrieval and i B. That the master index be placed under the QA program as a back up system, if desired, or until total conversion to the DMS occurs.
- 2. 1-85-472-NPS-02, SQN, Utilization of DMS i
A. SQN DCC has not implemented the DMS as the single CC drawing management system. NSRS recommends that SQN require exclusive utilization of DMS for ,CC drawing i information retrieval. This action should establish the DMS as the single CC drawing management system and discontinue DCC utilization of the master index. ACTION: 1-85-472-NPS-01 and I-85-472-NPS-02 Due to the re-organization, Division of Engineering has assumed the responsibilities for the As-Constructed drawings. As these drawings are transferred to DNE, based upon their prioritized list, the master index card will be removed as a back up system and the DMS used exclusively. Completion dated: June 1, 1987
- 5. I-85-472-NPS-03, Need to Perform Audit / Survey Master Index System.
A. Because SQN DCC is using the non-QA approved Master Card Index system on occasion as its of ficial drawing control system for dis tribution and construction status information, DQA is requested to audit / survey the adequacy of this area in the near future and on a periodic basis until total conversion to DMS occurs. ACTION: I-85-472-NPS-03 Quality As surance performed a survey of Drawing Control and the Master Card System on July 25, 1987 and documented the results in Survey Report 1c-86-S-003.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REVISION NUMBER: REPORT TYPE 5 Element Report PAGE 13 0F 16 TITLE: Document Distribution Control The results of the survey indicated the following: 1
- 1. A total verification of all drawings in the Drawing Management System is being accomplished as individual drawings or drawing systems are being transferred from Drawing Control Center to Design Nuclear Engineering. The transfer and verification of l
DMS drawings ' from DCC to DNE is expec ted to be completed by November 3,1986.
- 2. Drawing Control cards are in agreement with drawings on file and the DMS for the sample of Control Room drawings selected in this surveillance.
CATD Nos. 80503- SQN-02 and 80503-SQN-03 (Attachments I and J) were issued for SQN to identify implementing QA procedures and instructions at off-site DCCs and to correct identified deficiencies of drawing revisions and missing aperture cards at on-site and off-site DCCs. Response Knoxville - Part I A similar problem exists in each DNE engineering project. This situation has been identified and proposed corrective action documented in the preliminary DNE Project Records Management and Document Control Report. Some activity related to 80503-SQN-02 and recommended in the report, has already begun, and DNE expects phased implementation of the RM/DC Program over the next several years with immediate attention to the most critical areas. Response Chattanooga - Part II Document Control and Records Management Directives and Standards will be issued according to the policies established by the Nuclear Procedure System when that system is in place. Until the Nuclear Procedure System is available, (DCRM) Directives and Standards will be issued using the PMP process. Is suance of required Directives and Standards is expected to be completed in three to six months. , Response i The actual deficiencies identified and shown on CATD No. 80503- f SQN-03, Part 6, items 1, 2, and 3, have been corrected and coordinated with the TIC Center in Knoxville, Site Document Control and with the Chattanooga DCC. I
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN ' REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 14 0F lo Document Distribution Control The ERIS is developing the Drawing Change Authorization (DCA) Pilot which will be a QA-qualified system and ensure the information entered related to drawings and the change control , process is accurate. The original DMS is currently being j reviewed in conjunction with the Engineering and Computer Methods j Branch to ensure that the input and output data is verified to l qualify the system for Usage level 2, the system is used to generate or act upon Nuclear Design Output and the output must be verified. CATD Nos. 80503-SQN-04 and 80503-SQN-05 (Attachments K and L) were issued to document the lack of corrective action for deficiencies identified in the QA Inplant Survey Checklist No. 1C-85-S-002 dated 3/14/85 and NSRS Report No. 1-86-185-SQN. l Response j With the issuance of AI-25, Part I, Revision 17 and the issuance of SQEP 49, Revision 0, "Eeview and Approval of Vendor Drawings," adequate controls will be in place to direct the verification and use of vender drawings. Ir addition, proposed AI-23, Revision 24 and 5QEP 39 Revision) " Review of Vendor Manuals" will also address the use of vendor drawings contained in vendor manuals. As a part of the corrective action of Corrective Action Report (CAR) SQ-CAR-85-03-005, no commitment was made _ to back-check all drawings contained in our present vendor manuals. However, the issuance of the above Ale,, procedures provide adequate guidelines and steps to have vendor drawings placed in 'the DMS and as-constructed program for use in the plant.
.In addition, the 1_0,, drawings identified in the deficiency 10 S-002 are n the TVA drawing system and are starused accordingly.
In additica, all drawings contained within vendor , manuals are for informatito only and more if that drawing must be verified with site document contr^1 before work can commence.
,3 9cquoyah Engineering Project will either issue a new procedure of revise existing Administrative Instruction (AI-08) to clearly define and establish controls of Sequoyah Engineering Project SQEP "as-designed" and "as-constructed" drawing originals. This
'will be done by_May 15, 1987.
In addition, to address the conce d of the illegibility or drawings within 't.he Division of Nuclear Engineering (DNE), attached is a copy of SCRGENER18602 which addresses this item. Finally, to address the control and use of records and drawings within DNE on a continuing basis, the program group 'bcing ( <
)
h i ') L 0
1 l TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 15 0F 16 Document Distribution Control established by ERIS (see CATD No. 80503-SNQ-02, Part 1) will ! survey and audit and make recommendations to ensure compliance l with programs and procedures. I CATD No. 80503-SQN-06 ( At tachment N) was issued with Revision 0 of I this Element but has been voided because of corrective actions initiated by SQN to preclude recurrence. CATD No. 80503-SQN-07 (Attachment M) was issued to document the lack of tracking documents such as a CAR for identified deficiencies noted in NSRS Report No.1-83-13-NPS, R-85-07-NPS and 1-86-129-SQN. 1 In a follow-up investigation, NSRS report R-85-07-NPS, it was found ) that although a records handling system had been implemented, QEB had no schedule for processing the backlog of SQN records. QEB then j coordinated with the responsible manageres at SQN an acceptable l completion date (June 30, 1986) for processing the SQN QEB records. The next follow-up investigation, NSRS report I-86-129-SQN, found that
"... work is steadily progressing toward the resolution of the remaining open items identified by NSRS." Subsequently, processing of j the QEB records for SQN was completed on June 30, 1986.
Corrective action concerning the handling and processing of the site construction records will be tracked by the initiation of Discrepancy Report (DR) SQ-DR--87-060R. For additional corrective action, see Response to CATD 80503-SQN-02, Part 1. 1 CATD No. 80503-SQN-08 (Attachment 0) was issued to document the use of outdated vendor information without performing sample reviews of ,, hardware impact assessments to assure that the integrity of safety- I related hardware has not been jeporardized as a result of performing l maintenance with incorrect information. As a result TVA took the i following Corrective Action. ! I The site Vendor Manual Control Unit is establishing approximately l' 112 conditional use manuals in accordance with AI-23 under the program identified b'y SAL 0367. This included a page by page verification against the Master File copy, EQ Binder information, DNE contract file copy, and the Baseline copy in the Vendor Manual Control Unit. The latest vendor information identified by 5 this review was provided to the responsible organization for reverification that the latest information was used. Any j discrepancies noted were evaluated and if required, documented in l I accordance with CAQ requirements. This review includes : 1) Surveillance instructions which implement technical specification surveillance requirements, 2) EQ Qualification and Maintenance Program, and 3) Requirements for the Reactor Trip Systems 1 1 l i i N_-__________ _. b
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: SPECIAL PROGRAM 80503-SQN REPORT TYPE REVISION NUMBER: Element Report 5 TITLE: PAGE 16 OF 16 Document Distribution Control Operability and Maintenance. Additionally, TVA has received and is incorporating the latest Westinghouse Owners Group recommendations on the Reactor Trip Breaker. Based on the above, no additional corrective action or hardware assessment is required for past vs asr manual discrepancies. For current program requirements TVA has implemented the following: I Site Administrative Instruction AI-23 describes the program for control of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) vendor manuals. It establishes a method by which manuals may be " Conditional Use" or
" Controlled" vendor manuals. A " Conditional Use" vendor manual has undergone a Nuclear Site Director (NSD) approval process. 5 The approval status " Conditional Use" indicates that the organization has reviewed the vendor manual (s) to ensure they are using the identical manual as the master copy maintained by SQN l
Document Control. A " Controlled" vendor manual has been DNE-approved and provides information on equipment that is safety
-related or affects safety-related equipment and has been placed in " Controlled" status ; a post-restart program. Any manual used to design, install, operate, test, or maintain any safety-related equipment shall be a " Conditional Use" and/or " Controlled" uanual under the program control identified by AI-23.-
6.0 ATTACHMENTS ** A. List of Employee Concerns Info rmation for Element 80503 dated October 3, 1986 i B. NSRS Investigation Report No. I-85-472-NPS I C. NSRS Investigation Report No. 1-85-460-NPS D. NSRS Investigation Report No. I-83-13-NPS J E. NSRS Investigation Report No. R-85-07-NPS F. NSRS Investigation Report No. I-86-129-SQN G. Memorandum regarding " Sponsorship of the Drawing Management System and 1 Program Plan". H. Corrective Action Tracking ' Document 80503-SQN-01
- 1. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-02 J. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-03 K. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-04 L. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-05 M. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-07 N. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-06 -- Voided O. Corrective Action Tracking Document 80503-SQN-08 '5 l
** NOTE: Best available copies.
n yI i ATTACfDiENT A i LIST OF EMPLOYEE CONCERNS INFORMATION FOR ELEMENT 80503 l l 1 1 l n- ! 1 9 l . i (- ,
.e'- e ,
an-1 9 e e , .
.4..: 17, : - . ,
, %,e;-
. ,. / ,
1 i e
/ q % S 2 e
'* .e S
e e 1 1 l 9 4.- - e
- 4 4
0
.e.% '.? O E al .
n i\ 9 i e
D il0T S RA SO P O V EOTYt l l A PTll AR0 l SA iu lERG i _ T1 SYUSRELDGDE 1 YA IEt Llllllli l l XGCTl Ell 0Il O EME13 RU Tf l l Rl ,. EQ ll TDS1Rll il AAiET lSlf Rll D lt Cli . ITTl lT0iE _ CE". DA 1 AA OTlST DV I ltI T PiItl l D ASI0IGLE ED MuF0o0 EV , LID 1SIBR llYSF lEGST I t CAI!DI 0AS MTT 1 _ ilLG FllllIEll ll ll R I IllilICI ClT l R lU lLSVER ISO TlRllSOllIEFiIAl i l EDEDE l KoT T Ill OLl0EI lMCEEDP _ ll i AEIR lt 1 t TM l i V V l CARA E FL f i TDlOR
' RYDlEEEARPE l RS TEADA ESiRl R ell tl lEM lG"M l
l lAER , AID t ER _ EORAERlREIliEG l il i iGlll l t BIlOoO I U I ' uSI CUORllUIDPUTETl l lT A AAFPF l l .C l i ASA ,TllUAS l Q DISM OQ IEI E!I O 0EO YO EVSAIAPA _ loEl GORRREFVDl l IlCRT ETTl l i LLD CSATlLEOP t OE A l Vl O - VElIRIl l LI L SCTIllCEl l lTA il
) lCECTD1tF RDR RIESR IADl I /ARER A OFG LSEl AGTAEE l
R , L DTlE ElI0S l l IO l _ S P O
'R EAIRORDEl T RTO l
VIli LL TDAlD E EllTV Tl RT ll i SE SilELE lCiD i l F ETK CI l CISSITU l IlITTiTDSRC l EO l TMoTuTE l C T ASDO FD tuUUMi IRi l EI I l lSR0TO/ lATRIlRR iQC l FATIFA llDD El il CGECD LTGIS0AT E ,P lEl U UI T A FRl l FPTE (Ool _ I lll lllE TCMUE FR l
.UClTEliR MLDF i
l IC DIlIUD0EIARSGF l I t AST U FU Q D0T l0DAFOElRDA LO DIRll MT lllA l SLiRTR l OO XuR A L . l UTP EAl l IATISESRLEEAR ECGST C O E0 doe 'Il elf S T/RUA YASPC
.ll Y TMU OUPiVPS DDi1S1EiR l
Rll AII l OIS FEO T SRI l 0 RDIi l S lESRlE l l t i lERT E ,0 ATttFACSOTT RD. II IRYOT l E GE ET ASP ETEISCRElIR l i 1 VlE l IIP CUI) EAU TVM EAl RGIEliATAll _ RESFu RT GR1 EETIRDT ll
,ll Tl l
o E LEE l DL0OllFTlCAE0 i Dl l ioMlI l lb i EP EO1lEli i lll DlI l LTOT ISll FS YE
.LII -
ERT PJlFU CI GDO - lDlCBT TDAESll C TA II ,TRI0ll D S TPA R lR l l E0E SE Al OPTSICT G l l l l'tU t LAE lERl IMY AiRMA l l MCIFuA l C i U RlT i oC AEESElUflSlluARR ISIRlI CI CL OS l VB llVIlS I l i EY1LE IlA ARGRS AOEI CS E lA SR U0C 1O LR O RStJ LST UEoCIS PIQAD L O CR RFE EEDVCLID REOLlI _ F l YERCD D AETElEIOETD . RC SR .F ITLil I ELPl l DRCIIIIE I I I T CACT1IAE _ LC oT - LullCll 5 S S _ AllR E PSR 1 1 I S 5 1 S I 1 1 V eel 1 FCEU l EOllYC E oOO . SECLD 1 ~ SC P 01 l l S EIEl l lFEE3 l l STT 1 Q S P I lFY 0 RAR - I EOOF5 SGO 0 - _ T LO0 l1P 8 0 _ P 8 flE
/ 1 6 4
MT CSR ES TE 6 - IY QV 8 5 _ LR l l /- - 8 O I '
' 1 -
G ' - I E T A C 1 1 11 11 C B IL1B RP5Q 1M leR M l i M 1 1 t NR 1 1 l R t U EP O i l R 1O l O I O S l ABL 1F 11F 1 1 lF i 1 E - - - 1F G BF iK l 1 1K l i 1 K - 1 1K 1 TC l i l n l N i i l LO Q Q Q Q C PL S S S S lB 1 - l 2 S11RD l i e 1 1 1 1* 1 1 l 1 i S S 3 3 3 3 P M BT 0 0 0 0 3 C A dA 5 5 5 0 E R 5 SC 0 0 0 0 5
- G 8 8 0 3 O 8 8 8 0T R 2S P 1E T A A SU C A Q A A A Q Q Q PQ Q C Q CEM / l . .
ER i A '. ' R Q
-- 4 1
0 - 1 0 .
. 4 0
1
- 1 0 . l 0 0
A 0 - - i Q S Q l iR 0 0 3 - EYS 3 RE - 4 03 5 8 ECS : EB A 0 0S l d Y 05 0
'l l I CM - - - 2 -
12 EE R HU 6 6
- 1 O
,.? ' 60 5 RU- 0l l 8 8 85 8 60 EQ G C - - 85
~FEP E I 1 1
M
- 1 -
- 1 ERl l T I 0 Q X RFO A R 5 S X N C , I .
* %o i' ey .p
* < gZHh:<D4 -
3 g 3 D 9 w'" g $ Y 4 3 J ) . 9
MAMFTAATEM SCT C ~ LI AP SN OOIO l EDLHEl0LI E' IE B T F N lERG ll,MI l ~ l0 l l CA l: T. NITTNT0iE GlBilRlSTOS l - l l F RRPSRAF I1 . NI ADA ASIDIGLE RR l l - YEV ,L I D H S I B P, RA UCNDA ,SOEDEEV L . A I T0OE SSORFRSPEH U A DMTT llU ISO 0 C Il l Yll HEBLT UINB EINL - UR QOLiiliCEEDP OElLSVER1 ll 1 EEM R ATR0 NAG B1SA FMD ,NEM SF IBI - EFL TDlOR 0 0RLORADA1 ELIDTLL1I I OELROREEC AC SlAE l R , AID GSI l ER1 1 HTEElfFAT TSTT OUI 1 1 TUAL TBI EYO I t t AsA .TlrUAS ASAF MYUISMU CAB 0ATI l AiV1C MSOBLFS EYH AOYDPN L . V5AIAPA 1 TSSS EA ESQ('1ERFSSA6 SLPR
- d. T l 1 ll TL TMS lTA ilCEI TTI S UAE llL S F" "* R I
lT SDDlH SS tSDS t . YSDTESEO C oAGTAFE R , I lGIlEOYISEDHEH l SINATOHHLN FI lITTMTDSRC ollilITf SDDTRACR HAHSLTSLO l
) L ECISSIT0 EO FIT lDJ' l RSA' IE AT Y AC S O LIl l lSR0TO/
l ES(SE S ,AYCRFCl V(ETSRRS - P R LFATIFA NDD . LU IM,IYCS EFl T TA OODOR C EFRN FPTE HR S ERliA ETO0 RTE ElilT B0DAFOElRDAE L EFG)LATREEHU SA S W - (00l MT IC 1 1
,U T P T/RUA Y S YASPC HP LO DIRl l
l l
,0l BOlHPB l IAM RCilTPE ANT MOBE MLR C TGU)I ,DA N N Q 'Y H N E C E O EIEDTOP RHDA LP EAl i RlERT l E ,0 YMllYIS READ
.S E TEIRROCAll RAAE TOHAR IPEB Y TMO l RETEISCREHIR . RTRUETTDEOR C0 URHR .CRTLA
- T IRYOT SRI l0l i1 EEAll FbLoO IEliATAH RG.FTlCAED ESDQBAH FY E ll 0TED F FEIP l CDILEUD ATR MAL IE RESFU 0 ll llB RT EP SSE P'* 6 FU CLI SFST ! F!REATPR iL EFS HTSOVC OPT 5ICT S O 0 TEA PT PA H0IT0SIRAU lioMII CI lAiRMA MC1FuA A l1 4ALTFPA0AE - '1 ' TPA R NR l i T OFE F N U ARGRS RilT OC CS lHiTA 0ITLi EEDVCL1D l REOE1IIRl 1 lHVEA olIL D)El LSOOD1~ l R L LC F O O _ AOEI E RCACTTTAE I M .F RTFCuD IEtYBISDETLul S l iUAI YERCD D B I IU SA R . Sl l Bl l AoADRUSTP ELPll LC oT l C T - tuHCl 5 s Q P5R l - AlR E 1 1 li V EEM FCEU EOtlYC _ E 0OO _ SECLD i S SC P l 0 S P
- S N EIEM I P HFEE3 STT l l IP -
_ l lFY 0 RAR - I 2 _ - 7 EOOF5 SGO 0 2 _ T LO0 I IP 6 4 7 P 8 I/TE 4 4 5 MT CSR - - 8 _ .ES TE 5 5 IY QV - - 8 8 LR I l l - 7 c. -/ - O I I .1 I G E T - A 3 A C HB Y 1 1 NN 0 C t 5 B IL RPSQ 1 t 1R
,a ,1 t i
R 0 R U EP 1 1O YS 8 1FO
- S HABL 1 1 F y E - -
A G BF 1 1 K 1K* 1 NN r o A g NN e TC S S t LO P P 12 a C PL l l l l c b I 2 5HRD H ^ N
- u I S S S S 3 3 P T M BT 0 0 . N A C A UA 5 5 Q E R SC 0 0 N
- G 8 8 y
_ J O r o 0T R 3 2S P 0 g IE T A A 5 e SU C A Q Q 0 t PQ Q C 8 a CEM l
/
- C ERi A . -
R Q 1 . 2 A r ~ -- 0 0 Q o
- 0 0 f A - -
5 Q NR 2 2 s EY5 RE 69 69 1 n CC5 : EB 02 02 0 r e ll l l 1 Y CM - 1 1 2 EE R l l U 50 50 0 c RU- O ol i 85 85 0 n EQ G C - T - 1 - o FEP E 8 C ERl l T X X 09 RFO A X X , 12 8
. 1 C
g 60 mw - $ =" s1
< [wd'G<U4 85 c" q- .
N I T i^
i i
) >
- ATTACfDiENT . B NSRS INVESTIGATION PIPORT NO. I-85-472-NPS l
l 1 l I . e (* , f_Y gr '.",. ,\ N I O 4 5 4,e B O f f ___________________m.___ -
i l l l
, ;.f,y w ,,... .
~.
W i - ' c'; !.Y, ..%l,t4
. 4 .
*.,. . ;;l;;. g : <:).-
ATTACHMEN'*" B
.' .4 U4.',' .- .. Page 1 of 8 t p
* ! ATTAC&fENT B
.. a '. ..P,;l
- 1 .
l - .
, .iin. . I <. : e..i l . t. s.' , , ;
.' : .? TE!?NESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (n. l , *,. . ,b. . ? . lt ,
. . .i* .,. .
"i . ?. .
1.'UCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW ST/JF f;. . . ,! - T-85-4 72-!TPS
-le$ l 'INl /. . '
t
! NSRS I!TVESTIGATION REPORT NO.
.l.., -
~;n,' -*'
. .- 1-1 .' j EMPLOYEE CONCERN NOS: IN-86-108-002 (WBN) i . .i !,' > . T.I-85-062-002 (BTN) .
I 1 II-85-062-002 (BLN) t . t' - i
- . ! li.:.
l, t
\
l l
- ,'s g,..,
,t .,
l i I ' . O,e
SUBJECT:
DRAWING COI.* TROL MASTER INDEI SYSTEM l 3,,. 4 j . ,
.h . : . ,. ,- . .
. ' I 't,aw.. 'l *
. t: s
..:t;(i
, d DATES OF *'
.t .j:$'
[.b TliVESTIGATIDU: OCTOBER 2-30, 1985 . .~ ' ,
; l
- s. 4.o.. . 1 - . .I l
.sf s...r..,. '. .! . ' ...e,... .-
. ', STICATOR: . ' b C 1 T.'s,.ll .c. 'i '. *
! W. R. SIMONDS .
. DATE . .{
T ; , t h{ j *.0\'!*!.l l-l' .
*ca .. ]
,. t. s.i.a.
. .n , j . .rsg;u
.. Ili ESTIGATOR: r~
' I- -
.M' . /1 l. U i
**3... R. E. M00 LURE DATE
... C.T * - .
'. t e' in'.2 n i,.',' .i-. U '
. . . p.T'.
- o. ., . .,c . .
. f,.,DnrVIrwEDBY: I [, mew MM 8' '
I
- t:
* - i
- a. c. SAuER DATE ;
.s.:y.,:,. q :
...,.t..i
* * , . ,\
.)
.e... . s .1. '
. l
. . ,e sF:. ;t ,*e. i.
s ;,x yp.':
,50.k?'A?PROYEDEX:
W' A_l - -
/* Z! W ~ '
. .. . ; .h. l .: s. ..ly - .
E./ m ~F.TRIsoN
'DATE .
1 o s. t. .- s ., l i
.,4 ..a-
. " . e3, ..; .'g'y. (,j
=
o1 1.u. . '. ., o s-
....i.f.ts 3 S' - 8 6 ,p. b .s..
'.l
}g . l. f *
' 't t i' . *
. . . . . ti- .'. . ; *
.g. ..
*; t.::. " .
... p, ,
' .i'i e r;.i:*
. . .i" . .
? .
,.t.-
+
*t.'7- ,
. l.
* " . i 'a .-
- e 6
ri
'L'O16 j 'a
,h.
.',' . . , .g
..; a- y.
-}
, ~~
,pol.j.T.Mx:h:
ii s l -
. 1Q G.: ;.l&r *;'l.. 'I n ATTACitu.ENT B PaEe 2 of 8 r
ga P. '$Q" ' t j' ,'.;;. ,:;i" BACKCROUND
! .l " .
- 1. 6
,. 3 ,s.. ,
, . .j'
, , A Nuclear Saf ety Feview Staf f (l'5ES) investigation was conducted to l'.f, $ El':'"' Y ..'k, . determine the validity of two c.epressed employee concerns es rece !
j,' ) ,! ' D.* -Quality Technology Company (QTC)/ Employee Besponse Team (EET). The concerns of record, as summariced on the Employee Concern Assignment f:.; . 'li[. '?p.D l.,
- ;i . ,' 'lf(' Request For,ns f rom QTC and identified as '
!! . .V ':S 106-002, stated:
. a . l .' . l 1
$.
- H ,' .' ' ,',i '
. Concem: The current TVA system of using a master' card
; Nlh .y l !i,; *( file of drawings (this system in place at Sequoyah) is
! inadequate and should not be impicmented (if not already)
- c I V.. .t r. , '
at Matts Bar, Browns Ferry, and Bellefonte. This tystem
' '.f;/. ,.. ; .f
,d l'i}.'i j [ *:'
- allows for instant disarray, destruction, or loss of ref- .
- ' crence cards if a drawer.is dropped or the system sabo-a
, M , , d i
' '; !p ?;
taged. The data from the cards should be' input to the -
. T,, i .i
.i,. computer and available to all appl.,icable. offices within TVA.
.1 ..
g i, From this stated concern, NSES made the following assumptions: 1 .n,
'; ' \
e Reference 1 states that the Drawing Control Center'(DOC) was estab-
- J;' ' ,,' il - lished at cach nucicar plant site f or handling configuration control
. .' drawings. Configuration control (CC) is defined as the system whereby drawings are as-constructed prior to transfcr and up,on com- . .%. ~;, .sll.g~ .;:f ;.
pletion of each workplan. he only drawings not under CO are those l .~'J l h ..;,,p ., .
;j,j:? p.
not used to build the plant or to verify equipment configuration. j
. ' m. .' . - Therefore,,it is assumed by the investigator that " drawings" as used in the above concern neans "C0 drawings."
4.s ".!{ ?. . . . , ' .
,py .
A = aster index card file system (master index) was generally
, , -( h [. ..
necepted for use prior to 19E3 within NUC FR to maintain as-cen-
, , lpF{ h- ~ ~ ' structed status and distribution information for CC drawings on file ,
i
", .,jj in the D,CC. However, references 1, 2, 7, and 14 indicate that the I
Drawing'Hanagement System (DMS) has replacet. the caster index, n 1 l. addition to other systems, and is currently intended to be the j
;li,Q*
.l ;'/.,,D !j-.*
h'p, ,'single ,d , CO . drawing nanagement system for'the Office of Power and l
..,'~; ' -
t Engineering (F&E) (Nucicar). ~~heref cre, it is assumed by the i . ' i q.t,y '. ' ' , investigator: that the above concern inadvertently ref ers to the j master index as "the current TVA syster.. . . ."
.)..g
" r,.( ,y. l .
./ .
. .d.t.[$.,
;l y,qj .:. II. SCOPE , ~
e
.s,...
7, A. The scope of the investigation is defined by the conecms of record
' N,, , ' .'
to be two s.pecific issues requiring investigation as follows:
. . 4, .
i . Q. , . 1. '"he master index used by the Sequoyah (SQN) DC0 for CO drt. wings l
. . j f. ..i n . . ?..
is inadequate and should not be impicmented at *VA's other ' J
'; .I;.R ;.. ,.! - nucicar plants.
i . . ,:v. T, .' .. '.
" %. 2. Inferr.ation contained in the SQN naster index should be estab-lished as a ecmputericed data base which is accessible to all
. i.T. ' . al ' applictble ~~VA of fices. ,
ll
. .i .
. f.. . . ; .
g ~, i ,
'. '!:. , t 2 0067T i
. ' , .I ,
[h .
' d .c.ns.~,%. . sh.v. >...i'. s ::WF j,N'. .
e a
.Q '
. ,9,
*E.
!::RS reviewed corresponds Wbnkif y comitmenN&n8 fddh. find-ings applicable to the drawing control program for TVA's nuclear
,.WqW4 ,, dN AC j '. . 7. .
. power plants. Quality assurance program procedures and plant
~
6
$ 9 .it. l.ie.t ,N
instructions were alco reviewed to identif y programmatic controls. f 3 . Interviews were conducted with nine DCC employees and CC Task Force M-h]q il 1. , '.2. n i ,[i .i. , ' ,i members to obtain details of current CC drawing control practices 1 . E4' 'lO' and requirements.
'l .. @ .
III.' SUMu.ARY OF fit:DI!!CS
., ' h,*
3 ', , A. Requirements and Comitments i
.1
- 1. UUC PR NQtd'., Part III Section 1.1, dated March 21, 19 85, "Docu- *
, .;j 'i.l. ment Control."
i . , .. .6 -
,n....* -
j 1,.
- 2. UUC PR NQtd'., Part V , Section 6.1 (ID-QAP-6.1), dated
( q; ; h December 31, 1984, " Configuration Drawing Control."
.ij.;iL.
.ie
,..d. .a
, ; ,. -f.
Crevasse, " Joint Quality l
'n 9',.
- 3. Hemorandum f rom H. J. Green to A. W. !
Assurance Audit Report No. JAB 100-06 (A24 E20128 001)," dated
'y:',f%. March 8, 1982 (L16 E20305 876), comits TVA to develop the DMS l Q? ' 4 in accordance with the CC Task Force recommendat. ion;s (ref. 14).
l [ ., .. ~
. ' ,3'.: .
,y, .
- 4. Memorandum from J. A. Coffey to Manual Holders, "ETN Regulatory l f(. w., . !,
J.. Performance 1=provement Plan (RFIP) Oversight Group Meeting
'i"S 'j : -t
!,.,ji .: h (: 11inutes No. 84-12," dated July 19, 1964 (1.24 840719 S00),
*~' 4 ;..
~
w .H
. . 'h:: ..:, ,. A ;
- 5. Ecmorandum frc= J. A. Coffey to R. J. Hellin, "BFN Deviation
), ),y' .
c.
' JAS100-06-A05 As-Constructed Drawings," dated February 2, 1985
! l l! . . .: (E25 E5021:' c52), provides status and updated progress in imple-
? .{j :, ' ~
nenting CC Task Force recommendations,
; n ,* '
b :;-
. . g' . ' . its d
..;- f, 6. ."'VA Tepical Repert ' VA-TR75-1A, Revision B, Table 17D-3 ccm:r.
fll b. ,'.
VA lf.o US URO Reguintory Guide 1.23, (Revisien 2), dated *
{ 4,[ ^ [;j.:$, February 1978, " Quality Assurance Pregram Requirements (Opera-
..l
'l* : . . ., tiens); " which enderses use of /J:SI N18.7 197'6.
p A ;id,,y.
.>.s.,.,.,,u...
,l , .
h.urp !H , 7.* /J:SI U18.7-1976, " Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance f or the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Finnts." i.. 30/..N. p.! . !. i} , . j~ ,
. a. ,
... ' Tindings . ,
- :[I /., 'I',.h,. c, . .yTi E. m .
. - > ,. t .I ,.:,..it..
., .1. . 3
; ;.flnt.-~ : . L. ' 1. SQU Master.Indcx
- rt .$ b ; 1, 1 1 a
.L 1a..4:'. 1E, *:'he naster :..ndex was impicmented through reference 19 for CO
;r;t i ;; ,,,;..
4
- a. '
.P. '
drawings en July 11, 1979. It contains an index card for v.-l : ". . . .:. ( - each CC drawing en file'in the DCC. The cards are intended
.g;; . ,,
to contain the as-constructed status and distribution infor-4.2 g,'s . .) , *t, nation applicable to the corresponding drawings. SQN D00 t ' . ::,i,[- $)f , l l: ,l y. . t. personnel stated that they continue to maintain the master
index in accordance with reference 19 and that they q.[,y ':
,sl '.
.. o<.,s,,'..,.
;. . .,n. g , .
.. ,...n,.
.: . . . . W i: . .,
- i. ,,'.'"..h.
L. .' ; i; . .
. .is.. ..."J.3,',#..
.>u 0067T 3
. '.'.*6.
I
i Ffk.?I?E , i i
,"lW.t 11 < '
ll:.' }:2.);i.f?,f 0(k I ATTACHMENT E Page 4 of 8
~.j .
rely upon the index cards as a source of information to f' h*jf.g[.hi . f h *%l a" "h,,
- l .; ,
l identify CC drawing revision level, as-constructed status, and distribution.
':l i[ bl' *y '; As a reruit of SQN DOC personnel interviews, it was deter-
,' I ' ~ .U .y ; b.
mined that access to the master,index is not controlled, nor l'". ,' ,' ' P :.L r is it periodically audited to verify the integrity of the
' .. ii . ' i ,
i information on the cards. i Reiucenecr 1 and 2 do not identify the nnster index as an c. approved CO drawing control system.
' .; I -
, .o .
- 2. Drawing Management System'(DMS) -
.l5 t .
, i;. r N n.
References 1, 6, and 7 collectively identify the DMS as the i l single system to be used within PLE (Nuclear) to store.
- M ,ii * '
- b. - i, .' update, and retrieve construction status and other informa-tion for TVA and vendor drawings. The DMS data base is a 3.~. ! " ..l h
controlled document which is periodically audited and is
'.j ' .,, i.][.h y! t' i e : . '. ', ,!,.:[..:'. . ' - '. .
protected by security features.' s ( .,it i /:f g: 5 : ? . . Reference 23 states that the DMS replaces several systems S .': i
.b. l 9'@ A that previously contained drawing information which were not 1!
Y; .b. '$ )$,distribution lCif ,3 y E .'d i,' "
- I 4 :1,,] ' l generally accessible to all TVA organizations rieeding the
.0 I information. As-constructed status, revision icvel,.and D'I9 !:lN "b .' information can be retrieved by any authorized
- i. . j ,. ,' h}b .,. ' '-
i
' i. , '
DMS user through online access to TVA's mainframe computer.
. . '. :i tn , .. . . ...
i 4 .
. . . d ..d, yl ' l '.
[ c. Browns Ferry converted its CO drawing control systen to the . DMS effective December 21, 19E3, BTN DOC personnel update i.?' J '!.M -
.A
;l f.'
the DMS for BTN CO drawings in accordance with upper-tier N[I .fO,'$ [I; b ; . requirements and utilire the DMS exclusively to obtain dis- _.
- "1, [, tribution and construction status information. .
,..c . . . M,,'. ;.1 :
ie W .': '. ..
; q 32 3h,, ' l 6 SQN has placed all of its CO drawing information onto the !
> - '. i.. y ;!ll ' ; ;.
DMr 9.st has not fully divorced its use of the Master Index
.i N D' ; ' . care system. As a result, SQU has on occasion used the
*[ index as its officini drawing record control system for
!'%,.': ' lid. i,i,7 distribution and construction status information.
. . I ,,. .q.c.# ... ..o.v n,- b. . . ..,.. ,., :. ', ' . . . J
[.. Matts Bar D00 personnel ust, the DMS for CO drawing control L1;./[{ih3:',- *
- e. .
accordi.ng to the kdN DOC Supervisor.
- . . ' ' .,.4 .. -.
j; ;...,
-- .e: 4, .
. 'j i, s . ..
Ecliefonte D00 personnel use the DMS fod OO drawing control
- l 7..yh;;.i
.. ,f.
according to the E'.N D00 Acting Supervisor. ..
. .. d... ..,.
- p. hl'. ,?.:
. [ .
,.; eib. '*
* ,s*h'h.
yp. , I.
.l ' l
.1 ; , h
* . . , . .4*,
- e. ji .
. Q.*:
.. . .j.
e
- e. ..,...8..a g, e e 1 li 00077
.; . 'j;' ;
t. 5
(~l
- h; p,,:,[;,y. k y::. k! ' .v I '.;.. j b : . .s
- - i:1, w a ng. ;; . .a) .
,-l
)
.U'p . '
ATTACHMENT B ' Page 5 cf 8 i(l lp',:l.}',.lt 'h.c ']Jf 2 ;V., , CONCI.USIONS AND RECOMME
, 7.
f'jp.s[bA. Conclusions ((! fH:F u."4 .; j,, ..i! d..:b.'
,P
, N! .U i
. . l
., 1. 'The employee concern is substantiated not on the specifics of ;
,10. -
,1 . 13.h.iC!:l
'0 the concem but its substance. The. basis for this conclusion l
,' ; ;. ,.i iM. - T': w q ]. follows:
1- '
.!.:{.j:'
,i,;
.m . .
. ;;i:1.81L' :.r:t".."F':j.
i
;. ,n. The " current .: TVA system" for configuration control is Nq' l '
intended to be the DMS not the master card index system as
,.l,l.',:d
. i p . .
,5t%y; yq alleged. '
However, upper-tier instructions do not preclude
'i.
W.,;',tk;ipjlfl lei; ! r: ;l . ' . .., the use of the master card file and, therefore, though SQU ihylyW ; ; , D00 personnel are complying with the updating of DMS for SQU '
';'i.}' '";!c '."fi.';'. jh ' j!E "..
$ CO drawings in accordance with upper-tier (refere.;c 1 and
- I. ' ' 76 2) requirements, they are not meeting the literal intent of j
. ,i .l.li;p)N.
l2 i lIldlf.I[lI. the requirements to use DMS exclusively, si.nce SQN D00 3.f;**personnelcontiueto
" {
.>ar
.. n maintain and utill:e the master index. 1
- i i ' #9 pM. ."*i ' .')!The ..
n SQU master indeM system is not a reliable 00 drawing
. ,' J yj !- :. .' : -
.b.
- 'g.3,'jj;,
. d .%-[,y *}f control system since it is not. controlled nor is it an
; f."' .>i t ' ' ! approved QA program method. '
- o. .~ ,, , e. a. . w
. .i< ;;'/ ' .;lh[,1;4;;f.l '
l ,c. The master index is inadequate for TVA use'becaUse it is a l l ', ' ..i' "4.I:K.".] : - . ,9 localized system which does not provide accessibility to
.' other TVA organizations having a need to obtain the proper as-constructed status of SQN equipment.
.W . r.:;*, M J y, M.,,h Q..$ .
.. e .-
,- '. . Q,,' ; b .- 2. Accordingly, P&E (Nuclear) decided to replace,all the systems
- ..+. such as the naster index with the DMS at the single CO drawing t
' '. " ;. k.j ti,1 T
- ra i .:i..: .
"; n!!;n i a! ' ' '
, management system for P&E (Nucicar). Browns Ferry, Watts Bar, .
and Bellefonte do not use a master index system for CO drawing
.',.'.p. '
control but do use DMS.
.i .
il- . B. ~Recc=e:idatiens . I 'f! ' . l.. . :. .; l;il , 1. I-85-472-NFS-Ol, Cenfituration Drawint Centrol Requirements
;q. .t... , . . .e . ; )
l'
- l.S j . '
- The upper-tier requirements conf tined in ref erences 1 and 2 do
; [ ; Q . , * . '.' not preclude the continued use of naster index systems for con- l
' j t. ,i.;.u
. :., ' . struction status and other information retrieval for CC draw-
. @4 j i. ings. USES reco:=cends: ,,
, ; y .. . .
.I
~
I.',.
- l ': .. a. That references 1 and 2 be revised to require DMS utili l -
* . 3i.f,F j " ' ration exclusively by site DOC organizations for 00 drawing
! ' liU:!.'...
. . . s .. :3 information retrieval, cnd ~
. * .: q :y.;l*t
' 3.k. l f;f !. , '. b. that the naster index be placed under the QA program as a t
.R# ., ' backup cystem, if desired, or until total conversien to DMS
'., ' '?.0. .i *
*'s.:,.
- S. .
occurs. [F2] I, ;a* . i.
,s.i
..n.
. . ..c. . ...
s;LI. ; . ., . . e t;;L i : . Lj
.J 11M .,c. .U
. yp;.
.: ? 6 ' .t 5 DDL77 4...,. s,
I i 1 u , 4 - .m** gy 4 << t q. wh.,,.t .> 3.. y' .!.. . J H r,.. y l*
! , L,. - p4 u. -' . - .
- 2. ,.I-85-4 72-1TPS-02, Sot'"Iglier!'ent ation of DMs Page 6 of 8 i
f 3, Ile,{.. fs. a ., t
... }
[f,)tj d:SQN DOC has not is:plemented the DMS as the single CC drawing .
' thkstp'.a ' ' i tp i' !
' management system. USRS recommends that SQN revise reference 19
.l j :g e'::M,s,' t@ , . l'
'd:to require exclusive utilization of DMS for cc drawing informa-gi:M.N.f'l..q.i. '. .;), tion retrieval. This action should establish the DMS as the .
1',:! . ;'j" l.j i. ;.. ,- . . .' . . .
. isingle CC drawing nanagement system. and discontinue DOC utiliza-
.. (:,. .l..t..'
' t .. ~;;. r;".V '
v
. tion of the master index., [P2) .
,) .y: ..' . ,
- t. s.y (....s..o.
..l...
, , i ,. .. . . . l ..
. ,I-85-472-!TPS-03, Need to Perf om Audit /Survev lisster Index j
t s..,;; ::d('.:.. i : !i 3. !
- g. .
.:j'..+.P! .j r, 4 . . ,
Svstem 3 .:; y ". , .
,: Because SQN DOC is using the non-QA approved Master Card Index
'I; system on occasion as its official drawing control system for l, '.'. iM [ . . .
- ' N',j5 I
- f '. distribution and construction status inf omation. DQA is i:P?.9;;. ' requested to audit / survey the adequacy of this area in the near future and on a periodic basis until total conversion to DMS
~Q,If } 'l D ,
*I 4: . .,. '. . ... .
. occurs.
i M .'^:' 7* -No. response to this issue is required. USRS will moniter the
. d[,,g ,
. j'i,t'.y progress of this issue based on the responses made and actions
. 'j i-} P ,,
.taken to 1 and 2 above. [P3) ,,
#. g ..
1 1. v..w:
*% l 1
et . - e,. f. s.,' . . I 4MfM.II U. .
- . + 4. . .,t.,
.<. , pu,
=l{'....~6
- i
. , 1: a. . .
i 6 :
. ...., .' 9 .3.. , : . 1
. . ..a .. , j
- j. s
.. . := .' } f*. i.
si;'i.9'/.I.
.. : 1.. e*.*
C.,.l fd,}s, .y. 4
,'.*1 e t4..i . l. !." -
}. - : :: , !,'t, . . .. t 3-i' .
)., !(.
- 8. ,,4 4, i..11 [:.
i.g! b :,.j. * ', . d
-p.f< -l; .. . ;;.h. e. . :. i , . r . 3g. U :) .[
{ '.: ... ..,s ,,...i.
...s...
i.a. ;.e , .x.
- . . . e.
a.o , ,....
. c. ,
......2...!.. . .o . 3 3
- .- *M i; .
v4 !;;3p.. .i- ::; r. :1::. r - , u. : y.. ., . . .-<
* ., . 2 : ;:.t.}i, . .i. . . * . ,
s ... .
..o...
..- ..,. ,.. 6
,.. ,.. j
'..q. .Ct; Q i.
h.... :: e ;:,...* . .
, ..>. g . '.t
. r li . g' . . .. .
~, .o '
- i. . . ' ' '-
' .) .- - -- ' .
.,. ;. $.w. .,e.1Ir, g'm. .s<4. r ;',si s' i
..,:. , r. k y , s r .. -
- . 'i , . . .
- o,.pI .p .d -. .
- n. t .w, ...ts.fm. a . ... .n.
....a.s .. + ,
s . . ,l... . i
. 4. - . ,; ,.
i.. . t s . . st:,.1 3 6 .t . .. <. ..
- , .. .c '
~.u :.npiy .d2 "" t ' : ! *,
N.1 : u tr;'.p'! - , ,1: -
+ .f.,* :1,?8)... . '.a.;-m!:.pf9.:.u, . . . r. ;. . , '.
3 e - N. ci .,
, . 1.1r.'.d'.W.h.
a. 2
, , . . . .. m.. . .. ..
- t. n,1. i . .
r.,. .!
.. . 4 3
. . .N i.d .. -
i-
' /,g g; i ; Ytqy ?
' g .g
) . e.
- i. .. , .., . r ;) p ' 1 ' . ( *.
i.
*f, , ,
t.
~.
4 ,.a- . .t'*4.. 1,
~ ..$,.1. . .; . ,,.q !, ;! ' . ..
.?
}a..,Mp s.8i 8;n g a... ,
.I . (.'.g.'l !, T1;' 0067:
6.
'D i ry!O
,'t h.,ti'.-y,i "I'
!" .p"*. ' .
-'.1.. : e
.g.
r g.
.s.
1 1 l I
; . i.;;.I..f.i./$. .l o- Clid. .
.a.> - gM, 'Q; . , " .s. ;, .
b Q_ . . );' ATTACHMENT B Page 7 of 8 l
- . b J ' .' - '
. DOCUMElTS REVIEWED IN INYCSTICATION NO. I-85-472-17PS
..a...i'>~
"* :i AND REFERENCES I
-" . r '3. . .
l.' .. a d' f ' .$ n1. NUC PR NQAM, Part III, Section 1.1, dated March 21, 1985, " Document ] {
'$ ' E.
Control" . l. l ,;. 2. , NUC PR NQAM, Part V, Section 6.1 (ID-QAP-6.1), dated December 31, 1984,
+'. j " Configuration Drawing Control"
't 3. Drawing Management System (DMS) Users Manual, Revision 0 (B42 850606 509)'
.J >
, i' 4. 3 Memorandum from M. L. Abercrombie to Those listed, dated August 24, 1983, *
; " Document Control and Drawing Management Meeting Notes"
;[#;?;-l,*!
(L68 830817 801)
, . i.:..! .,.
i'5.';l Memorandum from M. M. McGuire to R. D. Guthrie, dated August 14 1984
$ij .h. "DMS Subtask Group of the Configuration Control Task Iorce" 4,.d.
. ,J O. ., . . !.! ' (L99.B41023 003) ,'
. A.' ,
j6 '
" Request for Drawing Management System (DMS) Qualit,y. Control and l
', h]p . y Memorandum
.i, : .
J ' 'l f romServices" Information System.s Analysis R. D.(R25 Cuthrie B50501 910).* to Joe W. '/mder l ., .* i
@ ? % W h i,'7.
.;.,D.,1 @u BFN - Regulatory Performance 1=provement' Plant - Oversight Group Hecting Minutes - No. 84-12
,] , j;gp;l.j,
' . ,' F! .i,'t. tt[,8.,'l, Hemorandum f rem' R. H. Wright to PWR Proj ect Files', dated April 17, 1984,
'SQU; - As-Constructed Drawing Meeting Notes" (BWP B40417 004) b.'dikj.$;J,iW
- ' 3.h.~ .: .
"Hemorandum from R. H. Wright to PWR Project Files, dated May 30, 1984, '
'~ .? ':.t. i.f.".! !,i
*i:' i:
. '0 9. "SQN - As-Constructed Drawing Task Force" (BWP 840530 001)
;. >;yt ;; h
' ! . . n ,.. . 16, 1984,
! N :I;;.'"." $'..d.[y;
- 10. D Hemorandum
.. ' "SQN,- As-ConstructedfEemDrawing R. H.TaskWright Force"to(BWP.
PWR Project 840816 006) Tiles, dated Au' g bj M % Mem.orandum ffom R. H. Wright to PWR Project Files, dai.ed March 21, 1984,
,i :. i ., .'. , ' k'F11. .. 0..
- ,0;*f ;y;gJi . ;, li i -
"BFN - As-Constructed Drawing Task Force - Meeting Notes"
.;.'..;W.".,h!.P.*..*
...6 .. . (BWP,.8.40321 004)
;. .,, -v.1. t ;. . .
.l t- i
.l
. .;.7:.12.,,'f Hemorandum from H. J. Creen tm A. W. Crevasse, dated March E,1982,.
* 'h ' i ',
" Joint Quality Assurance Audit Report No. JAE100-06"
. .i lr. ,i t.- ; -(A24 820128 001) (1.16 820305 B76) -- - - --
.i . qi -
A. 'J. Coff ey to R. J. Mullin, dated Feb: vary a;g,13. ;; - Hemorandum f rom 12, 1985,
- . . ' "BFN - Deviations JAE100-06-A05 - As-Constructed Drawings"
..e. . .
, t. :. . '(R25 850212 952) .
1
. . i .
.? y .
, ..:j l4. Task Force Report, dated June 3,19E3, " Report of Reco:mnendations f rom g ; j the As-Constructed Drawing Task Force" (A43 E30711 005)
' ' .t.: J.
. w , l
.i . . c he t..b
.i
' .i-:.h . .!. ,
0067T y- . .
" * i y*. ,.
E4%. .
-{ i,' d..r :.s p. Ja w.. te'} ; !
i*: Wi!'i j it.:'tW.I .! . l. l -- ' 4 : ATTACHMENT B page 8 of 8
+t s.c f..) : .*t .,f .
MMUI. 'l hj.j,N.k15 OEDO and QA&AS Joint Quality Assurance Audit Report No. JAB 100-06, dated 2'] j
, t January 28, 1982 (A24 820128 001)
'bidh lh ' % tg(';;id
.' s . '
.~l
. $. ,g$16.l
!. ANSI N18.7-1976', " Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the 1; din;.b.l)i b.i G i. *; Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants" p t
. t;;
,'q.il:c s i i
'< ). l
/'[t:lQT*17. ;.10 CTR part 50, Appendix B, j Criterion VI, " Document Control"
'j
.- 1
.l P . . gly
'll0Il18.l[ SQN M&AI-3, Revs. 4 and 5. " Revision of As-Constructed Drawings"
~, : t . . . kri l: . ;I'
" l '.![' 19. SQN AI-25. Revisions O and 10 " Receipt, Filing, and Distribution of j Drawings" -
1j ' . f?1/;..J. t
.j b : . j . T,'. i i".{ 2'O..i 1.7DN AI-4.10, Revision 3. " Drawing Control Center f or a Licensed Unit" l
. , . .;p .. . .
, , jI,I 21. BLW BLt.5.9, Revision 17, " Drawing Control Before Reccipt of an Operating j a ,i',! i 1 License" .
J
. . .:n ' .'
- i :', !iU I
,q:p2. l EPE DCU-IMH-X.1, dated September 22, 1985, Drawing Control" '
W;. = : :j - 23 3,Hemorandum from R. D. Guthrie to James P. Darli6g, dated.Oc "BTN - Drawing Management System (DMS) Budet Request" N(ober 5, 19 fl (? 5t .i
. I ...h. lly ! ]!.e (R25 v .., ; . J;p .;. .. .N t '.
l ; B41002 864) . i m.2:iq 'a * '; y] - . 15, 1985, J $' ;j. ' .24.,'{ Hemorandum f rom Michael L. Scalf to R. D. Guthrie, dated July
,h<t u..'.! ? :l.i. "DMS Overview II" (B04 E50715 902) ,
., ;u,.U ...-
.; p .
,. c ;, p . -
1
.,pkI, i
g,.h. .
; : u. .
,';C.. .
, - <i ' :'i.
11
- . i;r I
, .a -
. . . c,i . . ,
.wr t . .
l 1 ;
. % :.5 4 ' .,
* ~
" j
[$d.d
.g . . l 2
.S . , .-
i . t
. . . . .a: .
) <
q.:. p.; sp? .: - . ' .' ' . . .
. l
' :; r,;. .-' ' '
. -t p g ;-..' .
q n.. .e .s,.,..,
. v u :< v
- s. . . ;
.- . n. ji, . .* .I'f,i . ; . -
1 ,. g. i,e n:,6..i.,'f. .. :
. r ;; * ; ' . -
' .':{.;:- .
' ::l ; a t .
f f
...!;/; '
.'t '.1
, ,Y;j!';.'
' }.
P't :T/. t '. .<
.'m:.$;!h.b'..Y
l'
- < 1 .:
. r:r g *.kw!.Q .t .
8 0067T .
- ... :?: . . ,f .:.;*y;V. r.; ::: .
,S ATTACIMENT C NSRS INVESTIGATION REPORT No. I-85-460-NPS t
1 ? l i (
'~.
e *O e tw e 6 Lus"I.- A.f:N " i f i e 9% d
/
6
s
. ,.' gl!N( lsa. .i'
.n.,
. h . I,d. .i ~. 4 ;.g. , ..-
.',04*.1.,' ,. l s]. ;
ATTACHMENT C Page 1 of 6
. - e
., .a . ...s..l .
e , .
- 4::. . . r s .
' t s'
. t . : s"l .i s. ,\ . g ,
e
~
. .' . ;j .., : 4
, , .r; ,;; ; TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTijDRITY
*.s'
- l"!. '
NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW STAFF 1*
- .' NSRS INVESTIGATION REPORT NO. I-85 1460-NPS EMPLOYEE CONCERN: 72-85-062-001 o
.',. iSUBJ ECT.:
Sp
. DRAWING CONTROL AT OFFSITE LCCATICNS AND DRAWING MANAGEMENT
;4., '
I SYSTEM ACCURACY 1 . ! r.". DATES OF, , I
'..g'r '. .. INVESTIGATION: OCTOBER 2-20, 1985
'2
.' ' 'fi
,*;'p.s,
?. . .
.,~
b 3fifff
- r 't 5"IGATOR: -
bA '
- ff,h:r..'
*id.
- c=*
'[.,p.,(,'j t .
R. E. MCCLURE DATE U.
' d.:,! ra s . (,* i. , ,
!!NESTICATOR:
W. R. SIMONDS kr / M 3!g//, -
.. '. DATE .
. .. ': . : u .. --
.'..:. REV:EWED sY: '
. .- s d. 3/4 /f4 i,
- 7. C . CATLIN DATE
. e' e
- i
/)
$ , . . ! .APPROVED EY: . '
8/M/ / 7 #7
,- . g. ,. W. D. STEVENS _ DATE d; . '
. ,. ,. .u-
. . .s . !
.e , ..
. .,6.., . .
,i...y *g e, a
; i ,e ,., .e- .
. . :.y**
.,8
.,.s..
1 .I ..r.. . b. 8.s . I
- e l
s
. . .. .
- 1
. :a gf .J
\',.
/ ', ' .l:'.
s... . . l i
. e e .s d,. . .
l
. p' . ,, p. ., 'e.
+ -
@ *) .
. .e.
.i,...
S.
. : ;. , ... 1
'8,'
- i. P s
'1{
) i l
.. ,) ; E ; :
i
- . , . . 'll,[ ,,t, ,* j ATTA01DIENT C Page 2 of 6 -
1 1 J t- " t. 1 h .a i . "J. BACKCEOUND
. ' l. 'i . . 'I. -
' . . ' . . ' .. ,. > A Nucicar.S2fety Review Staff (NSES) investigation was conducted to
I. .
determine the validity of an expressed employee concern as received by the Quality Technology Company (QTC)/ Employee Response Team (ERT). The
. . 6 ;,, '
concern of record as summariced on Employee Concern Assignment Request
- ', h' '. ' , d
. '1.{4 ..
'..'-'. :' : :l.. form from QTC and identified as II-85-062-001 stated:
- i. .
- . r,, 't.
Browns Ferry, Bellefonte, Sequoyah - CI has been unoffi-cially informed that the latest drawings on all TVA ' nucicar power plant sites are not, in the majority of
'1 .
' [, - , ,
instances, the latest drawings at offsite'TVA administra - tive offices / departments, including a computer printout j
- j. '
- that does not reflect the current drawing revision, j
.; This can, and does, cause design,,, modification, and/or (
.q repair problems. )
\
- w. I' l
II. SCOPE .
. J
.U. ,. . A. *hescopeofthisinvestigationisdefinedbytheconUcenofrecord j A .s @'. ; .; which entails determining the validity of this concern, management N'M . ,,i I),., ,
'y' h, .; recognition
. of the problem, and corrective actions being' evaluated.
'i,Qh,,.
\
.HIl* 21
- i' E. The USES reviewed documents and interviewed. cognizant personnel to j
'S determine'if offsite locations did have the current drawing revision l
~
(p,...y: ' ' 'and .
, if the Drawing Management System (DMS) reflected the current .
, ;3gfp information.
'"'"'" ** .- 6. . ,
.i ' !!!. SMOUJY OF FIITDINCS
.x ? . ,
,' L. . A. Requirements and Co=.itments ,4
. . ,3 .
'y y . tl 1.] 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, " Instructions,
- i3 ;' . . .i
- Pr.ocedures, and Drawings"; Criterion VI, " Document Control" T* )
{, .Vp$, ,' . 2. ,j EN DES-EP 4.19, " Drawing Management Systc= Users Manual" i W.
- 3.'i Nucicar Quality Assurance Manual (UQ/E), Part V, Section 2.4
- ' .l, Q.'i. ' .. :
. ! Mh,f : (ID-QAP 2.4), " Control of Modifications," dated July 10, 1985
'* and Sec' tion 6.1 (ID-QAP 6.1), " Configuration Drawing Control,"
?:;i
.,. . ; i' '1,i.#- ,
,i , . g,
;; . dated" December 31, 19E4'
~~
f,' : ; UQAM, Part III, Section 1.1, " Document Control," dated March 21,
; .l.' r,f : . '. .; 4 1985
; mM.: . ~ 1
. d .?
, (; ..
- e. .e .
- a .,,j
,th 1
I
. . . -, t ,-
)
'(
, ,,, . . f4 e-s . ;; .;,:, ,
. y} . ,.t) -
- S.d k. r e ,:t,*
3 .
'N ATTACHMENT C Page 3 of 6 1
)
O ; .. ,:;d, . 4 q .,p.< N. Findings B.
.'.. c , '. ..!
]
, %,W , l
.s . p; .- ,
, ;j q;.y ' ,.1 . 1. There have been frequent cases over the years of offsite
. document control centers not having the latest drawings and the
, , , p,k i;, ' . .' }1.4 ,,4 drawing ,.* information system in plac,e at the time not reflecting
,,T' the latest revision at the site. This has been true both for
;. k, ii ' i
<* "as-constructed" and "as-designed" drawings and for both TVA and
, :::!il i vendors. The DMS was implemented in December 1983 to provide
' ( E,',i,;
'.online access for drawing information and is now the sole
; ;' y '.. i drawing information system used by P&E (Nuclear). However,
,. ] , l,:,- ,,,
i documentation (Ref. 9) was reviewed stating that all the
. v.!,; ' j .
* '. drawings used in desit ;n, operation, and maintenance are not in
~
. ; *, ? {.f. .g ,i the DMS. The DMS data. base is being expanded throughout P&E to
. h. . , 6 *
' enhance data integrity. ,
.4- j -
* 'i " .' 2. Review of DOC logs, workplan generated changes to drew'ings, and
'4t 1
- the DMS show that several months are often required for a
. typical drawing change to be processed.
!O . .:1;; ii .-
;,d y . *. 1 3.l Significant Condition Report (SCR) SCR CENIMSE501.was initiated
.il'y'h j '- ,'on August 20, 1985, concerning data entry into;the,DMS not ]
;[ , taking place in a timely manner. This SCR do'cuments.a large j scale, corporate-wide problem that has been addressed with *
- d. .f. .,Y.' f, . .
u, a' . : resources, goals, and reporting. ti .d.t. . ,
] ~..ij.'... . I'. ! 4..' TVA has recognized this problem and has taken action as
- Fr ;. M ' evidenced by the f ollowing: .
.: ' , '. D id . ' .l
,ja.
A configuration management program was established June 13, -
'!'j'M[p.S[.!;
l 4; j.l,- b 1985, by J. A. Coffey,' Site Director, Irowns Ferry Nuclear plant (BTN), as part of the P&E Configuration Control Task Force (CCTT). i .i fc .; ,
- , .i! '
y *. ,
- . b. "DMS Overview !!" memorandum dated July 15, 1925, fre
- q . ;,'._, ,, , , Michael L. Scalf, Chai=an, DMS Subtask Group to R. D.
+
U }h ' , [ Guthrey, Chaiman, P&E Configuration Control Task Force,
.: A +-
su m arices current" activities and reflects that each nuclear
*Yp plant has at least one representative on the group.
- fh - .: '/
- c. Communication between the CCIT and the DCC in Chattanooga
.$i-l l'
- - '. . h,_[ ," . has taken. place C6 dete=ine possible improvements.
, , : . . . M' 1 '
! d. Quality Notice NQAM Part V, Section 2.4, entitled " Design
. ~ ?' q',,; . * ' / Change Control System Using Design Change Supplements,f' was l,S. issued on September 9, .9E5, to implement a pilot design h change control system at BFN.
.. ' '. c ,
. g. . .
;, c. Regulatory Performanc,e Improvement Plan (RPIp) action item
' j.' No. 11.25 to " correct' weaknesses in document control system" has been identified, and corrective action is being taken.
,t .
; ::. . ' ,: . ) '
H.- pn 2
H,/ ;'.c " q.u,) .ig3. ! ( ..W.t . , : 1.s :, . . . ie .)
.. t.'. e.l .$ :
. p:
'1 Page 4 of 6 h.o..,. ...d}..9 .;N 2 :5 0'.! ,-s ATTACHMENT C
.ig@Ls. 'd .a ; .
5 .7. . After reviewing several workplan drawing changes and interview-
! .[ ,, fl_ E.f: '! f' , '
ing responsible employees, it was evident that there is not a q;,;.!'t l' .L ' - .
- e universal understanding of how 'D/A is maintaining configuration
. j f p.
.,l...ii
- i' control via the DMS. Many employees do not recognice the need l- i .j !)f, . Llt.foraDMS(and timely update to it) or the need to maintain s ; [;hf l.: '.'; ' i
, . current drawings at offsite locations.
i n ij ,*t . y' y ,[', ",k{ . 6.l'.Managementappearsto'beunawareofgeneralconfiguration l
, i management systems, such as described in reference 15.
li'd.
, ;. ir
.v.s , . .
e l ,,h IV. CONCLUSIONS.AND RECOMMENDATIONS
. \
i Q..i.
.6 *. A. Conclusions .
...:.?-
l '0," . I ! The employee concern is substantiated for the following reasons:
. , E,z .
l'
. 1. he DMS has been less effective than it should be because:
. ; : n. ,..
. [:7.'. ., ,
,s. The DMS base has ne.ver been fully defined and leaded.
I..8 4
, ::n . *
- b. Neither management nor employees have a universal m understanding of what configuration control means and how it e:
.m. e. 4, <
, .2 : '
is to be impicmented via the DMS.'
- c. Management failed to put in place audit and feedback l 7 ', ,
nechanisms on the sites to evaluate the DMS.
!e t; . .-
;p ,,
, d. A largi time cycle in the drawing update process at the -
... , M ,- , sites has resulted in eut-of-configuration drawings in
."8*,.y' , offsite document control centers. . . .
3 c,'- ' j , . ' '..g' .- j .; 2., TVA has recogni:cd that the existing DMS is in need of
. ... . d..e i,... f i=provement. A task force has been established to address and 1,- resolve these problems, and . significant progress has been I 1; ,,,
i ;' d.q1,.)
; documented (Refs. 9 and 13). - !
. :;- i ; : ' .,' .
-* .i .
...e. e. .i. m. . . r.. . t.<.. . .B. P.ecemmendations .
. l i; . . ' '.. .P. ...:.U.,.
,...t
- h. j l
. .3 ; S . :;"i ,.'. ' 1.,>
, I-85-460-NPS-01, Prevent Pecurrence l t ', ,,$. t y3;: ,n -i j "
. J M. , ,,.:.L '. .! ,
1=plement the' corrective action cnd the actions required to i;
; :[. gl ., I l prevent, recurrence of significant condition report SCR
- i.n
.. . t: .
'CENIMSE501 as outlined below:
., M
. . ' d.. . .
'.- . :., a. Establish appropriate instructions within OE to:
' ':]..I!. .. : .
- - T,L.'! .' ! ' ' (1) Define reecifical]v which documents are to be entered .
.; j' into DMS.
},'i ,.+y!+ ,
- 1. . l .:;;, s. ' . .
...9, i .
> s'.!f L i :
, ", ..E .. .. . !i.. ,. .
.l '
P 1. .. '.i,;, U. .!!.*.': . . 3, ; -L .
.e p.p,.., .&. .
3
,.. .'s . jh i i . . .
. l . . . I :; ' -
. -)
....' ..h
.. ATTACHMENT C- Tage 5 of 6
.* .':* d ' . .,t. :
n .. 4
(2) Estchlish all mandatory data elements to be entered, f
';C
~
(3) Standardize exact procedure of data entry. I. (4) Provide schedule guidelines. l Classify all drawings in DMS into three categories, each'
- b. l with.the following percent initial allowable date entry crror rate:
(1) critical 0%
.(2) primary 1% *
.f.; ej (3) other 5%
- c. Nuclear projects ensure. that appropriate management emphasis, procedures, resourecs, and training are in [P2) place
. , ,j,. ,
to maintain the data perf ormance identified above. 3: j, , , .., ,, . t.** I-85-460-NPS-02, SON BFN. WBN. and BLN Site Monarement Action
. [; '
2.,
. .'s ,
iEstablishanexpeditedprocessanddistributionskstemtohandle Delej; ate;to, the site
'f,h i drawing changes and updating of the DMS.
i ql 3i . QA unit the responsibility of auditing DMS site changes, a'.$,!'[' - tracking results, trending performance, and reporting on' these hi24$ [F2) DW .) i parameters .
~., s.j , , . .
,j.*
.:W,,- :
. w. . . .. . ..,
.. ! ,, ;b. ..
.. . . l
- . ,..:..' .1. : , , . .
l
! *O #
. t. , ' . g.e.I.4ht ;,
,t l
*!: . t :,j i j .
3 ) :(' ti.l'. .ii .1: . I '. ;4.f ., . ., p g , J. I Y- .
.o.:. t!..4: .
i S.!.: t? *3...e i -
- t .'. g n .. ! p; . i . . . 4
- : * *:i..'.(,'.; .
1
. ...i.. i:
; . 9. .;...i..*) ......p..
l
. s. . . .. , .
l t
. :) U/u ,,,x;..'
Ia e
. I(s, ,-
f [ ,. . I
. s :> '. ,
,' I
..I, h.k
, Y;
'i
;,iI.
l 3 9' li
* ;p. ,
i . l . !i : . \ . l '. h. .. l r
. . , T r,
',r-
. !. l,.
e .: ,( o
- ', ei; '
j
- ATTACHMENT C . Page 6 of 6 D00UMENTS REVIE*JED IN INVESTIGATION 1-85-460-NTS AND REFERENCES
* ,' .'h l ' i . " l. 1. TVA memorandum from T. Chapman to N. Bessicy " Documentation Prob 1 cms
. , :. , ' , . ,l -
Identified in Configuration Control Task Force Hecting Notes of
! March 6, 1985" (B45 850603 200)
! t' ' ; [o.! y .* . . '
4
. .: c I
,:j. y[. , 2. . TVAformemorandum
,1
- f rom R. Guthrey DMS QC and Information SystemstoAnalysis J. Anderson Service" dated (LOOMay 850507 3,1985, 513) " Requesl l
. o {;...e . .
1 I b= ' I ' t ' 'g 9. " 3 . TVA memorandum from M. Scalf to G. O' Dell dated October 18, 1985, 1 [S.I , '; ; ,
** Request f or DMS Adjunct Support" (no RIMS /MEDS number)
; '.9, . f .; - - - . . .
l' ;; ,(:' 4., Operational Quality Assurance Manual - Drawing Control dated November 2, l 1984
., p':;. ; ..
s...
.f,]:' 5 ; ID-QAP 2.4, " Control of Modifications," Rev. 7/10/E5 .
!4.. ?
UQAM Part V Section 2.4, " Design Change Supplements," Rev. 7/10/25
. i' t' '-' U. !
6. d '.j , .
; ,*i . 7 SCRGENIMS E501 dated August 20, 1985 (B04 E50820 001) .! ;-*
. .?.;4:,-
s .
,,, J i!T;.' F. S . Regulatory Performance improvement Plan - Action Item 11.25
- l d.iM, :Hi . ...n .
l e l
"
- p ;' p,',, 9. TVA memorandum from M. Scalf to R Guthrey dated March 12, 1925, "DMS
'M" . Overview" (B04 E50312 400)
* * , i .'
';&,',10. TVA memorandum f rom R. Guthrey to "" hose listed dated Octeber 9,1984, -
j ' ',' ' " Configuration Control Task Force - Subtask Groups" (Dr.N 841011 011)
..:... l
'l 11. *~VA memorandum f rem R. ' Wright to Design Services Tiles dated January 31, r ! 1985, "BFN - Office of Power Engineering Configuration Contrel Task 1
Force" (QMS E50225 '202) -
," 12. TVA me:norandum f rom R. Cantrell to D. Bowen dated November 21, 1964,
.,- . "DMS - Engineering Projects Responsibilities" (IMS E41121 002)
. ' i ' 13 . USRS draft report R-E5-11-NFS l
. . ..l
- 14. IVA memorandum from M. Scalf.to R. Guthrey dated September 30, 19ES, "DMS F
-j - Activities Report" (no RIMS /MEDS number) *
.o
,= l 15. DOE Directive 5700-Draf t dated 2-20-E5, Chapte: 3, Section C "Configura-
't- tion Management"
;;t;-
l :.-- , ,
.. ., i.
- t. .
f
,l -
0
.i *
.T t 1} . 5 t t 3'
^
.- m, l
~ .
t ATTACHMENT D
^
)
NSRS investigation Report No. I-83-13-NFS 1 i
- e l
l I 4 I 4 1 J T. e 1 e.n
!%5".t) v-p.
e 9 4 p e 9
e5 M N
..2a '
. ] ** , ,
g ATTACHMENT D g Page I of 44 GNS '84 03 01 150 840305X0187 TEhTESSEE VALLEY AUTH01RTY bTCIIAR SATETY REVIEW STAFT, ESRS PIPORT NO. I-83-13-NPS
SUBJECT:
T IhTTSTIGATION OF CONCERNS REGARDING QEB PICORDS DATE OF ,,,, - IhTESTlGATION: MARCH 16 - MAY 6, 1983
,=,
t
; .;.u.::\
IhTESTIGATOR:
/I N _ [
R. D. SMI y ' <
~
g/fyg.-y 347g-IhTESTICATOR. ia - 7 ,,, , i R. k'. TEAYIS < 4 ,, ,,7j p ~ bA7g-APPR0iTD BY: ), , ) f-s K. W. hMITT 4 ,[gg
. b47g ---
64 i MEDS, W5B63 C.K ~ T 4
~..
. . . . . :- .I '.; f'$ (*
;" ' 1
- w
, . . gg ATTACRKENT D Page 2 of 44 i
i a t p TAB!1 UP CONTF.NTS n L L n Pave ?
?
- 1.
SUMMARY
........................... I f 1.' SCOPE . C i
t
........................... 2 F
l Ill. .' ACTS . l
........................... 2 r A. Functional and Organi:stion of QEB . w B.
Concerns Regarding QEB Records . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . 2 i 3 E l C. Quality Assurance Record Requirements . . . . . . . . . . l 4 [ a 2. Documents External to TVA .'. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 5 I
( a. 10CTR50, Appendix B . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . 5
- b. Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.88 .
c.
. . . . . . . .. . . 5 E[
ANSI N45.2.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' .
. . 6 4
- 2. Documents Interal to TVA d
.573 r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 6 E h #4.\ c*
,s'9/ a. TVA Topical Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- b. Interdivisional Quality Assurance. Procedures 7
. . 7 D.
Implementation of Quality Assurance Record Requirements
. 9 0 1.
n Quality Engineering Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 E
- 2. , Division of Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 p%
- 3. ManaEement and Engineering Data Systems (MEDS) . . . 12 &
c E. handlinE Practices for Vendor-Supplied QA Records 6
. . . . 13 E
- 1. Quality Engineering Drunch k
. . . . . . . .. . . . . 13 s?
c
- c. Mechanical /Nucl ea r Uni ^. . . . .
s-
. . . . . . . 16
- b. Civil / Architectural Unit g[
. . . . . . . . . . . . 17
- c. Veldments Unit gy
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 gp
- d. Instrumentati'on Unit . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 19 8k
- e. Electrical Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 w
h'r 2 3. MEDS ~ . .. . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 J Division of Construction - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . . 21 4 Division of Nuclear Power - Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . 23 fhI 4C_ T. Randomly Selected Contr:ct Tile T1ow . W
. . . . . . . . . . 23 3(_
2v. Analy.i. !v
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A. Availability of Complete Records at SQN .
E. . . . . . . . . 26 Usability of Records by NUC PR . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 30 C. Ability of the TVA System to Meet 53 the KRC and ANSI Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 { D. Safety Significance . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 (( 1E
. . . , . . . i.
h ATTACIDiENT D h Page 3 of 44 TABLE OF C0hTENTS (Continued) V. Conclusions M 33 VI. Judgement of neede
. . . 3L ATTACIDENTS Attachment 1 - QEB Organi::s tion Chart Attachment 2 - Su.~ mary of Contract FIIes Reviewed T , t" .; , !
hi'4H - y;I,}= [."l M g m 4. r % T e M e_
'[
~
O ATTAC&iENT D
. P age 4 of 44 O
- 1. S t*. MAR Y As requested by the Assi, tant General Nn8Fer (Te c hn i c a 'l ) , the Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) investigated concerns regarding the inadequacy of QEB records. flo re specifically those records that are required by NRC to document that commodities requiring TVA source inspection for nuclear plants meet the desi En specifications. The concerns were that the record system did not meet either the NRC or ANSI requirements
.that control and review f or a ccura cy and comple te-ness of the records were less than adequate, and that the documents were not a ccu ra cy.
receiving a second and third technical review for technical QEB is responsible for assuring TVA
- hot vendors supplying equipment and materials provide those conrnodities in.accordance with TVA's contract specifications through inspection of the vendor's QA program and the commodities manufactured. QEB is responsible for collecting I the vendor QA documentation and providirig it to the Division of Nuclear Power (hTC PR), the ultimate holder of the recotds. In order to fully determine the extent of the problems relating to ~
the alleged concerns, this investigation included an examination e3 of the system for handling QEB records from generetion to ultimate storage. Scyuoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) was chocen as the ultimate 'T ) W' location because it was the newest facility on line and, according to the TVA Topleal Report, all quality asssurance (QA) records were required tt, ,be onsite at the time of the investiEstion. g g The degrees investigation for all of determined the QEB units.that the concerns were valid in varying tiFators thA t pr^blems within QEB both It also became clear to the inves-organizations other than OEB. In summary, af fected and were affected by the folleving problems were identified relating to QEB records. The investip tion determined that, with what NSRS considere minor variations, the written procedures provide for the ec11cet ion, verification uf accuracy and completion, and transfer of vendor Q'A records ANSI to NUC PR in a manner which is in compliance with NRC and requirements. . However, with inadequa te iruplementation of those , procedures , pa rticularly across cryaniza tional bounda ries, the com-pleted sets of QA records"were not Eetting to bTC PR. Even if FUC PR '_ were to receive a complete set er records for a given product, in ;' their current form the records would not be in a condition that would allow easy ret rieval of information. These deficiencies place TVA in violation of 10CPR50, Appendix B, Criterion VII requirements for SQH; and unless
~
chanEes are made to correct the problems, both Watts Bar Nuclear subject to thePlant same(VBN) and Bellclonte Nuclear Plant (BI.N) will be violations. 7
~
l At the time of this inventi Estion, QEB did not know how many con-tracts f or SQN were cceplete, and therefore, associeted QA document records required to be oneite. They did not know with any degree of certainty whether or not QEB had all the vendor QA documentation required to support fulfillment of the contract rpecificetions; they b
. ,E i J. m p d w W i" N M q~-
i
,JN N- ~
( ,. - h ATTAC&iENT D hPage6of44 with the responsibility of assuring that chased physicelly meet the commodities pur-fications and to collect,the rent ractural or purchase order speci-insintain, and t ransmit to the user of the comodity documented the specifications. proof that the comodity complies with Quality of the commodities is verified by TVA out regional inspectors located in eight regional offices through-the United States, plus Knoxville, and commoditica are not released from the vendor's plant until the inspector has docu-mented evidence that the contract specifications have been met. The flow of t' hose documents , both theoretically and in prnetice, are described in sections !!!.D and .E, respectively. Under the direction of the Branch Chief, QEB oversees the manu-f acturing of commodities tion. for TVA which require source inspec-A method of keeping t ruck of .the number of contracts and ! their 1980, value QEB was was established in the 1970s, and as of December 31, inspecting 1,824 contracts valued at over two T billion dollars. Since then, through May 30, 1983, 994 contracts l were added and none removed. Removal of a contract from this list required the contract to be romplete and the' file trans-eitted to the QEB Reccrds Unit (NOTE: In March 19E3 the per-gyg,, sonnel and functions of QEB Records Unit were transferred to
!!EDS.
g&64 For convenience and because the units had not been offi-vVs.40 cially renamed yet, the report will continue to refer to the QEB Records sent Unit.) or the site. Since no contract records have been to either location by QED for several years, the number of active contracts and their dollar value may be greatly inflated. The branch chief estimated that at 1 cast 80 percent of their work was nuclear related, and the vendors added manuf acturing, testing, and documentation cost associcted with producinE a quality product with the required traceability added 64 percent to the nor=al cost cf the commodity. Guaranteed quality usually requires closer attention to product processing, sometimes requires more time per unit produced, and can in some cases add to the cost of initial production. 110 wever, an ef f ective QA/QC program and more than pays for itsel f thrnuth increased reliability performance. Tinding problems during manufactuirng is cost effective when compared to finding them et a later date. Organizations 11y, QEB"is divided into Tield Operations (ten-taining the eight regionc1 offices) and Centre] Quality Contro). Staff sizes, includinE clerien!, for the Field Operations was 73 in 19E0 and is currently at 39. For QED Knoxville, including
' the Branch Chief's Staf f and Central Quality Control, it was 33 in 19BD and is currently at 31. Central Quality Control is divided into five units each responsible for a commodity manu-factured under their speciality. These units are titled: weld-eents, mechanical / nuclear (including NSSS), instrumentation, civil / architectural, and electrical (tee attachment 1).
B. Concerns Eerardinr OEL Records hSRS was requested by the Assistent C'neral e Manager (Technical) to investigate concerns { regarding QEB records and to prepare e report documenting the investig,etion findings.
.,. L
- - y . . = '"b Y2pf l
' ATTACmiENT D ~ Page 7 of 44 O @
e The concerns were that NRC or ANSI requirements;the tcrorsin system probably did not meet that the , that come to TVA through QEB were not ndor generated QA documents s or completeness or being adequatcJy controlled.ibeing reviefedoffor accuracy b support these concerns, a roomfullofdocumentsstoredjntheQEBCedar Bluff office in deteriorating boxes stacked onelon hop of the other with only a contract 1. umber on the outsie n was described. The concerns further identified that recordn a r.nrned ove r t i the QEB hecords Unit by the nnit supervi s'> rs scre d eing indexed a nd r e o r g a ni::et. b;r nontechnical eterical personnel; that vendor QA documents were not being reviewed a second and third timt!for technical accurery and co rple',eness by the other unit supervisors or the contract found ciissing in atechnicar engineer; and that if documentation was contract that had been closed out for several years, it niig'a t ce diffict.lt, if not impossible, to duplicate that docment Irom a vendor's file because in some cases vendors have gone out of business. '. r' C. Quality Assurance Record Requirements . - The vendor generated quality assurance records that a nuclear gCig utility is required hierarchy to accumulate and store are defined by a of docuuents. W! The control and handling of these records is also described in the document.s. These documents and their relative below; > position in the hierarchy of control are listed 10CTR50, Appendix B, Criterien VII, " Control of Purchased daterial, Equipment, and Services" and Criterion XVII,
" Quality Assurance Records."
Eetulatory Guide 1.88, " Collection, Storage, end Hain-tenance of Nuclear Fower Plant Quality Assurance Records." ANSI N45.2.9-1974, " Requirements for Collectien, Storage, and Maintenance of Quality Assurance Records for Nuclear Power Plants." - Topical Report TVA-TR75-1, " Quality Assurance Program D Description f or Design, Construction, and Operation. Interdivisional Quality Assurance Procedures'(ID-QAP) < Manual for Nuclear Power Plants. A ID-QAP 17.1, " Transfer of Quality Assurance Records for Design and Construction" i ID-QAP 17.2, " Quality Assurance Records for Design and Construction
O ATTACH.4ENT D O p age 8 of 44 1. Documents External _to TVA ,
- a. 10CTR50, Appendix B Title
- 10. Pa rt 50, Appendix B of the Code of Tederal Regulations
,Au the controlling document for all quality assurance activities for a nuclear power plant.
10CFR50, Appendix B, Criterion VII, requires , in part, that measures be established to assure that purchased material and equipment conform to the procurement documents. Also, these measures cust provide, as app rop ri a te niched by the vendcr. , for objective evidence of quality fur-procurement The documenting evidence that requirements are met must be available at the plantsite prior to installation or use of the caterials or equipment. ,This documenting evidence
, must be retcined at the nuclear power plantsite and I shall be sufficient to identify the specific require-ments, such an codes, standards, or specifications cet by the purchased material and equipment. .This crite-rien in 1970.has remained virtually unchanEed since its issue a- , . i
- Pgy;
'%^P Criterion XVII requires, in part, that sufficient records be maintained to furnish evidence that activi-ties affectinE quality were appropriately performed and that the applicant establish requirements con- ,
cerning record retention, such as duration, location, end assigned responsibility. '
- b. F,erulaterv Guide (RG) 1,S8 The regulatory guides provide methods acceptable to NEC in cceplying with the Commissien's regulations. .
EG 1.88, revision 2,1976, specifically gives guidance ; Fcsition," the following:for Criterien XVII and states in Part C The requirements and guidelines for collection, storafic',.and maintenance of nuclear power plant _ quality assurance records that are included in - ANSI N45.2.9-1974 a re a cceptable to, the h'RC staf f , 4 and previde en adequate basic for complying with the pertinent quality rssurance requirements of ,. Appendix B to 10Cris Part 50. .. .
'4 This in 1974statement is unchanged from revision 0 issued 'T
'T TVA ves committed to the requirements of the -
reEulatory ruide with the folleving exceptions: Tor 5rowns Ferry, OEDC will use one-hour filing cabi- c-nets for temperery record storage and OEDC will pro-vide a two-hour rated vault for permanent record , 4
. o'
, i*
- Page 9 of 44 ATTACWJNT D . -
l 1- . e e
. g storage. "
For Sequoynh and Watts Bar, only the excep-tion that DED: vould provide two-hour Illing cabinets for temporary record utnrage was taken. For Bellefonte, llartsville, and Phipps Bend, the exception that DEDC would provide one-hour rated filing cabinets for tem- 4 porary storaEe of records was taken. g g
- c. ANSI N45.2.9 N
- q Since RG 1.88 endorses an ANSI standard, the standard l
becomes the controlling document. ANSI N45.2.9-1974 h[
-=
states, in part, that: This utandard provides Eeneral requirements and d guidelines for the collection, storage, and @ maintenance of quality assurance records asse- Y ciated with the design, manufacture, construc- ( l * ( tien, and operation phase activities of nuclear g i \ power plants, m M This standard delineates technical requirements; 5 receipt of records methods; storage, preservation,' and EE h safekeeping methods; retrieval requirements; and dis-s@W position of records. It does not specify where the records are to be physically maintained. This stand- g g
. ard was not intended to cover the generation of reccrds.
Also, it does not apply to activities covered by gg g Section III, Divitiens 1 and 2, and Section TI of the $ ASS Loiler and Pressure Vessel Code. DE
- 2. Docu:nents Internal to TVA g
Each orgen! ational level within TVA had developed a docu- W sg rne nt which described the handling of QA records at that NE level. The TVA Tepical Report As t.he controlling TVA
- document and each lower level document rnust adhere to that control. The Topical Report rney be e:: pas.ded upon and (
explained, but all commitments made in the Topical Report i must be satisfied., Most of the TVA controlling documents " have been . revised"several tirnen since the records being ' reviewed were initially crented. The handling of the records, - of course, cus t adhere only to the controls ir{ effect a t = the time of their creation. Since the first procurement documents were written for SQN, th : FRC regulations have been tightened considerably; but the basic requirernent that . : QA records be rnaintained onsite in an estily retrievable r:anner rerneins unchanged.
- m. TVA Toolcal Revert 7 epical Report TVA-TR75-1 presents the TVA Quality - --
Assurance Progrem developed for the planning, design ' and construction, operetion, end : maintenance of TVA y 6 I
ATTACHMENT D page 10 of 44 . 7 r nuclear plants, it is thus the highest level TVA $ document ior control 1 int, the aetivitles being investi- (
~
gated. hevision 5 of this topical report dated July 1982 has been accepted by the NRC and, revision 6 k L suba:ltted to NRC f or approval and dra f t 7 remain essentially unchanged in the areas 1 of revision $
. gated. investi- 6 Section 17.lA.1.2.3, "EN DES Quality Eng,1-2 neering Branch," defines toe organiza tion and respon- k sibilities of the Quality Engineering Branch. Section 17.1A.1.2.3 states. In part, "The Quality Engineering 6 Branch (QEB) . .
. is responsbile for determining that EC
- the manufacturer 6 and suppliers of equipment and $
materials for the nuclear power plants fulfill the E technical and quality requirements. as defined in the A procurement speejfleations." Section 17.1A.17.1 h states, in part, "EN DES QEB is responsible for sup- y
. plier QC records un those contracts in which QEB y g
-r inspecti n is reyulred. This responsibility is to see that such records are sent and incorporated' into the
{ P MEDS system . . .
." Section 17.1A.1T.2 staten, in part, " Construction QA Procedure, ' Quality Assurence h Records,' contains similar provisions for records' $s 4 generated or received at the site during the construc- @
9.W
" tion phase." Section 17.lA.17.3 states that "the {
==
transfer of DEDC QA Eccords to NUC PR is established 7
, in an Interdivisienci Quality Asssurance Procedure.
The transfer system nakes previsions so that OEDC QA { g records are readily retrievable by NUC PR at all times." - b.
$m.+
Interdivisional Oualltv Assurance Procedures The ID-QAPs allecete responsibilities to the different divisions within TVA for the various quality assurence % functions. 2D-QAP 17.2, Section 1.0, " Objective end E@- Scepe," states: W M This procedure establishes the guidelines and identifies the interface responsibilities for controlling quality assurance records within OEDC. Section 2.1.2.'d under " Responsibilities, Divisjon of Engineering Design," states: - g Turnishing CONST with evidence thet purchesed l N1 items ecnform to the procurement requirements I y
, (ettachment 2). l Attachmer.t 2 to 7D-QAP 17.2 conteins a listing of the "hetords Required at the Site Prior to instellntion er Use."
which was This e attechment referenres the "McAdoo Letter" letter to J. D. McAdoo, Manager of Licensing ; b
~, -.
.p - s - 'w '
,- ATTACIDfENT D -
' page 11 of 44 ~
O 9 3 e N.e and Reliability, West.inghouse Electric Corporation, 4 from C. K. Beck, Deputy Director of Regulation, U.S. " AEC (now U.S. NRC) on May 11, 1971. The letter con- ' tained, as attachments, " Guidance for Criterion Vil V Regarding Certi ficat ion Sys terns" and t he Wes t inghous e - Implernentation of AEC Criterion Vll Guidance Regarding Certification Systems." The body of the letter itself contains the AEC criticism of the Westinghouse fe,ple- E. menting doeurnent. There is no description of how # Westinghouse rnodified its program to rneet the AEC requirements. Attachment 2 of ID-QAP 17.2 describes how TVA is implementing the AEC ;;uldelines. It does this by referencing the "McAdoo Letter" ar.d adding g - some special requirements. Under Special Requirements it st.ates that "for Code Material a Certified Mill Test Report on Certificate of Conformance and any
, required radiographs a re required."
r , The Westinghouse certification system had .t'hree docu-ments: g (2) a Quelity Assurance Release ' 2
' (2) a copy of the purchase order -
(3) a copy of the equipment specifications
'TVA cieets parts 2 end 3 by stating these items are included in the procurement documents supplied to the construction efte by the procuring organizatten. Part '
I was rnet by its being supplied by the vendor or by "a Q'B. TVA did not go into the degree et detail in L describing its sys tere as Westinghouse did, it did not 7 address the criticism that the AEC had of the Vesting- g house description, nor did it have en NRC er AIC eriticism er acceptence of its program; The Vesting-house three part system was acceptable in its bare D form, but the detailed method cf implementation of the ' system was net acceptable to NRC and the "McAdco E 1.etter" described what Westinghouse hed to do to make it acceptable.
^*.
. ID-QAP 17.2 describes the rnethod of transferring ew records frem EN DES end CONST to NUC PR.e h'UC PR is the ultimate user of the records being ecllected and -
generated end, therefore, must be in s'ponition to use those records. The responsibilities of EN DES include C - receiving, stering, maintaining, indexing, and trans-i-
. ferring to b'UC PR supplier QA records (except receiv-ing intpection reporte) required by centract specifi-c a ti en t. . ,
CONST responsibilities include receiving, rtoring, and r.aintaining supplier QA records. CONST also arranged fer the transfer of QA records to h'UC FR k~ es required by the 3D-QAP. These QA records, cf course, include much rnore then vender-supplied records. g k m.
Y. ATTACHMENT D NUC PR was required to arrept the QA records ! rum N CONST and EN DES and maintain them. MEDS had the responsibility of coordinating microfilming and dis-tributing EN DES and CONST QA records h to NUC PR. D. lpplementation of Oualftv_ Assurance Record Requirements i Af ter the responsibilities of the various organi:stions were i defined by t.he 1D-QAPs, each organization then had to have a means to implernent the requirements allocated to it. OEDC used the Quality Assurance Program Requirements Manual for Design, Procurement, issued procedures. and Construction (PRM). Under this, each division EN DES used Engineering Procedures f or this purpore and CONST used Quality Assurance Procedures and Construc-tien Procedures. .. PFJi 17Q PR-1, " Program Responsibilities, R1, November 15, 1982 ( (R0 issued June 29, 1982), assigned' responsibilities.to EN DES and CONST. plier QA records EN DES responsibilities included maintaining sup-until turned over to MEDS and ' assuring that supplier records were identifiable and retrievable and in a ' [h
- 4. E l system compatible with NUC PR and CONST requiremer.ts.
responsibilities included assurance that CONST and contractor CONST records phase. are identifiable and retrievable during the construction , CONST was also required to maintain supplier records , until turned over to EN DES (MEDS). PRM 17 QPD-1, "Hanagement and Engineering Data Systems ' RO, April 2, 1979, stated that r1EDS was responsible for all(MEDS)," phases ef the records management function and ensuring that all 4 records proEram activities were in accordance with industry codes and standerds and Pederal regulations. It also stated th:t documents which furnish evidence of quality of items and/or activities affecting quality or documents which have expected retrieval sent significance for any OEDC organization or for TVA, are to tiEDS. No mention was made about distribution of microfilm. '
- 1. Quality En gi ne e ri ng Branch Activities of QEB in the area of vendor QA records were controlled by procedures. the following division-wide engineering EN DES-EP 5.4, " Release of QA Items Prom Suppl.iers' Shops to Construction Site," E6, April 1, 1982, and the branch-wide engineering p ocedures QEE-IP 24.11,
" Inspection - General Instructions," RO, March 4, 19E3; QEB-EP 24.37, " Produce Compliance Data and Quality Engi-neering Records and Disposal," RO, January 22, 1982; and j QEE-EP 24.5E, "llandling of Supplier Records," El,
- Septernber 1,19E2 (R0 issued February 9, 1979).
It thould be noted that the issue dates for two of the three branch engineering procedures were in 1982 and 19E3. Prior to 1982, there was very little in the way of a formal , n
* ' * ^
/$TTACIL*iENT D Page 13 of 44
'..~... . .
O O program in ef fect f or the Knoxville of fice of QEB. This was verified in conversation with the Supe,evisor, field Operations and others within the QEB organization.
- a. EN DES-EP 5.43 This EP described the method for setting up a contract file at the regional offices and the Knoxville office.
It described the duties of the regional inspector and of the QEB personnel in Knoxville. One duty of the TVA inspector was to verify that "perf ormance test reports are accurate end. complete and that documentary evidence exists that the items conform to procurement requirements, including cali-bration of test tools and equipment." Also, the I inspector " handles" supplier test reports and other
, data" as follows:
(1) Sends cable test reports, performance test reports, and other data that require QEB er technical
,g m engineer approval to Central QC Enoxville, as fg.] they are obtained.
(2) Requests the supplier to send data packages for structural and piping loose material and code
' data report forms for items which require /sSHE Code, Sect'.on Ill, N-sy=bol stampics to the jobsite with the shipment, unless otherwise specified by the contract.
(3) Handles other vessels, components, and equipment items in accordance with the contract require-ments or as directed by the Chief, QEB. (4) At the end of the contract er purchase order, sends the data files to Central QC, Knoxville, for microfilming unless otherwise specified by the ' contract or inst ructed by QEB. \
- b. OEB-EP 24.11 1
This EP was issued on flarch 4, lJ'E3, and replaces the TVA Inspection Manual. The procedure is a general instruction on the practice of inplant inspection (source surveillance) by TVA. In section 7.3.7, "Tinc1 Reports," it is stated that, "pinal reports are nor=elly used to close out a. contract file. The Central QC Staff reviews the file for completion after i l dirt ributien of the final report." l
)
I
- ATTACWiENT D
. . O @ Page 14 of 44
- e. OEB-EP 24.37 Under Section 1.0, " Purpose and Scope," It was stated '
that "this EP covers the inclexing and preparation of Product Compliance Data and Quality Engineering Records produced and received by QEH." Under Section 2.0,
" Policy," it was further stated that "the QEB is
- responsible for the storage of Product Compliance Data and Quality Engineering Records during the manufactur-ing stage of contracts set up for inspection." In-cluded in,t'hese responsibilities was the orderly transfer to of records from QEB to tfEDS for transmittal NUC PR. ,
In section 4.1, it was stated that the QC Unit Super-visor " accu =ulates Product Compliance Data and Quality r' Engineering Eecords by project; ensures that the data / records a re complete and a ccura te." ,The QC Supervisor was also required to turn,,over. records to the QEB Records Unit. ' -
By this EP, tiEDS microfilms the data packages and fQt) w.a sends a copy of the microfilm t.o QEB and to the re-lated plantsite, d ., OEE-EP 24.58 In Part 1. " Purpose and Scope," it was stated that "this EP outlines the methods that QEB uses in handl-ing supplier records for TVA contracts requiring inspection by QEP.. This EP applies to supplier reecrds submitted to QEB to furnish proof of com- , pliance with the requirements of the contract." The EP also instructed the TVA inspector to prepare a ! detailed index identifying the number of packages or boxes, what records are contais.ed in each package or box, and to what piece of equipment the records apply. The inspecto.rfvas then instructed to send the records i to Knoxville. The Knoxville unit supervisor was directed to receive, review, and check the records against the original records checklist.
- He was then i..structed to further index the records, if necessary, and ceintain them until turned over to the QEB Eccords Unit.
2. Division of Construction (CONST) The CONST Quality Arsurance Program f or records is set E forth 19E2. in QAFP-17, " Quality Assurance Eecords," RS, June 30, Very little ruidanec is given in this policy state-ment concerning vendor generated QA documentation, does, however, it state that QA records shall be identifiable s
.. p w
- e o
ATTACIMENT D v Oage15of44 and traceable to the item or activity, they shall be retriev-able, and they shall be maintained in a systematic and controlled manner. At Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, SNP Construction Procedure No.
- P-8, " Quality Assurance Records ," R16, Februa ry 18, 1983, described the manner in which QA records are prepared, reviewed, handled, cla s s i fied, tempora rily s tored a t the construction site, and transferred to hTC PR.
In Procedure P-8, Section 6.C.4, "QA Records Originated Offsite,," it was stated that "QA records received a t the site which were prepared by vendors or other TVA'orSaniza-tions shall be incorporated into the site cont ract file." l This requirement was established in revision 13 dated November 11, 1977. In Procedure P-8, Section ~6.C, " Transferring Eecords to NUC PR," part 2, it was stated'that the Quality Controj and Records Unit (QCRU) will arrange for EDS to microfilm all a , QA records with manual folder level indexing. Also,'the microfile was nc :) to be returned to QCRU for transfer to hTC PR. Norutierofilmable in hard copy. In section QA records were to.be transferred to bTC PR
, 6.C.4, it was stated that the _
transfer of QEE supplier radiographs vill be made by EN DES. 3. Manarement and Engineering Data Systems (MT.DS ) The eperations of MEUS was described in their procedure book. March 25, In MP 13.01, "Backfile Documents - Processing," RO, 1981, it was stated that E DS receives requests from user orEani:stions to film backfile documents. MEDS
- then goes through the mechanics of fileing, including a setting of priority using ettsch. ment 2 (this attachment was not available). After filming, MEDS distributes index and a "
film to organizations requesting cupies. MP 12.07, "ProceIsing Site-Originated Quality Assurance ' Records - Sequoyah and Watts Ea r Nuclear Plants," RO, Ma rch 4, -- 1982, described the mechanics for bringing the records from the construction ~ site Ifsted to Knoxville to be filmed. - One' responsibility cf the MEDS user representative was to deliver the index, all illegibler, and the applicable , number to hTC PR. of cepies of microfilm to the site QCRU for transfer 9 1 Jn MP 14.01, " Document Processing - Overview," RO, He reh 4 ' 1961, it stated that for documents processed in the MEDS : online tyr. tem, MEDS received docitments from user organiza-tions prepared in accordance with instructions in MEDS _ Handbook or releted EPs, CF s, end AIs.
.. ..>w,
$N.NiN$ -
N ATTACFDiENT D g Page 16 of 44 g E. Handling Practice > for Vendor-Suppli,ed_gA Records g Discussions were held with ruernbers of QEB, MEDS, CONST, and NUC PR to ascertain actual practices in the flow path of vendor " QA records f rom the vendor to the ultimate user of the commodity W and ultimate holder of the offical records--NUC PR. The flow of k, records to SQN was chosen bec.iuse it was the newest operational nuelser plant in the TVA system and the last unit had been in k corznercial ope ration grea ter t han six months , thus required by y y the TVA Topical Report to have all QA records onsite at the time y of this investigation. Areas covered in the investigation .Y process included accumulation of records, review for accuracy and corepleteness, storage, indexing of contract files, and transmittal of the records. The actual review of randoraly g
,, u selected completed contracts is described in section Ill.T.
g l 1. Quality Engineering Branch ' e g As described in sections Ill.C and .D above, the overall handling of vender QA records has followed.an evolutionary process. g Members of the QEB organi::ation stated that their - C-
' files were the of ficial files during the life of an active D contract and until the file was transmitted to anot'her ^
-r-group. The branch chief stated that the QEB files lose _
their offical status when the files are transmitted to MIDS Q for filming and the film has been reviewed by QEB. QEB ' E personnel stated NUC FR had told them that h*UC PR did not $ know what they wanted or needed in the way of QA records g end that b'UC FR did not want end could not physically store ~ hard copies of QEB's reentds. Correspondence on this prob- r lem was renerated in 1977. Ultimately some QEB centract , files were shipped in 1977 in hard copy to SQN CONST, and y each file included every document QEB had st the time, p t{
- Apprently no effort was made to eliminate non-QA inferr.a-tion or dupliention.
The problem of what the retjuired QA documents would consist N g-of for any given commodity also presented a problem to QEB. M-Personnel stated that contract spi:ifications, until very k-recently, were vWgue rega rding the required vendor QA
2 .
do cumente ti nn. This vagueness was described as resulting in the regional inspectorr, having to negotiate with each _, t vender about what records the vendor was willlng to supply. 1 Therefore, doeurtentation for like commodities varied from 3e vendor to vendor and may only include a vendor certificate of compliance or may include as much as a data packaEe, k including certification ,f compliance, mill certifications, M
, test reports, etc. g ge There was no practice of routinely transferring QED records to CONST, and it appears that QEB records were transferred at only two titie periods when they were running out c f g file space in QEB. *
. - n
3 f.? , .[gg h a* h- -
. ATTACRMENT D P l O O age 17 of 44 1 In about 197:1n van (one permn rernlled it being a 12-font
' moving van) wea illied with QEB records for BlN and trana-ferred to BFN. In 1977 two shipments of hard copy records were transferred to SQN CONST by QEB after being filmed by MEDS. The QEB Branch Chief said CONST could not physically accept records before then. Other QED personnel recalled l that they were out of file space and needed to make room,
^
l They further recalled this was a hurry-up operation requir- ! l ing overtime work, and the files were not reviewed for
]
completeneen. One shipment of Mechanical / Nuclear Unit records to SQN l CONST consisted of 27 boxen (presumed by NSRS to he 1 - f o o t.3 l l per box because this was the mnst common size) rentaining j j 377 cornpleted contracts. These contract files ranged in j size from very small, 116 contracts contained in 3 boxes, l l to very large, I contract contained in 5 boxes. There was I r' no documentation of transmittal produced for this shipment) however, SQN CONST had n'enpy of the index produced for the l transfer with written-in file drawer locations. - l Another shipment was made on October 19, 1977, from.the
%_. design project manager to the SQN Project Hansger. This
,N shipment consisted of 28 boxes containing 348 contracts. As with the previous shipment, QEB stated all files were j
. filmed by MEDS before shipment. Copics of the film were possessed by KEDS and CEB and NUC FR Central Office.
Indexing for these films uns manual, not in the MEDS data i base, and included the centract number, vender name, and a I very general description of the ecmmedity. SQN CONST had no recad of this shipnrent but found the records associated with these transfers after the NSRS inquired about their disposition. It was believed by CONST that the first shipment was incorporated into the CONST filen developed for the same contreets, but they later determined thet the records were net i nco rpo ra ted. A similar transf er wns rnade to BLN in 1977. No record of
. any t ransfer of QEll records to VBN could be found. There was no recorded trans f er of QEll records to SQN since 1977;
,however, both QEB nnd SQN CONST persennel remember that several boxes of contract files were sent by QEB to CONST in the 1979-80 time period nnd returned becabue CONST said they did not know wl.et to do with them.
QEB maintains a enrd fije on centracts requiring QED source inspection iesued since about 1965. On these cards such
- informati:;n is meinteined ni. contract number, vendor, responsible unit supe elsor, whetheir the contract is nctive or complete, end i f the records file has been transferred.
QEB also mainteined n computer!:ed data base on all active centracts from which completed contracts were removed Diter the contract has been completed Ibr about three mcnthr..
- 3r
{z. 'E.', .J l . '
- k =* ; Y A e ATTAcgqui p -
p age 18 of 44 ~ 0 i There was no Jist other t h.in t he rurd file for completed contracts. QEB is present ly th veluping such a last. As such, it would be extremely difficult to identify all completed contracts for a given plant. Only one unit , supervisor, lustrumentation, maintained such a list. Compa ring his list of contracts, which also contained
- disposition of record information, against the Jist of records sent to SQN in 1977 revealed several interesting points.
Of the 248 completed contracts listed by the unit supervisor, only 172 or 69 percent have been sent to CONST. ! Of those contract files still in QEB's possession, some had bee.n reopened, which was common practice to avoid issuinE a new contract, but the records for the commodities produced under the contract fi rs t issuance remained as well. Within the six boxes of the Instrumentation Unit's records sent in 1977, one contract--76K52-820lS7'4--with Standard Pipe & Supply Company was shown on the QEB index sent with the r' records. This was not a contract on the Instrumentation Unit supervisor's list nor.vas it on the QEB list of filmed SQN records. SQN CONST could not find that; contract with the nther QEB recordr.. [.1 Comparing the list of filmed cont racts f or SQN agains t the Q'~ QEB list of contracts weretransferred contract files revealed that four not filmed, contrary to QEB's belief (73C55-83535-5, 74C56-83612-B, 73C35-E3571-2, 74C57-25443). Another discrepancy found was that the contents of boxes 21 and 28 shipped on October 18, 1977, had identical contents. Of the records sent by the Mechanical / Nuclear Unit in 1977, there are several dir.crepancies which appear to be type-graphical errors between the listed contract numbers en the hard copy sent to SQN and the filmed list. Of more signi-ficance, two boxes of rererds (boxes 1 and 2 standard com-ponents) believed to be shipped by the unit supervisor had not been filmed and could not be found by SQN CONST. An additionel four contracts on the list of contracts sent were not on the list of filmed contracts (74C56-83612-B, 74C54-83635-6, 74C54-E3635-8, 74P63-14703). These dis-crepancies were communicated to the Qf.B Eranch Chief for his action. The Chief. QEB, said they would like to turn ' ova- '-'ed files to EDS for their filming and distributor... ...mt conths e f ter a contract was completed, lie furt her s ta ted that MEDS could not A completed contract keep up with the volume of QEB recerds. to QEB meant all the compunents required on a contract had been shipped from the vendor's site and did not necessarily mean that TVA had all the paperwork, in the past records it was QEB's responsibility to transfer their to CONST and the branch chief delegated that respon-tibility to his unit supervisors. In the opinion of the Field Operations Superviror, QEB Joes not have to maintain
. t.
ATTACHMENT D P age 19 of 44 O l their records : in an indexed or easily retrievable manner. Jndexing and organization f or retrievability is required only when the records are t rans f erred to MEDS. With regard to radiographic (RT) film produced by the vendors during their tests, QEB stated they do not want to handle it because they don't have the storage facilities for those kind of records. , RT film until asked for or send it with the equipment.The vendor { was s general, QED personnel were unclear as to the dispositionIn of RT film and when, how, or if TVA received possession of it. Of the contracts reviewed by NSRS, the contract lan-guage regarding RT film was equally vague. It specifically stated that at the completion of the contract the film became the property of TVA, but did not specify how or if TVA would take possession. j' a. . Mechenical/ Nuclear Unit This unit consists of a unit supervisor and an SL and an SE responsible for all NSSS and mechanical con t ra c t s . 4Q{} For the NSSS contracts the vendor is w.' responsible for collecting all QA records and turning - tnem over to TVA at some predesignated time.
. With the TVA direct contracts under this unit, the vender QA records are (1) maintained by the vender until told to release them, or (2) collected and QEB cffice by the regional office until the Knoxville maintained itally sent requests they he sent in, or (3) period-by the regional office to Knoxville.
Because of the vagueness in consensus standards and contract specifications regarding required QA docu-mentation, the unit supervisor stated it was difficult to have any consistency in records. Skid-mounted equipment, for exaeple, was described as having no governing consensus standard, and considerable negoti-ation by the regional inspector was required to estab-lish what QA documents the vendor was willing to produce. creese in the In some cases this could result in en in-contract cost. The unit supervisor stated he relied heek'ily upon the regional inspector and his ability to verify tha t the connodity met contreet specifications and that the documentation was con:plete and accurate. Menpower within this unit was described as insufficient to ~h adequately review the QA recordr as they errive; spot checking is the best they could do. - he stated that some one of-a-kind records are maintained by the vendors until asked for, but was unable to specify how the TVA request for these records would come about. E
_ _ r.n . zum '
.~ msd8d 'e ' M ' ,
.,,',' ATTACHMENT D Page 20 of 44 The supervisor stated that approximately 200-300 Furthermore,activecontractswerebeingadmini6geredbyhis unit.
approximately 140 feet of records on completed contracts boxes in a for that unit were being stored in two-hour fire-rated room at QEB. The boxes were stacked on top of coch other with a contract
- number on the outside, visor that approximately four man years would beit was estim requ. ired to go through his them, and put them in order.completed files , review With reFard to the 1977 shipment of records to SQH, the supervisor recalls it was that he personally took a done very rapidly and van Ic'ad down to SQN CONST.
No emphasis was placed upon. reviewing them for accu-racy or putt'ns the records They were indexed only to the contractin some logical order. [ A copy of the index was"that or file level. supplied to the investigators The supervisor believed . but could not be certain. the recordsfwere complete ,(;h}a Records from his group were to be transferred when a Qy? contract was complete to the QEB Records Unit for filming and transmittal to CONST. He said that the Records Unit was not and the unit supervisors were able to keep up with the records records. told to hold on to their b. Civil / Architectural Unit i This unit censists of a supervisor end twe technical staff members rer.pensible for administration e( con- .. tracts for commodities which correspend to what title implies. their ' concensus standa rds and centractAs with the Mechanical /L; clear specification were described as vague in some areas regarding required vendor QA documentation. This results in negotiations with vendors regarding the QA documents they will supply. ' For some contracts administered by this unit, bulk quantities of structurel steel, piping, etc. the QA documentation nnd mill certifications we,re se,nt with the commodity receive a copy. to CONST at the site, and QEB did not For other vendor produced commodi-ties,.QEBinspector. regional received the QA documentation from the i vided by the vendor, then a copy was sentIf more than one copy w
.) with the conmodity. to the site .
Tor SON, however, the unit supervisor stated that only QEB received the QA documentation; 7 This unit the site did not. ter for essuring the QA documentation isAscorrectsupervinor .
~
.. 'd, . -
%Y E!?..i O ATTACHMINT D
@ Page 21 of M l .
the cont ract inforsantion is rerefved by this unit, it is werefiled until the the contract is complete. They Records Unit when they could receive them. reviewed The nuper-visor stated that they w review of all files sentere approaching 100 percent However, he said the Records to the QEB Unit hadRecords Unit. a backlog of records and none had been sent in about a year. Currently he3 estimated that his unit had between 100-200 feet and the regional offices had aboutof completed file records in Kno shipped to QED in Knoxville. 200-300 feet to be He estimated three to four man years of work would be required to review and index the files he currently has before sending them to the Records Unit. He sal'd the Records Unit "unfor-tunately" is indexing the files they currently have ( anddodosen't to believe they.,have had sufficient guidance it properly. He stated makes that but thet washethewould Recordlike to job. Unit's e revi' w the file EDS h 3 ThU This supervisor stated he sent some records, he could not about remember which ones for sure, to SQN CONST in 1979 or 1980 but they were returned. There was no record of transmittal found by QEB.
- e. Meldmente Ung This unit, under the direction of a supervisor and one engineer, f abrication of large components. administered contracts involving out This unit was created Units and was innotof bothin the existence 1977. Mechanical / Nuclear and Civ With rega rd to QA records, of the vendor data packege to be r. hipped with thethis unit required connodity and required the offical QEB copy to be maintained by;the regional office. Approximately three cienths af ter the completion of a contract, the Veldments Unit Supervisor would the region to Knoxville. request the records be sent from Reviewing his unit's list of
, completed contracts for SQN revealed one completed for over a year that had not been called in.
Prior,to the file. a record shipment, the region was to index
, According to the unit supervivor, additional indexing was perfomed in Knoxville by QEB end finelly MEDS.
!!e f urther stated intelligence ves prepared for files describing the Illing system to aid retrievability .
am.
ny , e g,-c S O % d d ~ Q WhM '
" *5 7 ' ' 2 '
te O 1 ". " \ J g ATTAC&iENT D
~
age 22 of M 1 . Reviewing the recently completed file on the Bellefonte containment, filling five cabinet drawings, transferred to the Records Unit; it took about three hours to track down the pedigree of a component for the pola r
- crane using the combined talent of the person indexing the file, the unit supervisor, and by telephone the l
TVA resident inspector at the vendor's site.
- d. Instrumentation Unit This unit...under a supervisor and one engineer, admin-inters contracts for instrumentation requiring source inspection. This was the only unit that maintained a working document 11 sting all contracts handled by the unit including the disposition of the contracts' records.
! Unlike the previous three units, the Instrumentation ' [ Unit contracts were described as rnore specific regard-ing the required QA documentation. This unit required the QA docitmentation to be sent to the site with the comodity and to QEB Knoxville as it was generated. The documentation was reviewed for completenerin in g.,g et*q Knoxville, but not technient accuracy. The regional
% s' inspector was relied upon to provide the technical review necessary to assure a quality product. The
' regional office also maintained files on the contracts and was considered the duplicate file for this unit.
This unit had some contracts previously completed that were reopened to purchase additional equipment. In those cases the documentation for the previously completed portion remained a part of the contract file. The unit supervisor stated that the QtB Record Unit was unable to accept any records for the lest two years so they had been huilding up in his, filer. He also stated that the Records Unit clerks, for the most part, do the contract indexing. e. Electrical In.it-This unit, under a supervisor and two 'enginee r s , administers contracts requiring source inspection under their purview. According to the unit supervi-ser, like the Instrumentation Unit contracts, the specifications in contracts regarding QA records are adequate. ReFarding QA records, this unit supervisor required the regional inspector to review them for completeness end accuracy. Wen natisfied, the regional inupector would send eight copies to QEB Knoxville where they j I c.
v pgC#V*
. . . ~
~ .
ATTACHMENT p Page 23 of 4.4 O O were reviewed axnin for completeness and accuracy. ; When satistled, the Electrital Unit Supervi6er would
- then send seven ropies of the QA records to the techni- E ral engineer for review, npproval, and distribution. b This unit supervisor expressed concern regarding the transfer they wereof nothis records to the hecords Unit. lie felt (
capable of adequately handling them. 1[e i further stated he had never sent any records to the L Recorda 1979, seven UnfLfeet and3 was M uctant to do so3, but in about L, of SQU und seven feet of VBN records were taken from him and sent to the Records Unit. , QEBa had recognir.ed that a problem existed with their records and 4 number of actions and program changes had begun. The " inspection load of the regional offices had decreased and
- those personnel were being used to review files for com-pleteness. I' T
l . A recent procedural chanEe to procurement 2 specifications v!11 require' future venders to supply a list y of QA documents they vill provide to show' compliance with the contract specifications. OEB was also developing a y px list of all contracts they hed handled since 1965, includ-FM inE the disposition of the contract and location of' the k
*' contract file.
A data base for QEB records had been devel- E oped and was in the testing and evaluation stageu. 2.
. Q FIDS c.a A discussion was held with the MEDS Branch Chief regarding -
the rolewere records of MED5 in QEB records. He stated that once the filmed end indexed (for either cemputer aided or manual retrieval) by MIDS, they became the official documents. i He knid that for QT.B and CONST QA records, MEDJ & performs the filming and QEB end CONST were responsible 'or Le distribution of the film to N'lC PR. He stated that con-riderable effort had been expended in develeping a data ' base for QA records which could be queried on the document level. Th.s system would include both QEB and CONST records.
- Vnen asked ; f NUC.FR would have access to this, he stated that POWER in Chnfianoogn had a MEDS terminal and could use it E if they wanted to, but their experience had been that NUC form that PRbTC did PR notcouldwantuse, MEDS taterial because it vos not in a that'MEDS was lie also expressed the position -
for OEDC not POWER, and MEDS would not put '~ the records in a form NUC PR would like. The branch chief L.- stated that.the new data base would be used on currently produced QA records and olc'er QA records would be added as time permitted, probably taking several years. y ins., Vith force reEardwas to a question on duplication of records, a task " identified by the branch chief which was review- 5N' ing records produced by OEDC and specifying on a specific hasis which groups of records were 'to be rettined and which I s N
ra # 2 ' > w alt *:" m,,. "
. - _ ~ wout
* * /
ATTACEMINT D Page 24 of 44 " O O were t o be di s ca rded. Copice of the tank forte reportu for SQN CONST and QEB were reviewed and to noreduce effort duplication between the two nets of records could he found. The^ task force representative from that NUC reviewed CONST PR, the division that records did not have a the retained CONST records. would receive
" force report and determined there were records the task HUC PR did review scheduled f or destruction requested that that HbC PR wanted to retain. HUC PR l were. they be included in the transfers and they I
! Interviews were held with the QEB MEDS representative. The l representative stated that MEDS would index completed een-l tract files to the package level. In doing so KEDS would look for any obvious errors and, if found, would send the ! file back to QEB for correction. A rough estimate of the
, MEDS cade byworkload in QEB for all' QED-inspected contracts was the representative T as follows: -
a.
- b. Completed contracts in QEB Records Un'it 7 150 ft 3 Completed contracts in QEB Materials ~
Engineer possession
,;ps 04- M c.
Open contracts in Meterials Engineer $20 ft 3
- - A possession 345 ft 3 The KEDS representa tive assumed one cubic foot of files would fill a 2300 image roll of film, and two cubic feet of records per week could be made camera ready by the three MIDS clerical persons in the Records Unit. Using these a s s urepti ons ,
19 person years for KEDS Records Unit person-nel alone could be expended nn currently completed records. This that are does notnot include the files held by the regional effices duplicates of QEB Knoxville file material or records found in QEB files previously sent to the TVA records center which require filming. Discussions with QF,B Records Unit clerPs revealed that they had been expected to index and organize completed ' contracts without sutficient Euidante.
~
they were just ex)eeted to know how to index.They stated that they di6 the best they could. Consequently. - to document a procedure for indexing.One clerical person attempted This was the only guidance, described by them, they had to work with. . 3. Division of Cons t ruct,,io_n1 e,gueysh S Huelea r Plant In addition to CONST generated QA records involvinE CONST activities at SQN, large quantities of vender generated snd . TVA-relsted QA documentation is accumulated. Vendcr Eener-
- part documentation includes that which is provided as a ated of contracts requiring QF.B r.ource inspection. CONST personnel interviewed indicated that they believed their records were complete nnd QF.B rechrds only duplicated what ,,
_. , _ w.u,w & a 25Y *
/, .
- ATTACmiENT D . Page M of 44 -
O O they had. Fersonnel recalled that sevrral boxes of QEh records .irrived one day (in the 19 79- 19f>0 t ime per i od), and they did not know what to do with them. glancing through the Personnel recalled records CONST had already.recorda They indicated and sawit duplication would be a of those large effort t o t. ry t o
- and since they saw no value in doing so, chose notincorporate the t CONST ultimately sent to.
the records back to QEB in Nnoxville. Questions about records shipped to them in 1977 trom QED produced some consternation because those currently involved with CONST 04 records were not involved in the 1977 records transfer. Documentation was produced which indicoted the l QEB undocumented shipment of records by the ricehanical/ Nuclear Unit Supervisor in 1977 had been received und persumed incorporated int.o the CONST files. This was a rrived at by CONST f rom the fact that file drawer numbers ( were CONSTwritten was next to each *:ox on the index supplied by QEB. informed that based upon the NSRS review of the > film of CONST QA records, had been incorporated into the CONST files.it did not appear that QEB records he found of the formal October 1977 shipment No record could Stack. from Pierce to dh and index. NSRS provided CONST with a copy of the transmittal M " A few days later, CONST informed NSRS that QED G
~
records shipped in 1977 were found still in file cabinets in another buildinE. indexes , CONST det. ermined thatReviewing what was found against the two boxes were c:ssinE. NSRS inferrned QEB of this discrepancy for their action. A large portion of the CONST QA records had been filmed "
,(over SQN.
200 rells of film) and the film given to NUC PR ut - CONST stated they did not have a machine to review the film the film was produced by KEDS and, therefore, did not know if complete or readable. CONST just gave the film to NUC PR. " of thc CONST informed NSRS, based tipon their use film ut SQN NUC PR, that about 80 percent of the film for SQN unit 1 CONST records was illegible and the ori Einal records had been destroyed. In a discussic.i wim the CONST tiaterial Inspection Group e(MIC) contractSupervisor, he stated thut each piece supplied under requir8.nE source inspection is inspected against contract specifications, vender and QEH documentation. including the presence of required I If the vendor documente'.icn or QEB release for shipment form is not present, the com-medity is rejected unless QEB verbally authori:cd its acceptance by telephone. Themanufacturing put CONST QAand records clerk stated that venders sometimes test data plied. These manuals were given, in equipment manuals sup- n
/
NUC PR in hard copy; they were notaccording filmed. to CONST, to SQN g p Gu In
Page 26 of 44
- ~
ATTACRMENT D O O L'ith regard they had not to vendor radiographic (RT) I'.lm. CONST stated seen any f ilm rome onsite in yea rs . CONST stated they recieved about two boxes of Chicago Bridge and Iron RT film for the indexed. containment from QEB and it was not 4 Division of Nuclear Power - Senuovah Nuclear Plnnt L In discussions with SQN NUC PR personnel, they stated that they received QA records control had custody of it.on film from CONST and document The filmed records received admittedly were not reviewed for accuracy or completeness by any of the QA or engineerisig groups. They were reviewed only for readability by document control. Fernonnel at SQN NUC PR stated they did not know-what should be in the QA records they receive. They further stated that they had a
. difficult time finding anything in them and generally CONST I, personnel were requested to go through the film to find something for NUC PR.
A manual index in loose-leaf form was provided with the film. on the folder level, i.e., contract The indexing'alevel.was generally number only. The g w, largest contract observed by NSRS was contained on 13 fQs@3 rolls of film generally indexed to the contract number and
-93 < some other unidentified lower-tiered number.
Tilm was stored by document control in two locations--the vault and in the document control file area in the adminis-tration building. The offical files were considered to be the film and any unfilmable hard copies from the records filmed and any other hard copy records were considered to be duplication. Test records not found in any other file rystem at QEB CONST or NUC PR were f ound in wha t was con-sidered the duplicate hard copy file at SQN. Vendor manuals transferred by CONST to NUC PR are con-sidered by SQN NUC PR to be for information only. The Office.vendor manunl was supplied by che NUC PR Central offical Vendor RT file Eeceived by document control was sent to the U. 5. Government Record Center in East Point, GA. Records, generally by system or component, were mainteined by docu-ment storage. control specifying what RT film had been sent to The list was quite sm:11 and included only main coolent components. Construction produced RT film was stored in the NUC PR and
. CONST vaults.
T. Randomjy Selected Contract Tile Fl_ow _ - Me t hodol ory After studying the operations of QLU, it was decided thut sinec UUC FR vas the ultimate user of vendor generated QA records, a -
ATTACaiENT D Page C7 of 44 v. g g - l i verification of records actually under the control of NUC PR l would be performed. in order to do this, SQN was selected as I l the NUC PR facility on which to perform the record check. First, contract file records were selected at the QEB office in Knoxville for review. The contracts were selected to be repre-sentative of each section in QEB. Fifteen contracts were selected in' total. After their review in Knoxville, the files for the gl i same contracts were reviewed in SQN NUC PR and were then reviewed in SQN CONST. A comparison of each contract file was made to w\ g ensure that the information required to be generated and trans-g g mitted by the vendor was actually going through TVA's prescribed routing to NUC PR. In general, contract files were found .in varying degrees of completeness with no generni organi ational .l style and with portions of flies in multipje locations. More l i complete files were found in the possesrion of QEB Knoxville. - I but again in multiple locations. Specifically within QEB com- . pleted files were found in hard. copy'in the possesion of the unit supervisors, in a two-hour fire-rated room, in the QEB Records Unit files, in the Chicago Regional office files held by the QEB Records Unit and segregated from the Knoxville QEB,
.S'.1 files, and in microfilm in the QEB Records Unit. Portions'of "7 the ancie completed contract were found both in hard copy and in g '
l microfilm, which had been made in 1977, in the QEB Records Unit. l . At SQN CONST the hard copy files previously tranferred by QEB l were found stored in hard copy in a location different than vhere CONST maintained their vendor QA records. All but about s l six file cabinets of CONST vendor QA records hed been micro- [ filmed and given to NUC FR. E t l NUC PR had CONST film on file and had httd copy files for vender contracts which hUC FR believed to be duplicate records. k NSRS determined, however, that NUC PR's hard copy filc, in fact, had information not found in any otiser file. Most, but not .sil, of the files in QEB's possession appeared - complete. Microfilmed filen at NUC PR and, therefore, CONST were incomplete. had the'QEB ffles in CONST's possession been incorporated into the CONST files, NUC PR would have what would appear to be complete files for mnst of the contrnets reviewed. This would exclnde, of course, those centracts wher.e QED only ~ shipped portions of the completed contract filc. L None of the files in the various locations followed a set style of orpenization. Some vere found in reverse chronological order, some by items produced, some by category of information (cor- - despondence, tests, etc.), some with a combination of the above styles , and son:e in no logical order. Each i11e contained what was considered to be superfluous infor-nation, :.uch as multiple copier, of contrpets and attachments and multiple topies of correspondence and irrelevant correspondence. a
.[4 '
ATTACHMENT D . Page 28 of 44
- O O l
Microfilmed files contained t e same multiplicities and also included . machine repf es of test pat terns, envelopes, and blank pages. that No information was found in any contract file reviewed the file had ever been reviewed for completeness and no index was found adequate enough to allow someone looking for information to find it without going through the complete file. In fact,
' file that had been indexed to athe retrieval cf specific information from greater extent than most required the unit supervisor, and the site by three hours of coordinated effort the Knoxville QEB indexer, inspector via telephone.
The following is a. listing of the contracts reviewed. Addi-tional inf ormation can be f ound in the review sunrna ry f or ea ch contract in attachment 2. l NSSS/Hechanical Section l
- 1. Atmospheric Relief Valves '92697 I
- 2. Auxiliary Control Air Dryers - E3630-1 3.
- 4. Auxiliary Control Air Dryers, Dewpoint Alarm,- 83630-2 Vertical Turbine Pumping Unite - 92609
- 5. Steam Generator Safety Valves - 92696 '
n.:%
%:N w Civil Structural
- 6. ,1ce Condenser Seals - 82064
- 7. lee Condenser llinge Blocks - E23844 B.
- 9. Aluminum and Stainless Steel Honeycombed Cushions - E20345 l'O .
Missile Doors for Air Condit.ioning Entlesure - 67262 Reactor Supports - 75018 Instrumentation 11. Spare Diesel Generator and Exciter, Voltage Regulator - 825204 12. Level Switches - E3530-1 Electrical 13. 14. 6900-Volt Swith6 gear and Transf ormers - 54495 480-Vol't SwitchEear and Transformer - 54523 Weldments '
- 15. Accumulators, Pumps, CVCS - E26301 Also, the Bellefonte containment contract (weldments) was reviewed in the data. Knoxville QEB office, specifically for retrievability of .
t
o ,' .b
.i '
Page 2B of 44 e ' ATTECID4ENT D O flicrofilmed files contained the sue multiplicities and also included machine copies of test pat terns , envelopes, and blank pages. that No inf orma tion wa s found in any contract file reviewed the file had ever been reviewrd for completeness and no index was found adequate enough to allow comeone lookingfor
. information In fact, to find it without going through the coreplete file.
' file that had been indexed to athe retrieval of specific large information f rom one greater extent than mos t required three hours of coordinated effort .
the unit supervisor, and the site inspector via telephone.by the Knoxville QE g
- The following is a ' listing of the contracts reviewed. Addi-tional information can be found in the review sumrnary for each
. contract in attachment 2.
NSSS/ Mechanical Section
- 1. Atmospheric Relief Valves '92697
, I 2.
3. Auxiliary Control Air Dryers - 63630-1
- 4. Auxiliary Control Air Dryers, Dewpoint Alarm .- 83630-2 5.
Vertical Turbine Pumping Units - 92609 fi Steam Generator Sa f ety Valves - 92696 ' ree?n. f Civil Structural hv ! 6. 7. Ice Condenser Scain - 82064 8. Ice Condenser liinge Blocks - $23844
- 9. Aluminum and Stainless Steel Honeyeembed Cushions -
- 10. Missile Doors for Air Conditioning Enclosure - 87262 820345 Reactor Supports - 75018 Instrumentation 11.
Spare 825204 Diesel Generator and Exciter, Voltage Peguletor - 12. Level Switches - 83530-1 I Electrical 13. 14 6900-Volt Switchgeor and Transformers - 54495 480-Volt Switchgear and Transformer - 54523 Veldments '
- 15. Accumula tors , Pumps , CVCS - 826301 Also, in the the Dellefonte Knoxville QEBcontainment office, contract (weldments) was reviewed
, data. specifically for retrievability of .
e 7 $ es
,w.,a _ w
- ATTACHMENT D Page 29 of M O O IV. ANA!.YSIS During the investigation of QER rernrdu, it became apparent that the investigation must include to some extent activilles of groups involved with the records both before and after QEll, it was ultimate disposition of vendor supplied quality recordsbelieved and theirthat the usability to TVA needed to be addreseed in total bef ore a proper L evaluation and corrective action, 11 necessary, could be specified. ,
Along these lines the analysis has 6 sections addressing: been broken down into four sub- , SQN, (2) the usability of records (1) the availability of complete recordsg at
~
received by NUC PR, g of TVA's record system tu satisfy NHC requirements, and (4) the(3) the ability ; safety significance of QA records. I AlthouSh this report centers almost to and at SQN, there is no indicationentirely thnt upon the flow of records nlno apply to other TVA nuclear facilities. these findings would not L i A. Availability of Complete Pecords,,nt SQN Reviewing TVA's Topical NRC regulations contained in 10CTR50, Appendix B, and Report N: t implementing those regulations, it h,ecomes (sf very clear that all QA doenmentntion confirming that materials end equipment at SQN and met purchase specifications should now be j onsite. The regulations TVA'n implementation specifically state onsite--not but onsite. the central utlice, not the vendor's pinnt, a Trom discussions with QEB personnel and in reviewing their records it was establir.hed that SQH did not have all the records required. , F The only shi ment of QEB retnrds van made in 1977 and QED still had several hundred cubic feet of records plants.in Knoxville and en undetermined amountfor SQN in the andregional other nuclear offices. For the most part, QEh did not know how many completed contracts it had for SQN. QED pointed out that the sites did not want the recorris them. in hard copy because they did not have room for recordsBoth QEB and NUC PR stated that H'IC TR did not know what they wanted. [ Each organization--QEB,'1 CONST, HKl)S--appeared very protective of their own records and needs. 4011 had their records in a f orm they wanted and believed their rernrds were the official TVA vendor QA records. With regard to fnrm, units within QEB and records were maintained in five differentthere were five styles and levels of completeness. CONST, likewise, believed their records were more complete than QED's and were in a form i usable to them. CONST viewed QED records as duplicaten and unnetecsery. Therefore, QED returde v.cre either stored in
. separate file cabinets or returned to QEB and not incorporated J intoputCONST to records flies in n as their procedure required. MEDS was unwillinE records management group, form NUC PR tould use because they were OEDC's .
not to film records as nupplied and indexPOWER's, They, therciore, arranged the film on a file level '
. */ .
j', ATTACRMENT D 8 O O depending on how the file was arrnnged by the group having it Illmed. NUC PR on the receiving cud i>f t hne r ecords was whatever anyone wanted to give them and hoped no one would askt .s k i n g ' for the records aEvin. Not knowing what NUC PR wanted, both QEH and CONST took the conservative approach and filmed everything : they had in a ' contract file, including multiple copies of the contract and attachments. 'this was muEntfied by itEDS filming { n machine copied test patterns and blank pages because they were in the file. The results of thin mass filming was a con s i de ra bl e d amount of duplication.between QED and CONST. 4 I CONST had no capability of reviewing filtn produced by MEDS and l jus. forwarded the film to NUC PR. CONST stated that through g their use of the film in NUC PR possession, they estimste that 80 percent of the CONST generated QA records are unreadable and the hard copy has been dentroyed. i r' I Since QEB did not review the files for completeness prior to shipment in 1977, no one in QEB knows for sure.whe ther or not the records were complete. Errora were found in the 1977 docu-eentation by NSRS which showed that QED did not review wha t they
;.h;. thought they were sending SQN CONST either at the tic,e of s hip-ment orthose af terrecords.
the reported hectic time of assembling and trans-s mitting (I It appeared from discussions with QEB, CONST, MEDS, and SQN NUC PR that each was' unaware of the others required input or the needs of the records recipient. It appears that the general attitude was that thh QA records are required to g be stored onsite; therefore, send the records and don't worry about their usable value to the recipient. Considering TVA's assignment of responsibilities, both EN DES and CONST are responsible for providing documentation of the satisfactory desi En and construction of a nuclear power plent to the user (HUC FR). Included in this documentation are drawings, maintenance manuals, quality records, etc. If the sources of quality recordn associated with a piec; of equipment areas. were identified they would fall into three Beneral Those associated with quality in manufacturing, installa-tien, and maintenance. ~Two thirdr, of these records ere to be supplied by EN DES and CONST. - With those QA records and the QA records produced during maintenance, HUC PR is reciuired and should be able to retrieve records showing the pediE rce of a piece of equipment in a reasonable length of LJme. 1 During the investigation QEB stated that NUC PR would not specify what they wanted for QA records. It can be effectively arEued thet HUC.FR should not have to specify what is needed. Bened upon the regulatory requirements, the onsite required QA docu-rentation is to chow that a pit:ce of equipment meets the con-tract specifications. inspects EN DES prepares the r, specifications, the manuf acturing process, and collects the documenta- L tien proving to TVA's catisfection that the specifications have
, (
'? ATIACmiEliT D page M of 44 h
i been met. it follows then, that EN DES should he in the best position to decide what accords are needed to prove the contract specifications have been met, not HUC PR. A similar argument could be developed for CONST. 5 The monetary value placed upon these vendor produced QA documents ! is large. The QEB Branch Chief placed an additional 64 percent - l on the cost of the manufacturing process to produce a commodity acceptable for a nuclear power plant. Af ter the TVA regional inspector assures himself that a commodity does, in fact, meet i l E ' the contract specifications and releases tha t corrnodity f or r 3 6 shipment to a site, the only nrchival proof TVA will have that l shows proper quality will he the QA documentation on that com-medity. Therefore, the justification that the additional 64 percent was well spent, preventing the possible shutdown as a l unit or the replacement of equipment, rests upon the documenta-T tion QEB collects and its usability"by the ultimate record holder.
- Considering the two billion dollars in contracts QEB was inspect-inE in 1980, the value of the QA documents collected by QEB was Q 5 about 780 million dollnre, most of which was nuclea r relt,ted.
Mcst QEB personnel did not know whether or not the required u
# documentation it was, but reostwas available and retrievable. They all believed N did not have a method of verifying that belief.
M in the specific case of RT filen, QEB did not know nor did the reviewed contracts show where that film was located. For the g most part, it was believed to be at the vendor's facility. ;gy; e Beturning to why the records were not in the possession of SQN NUC FR, the investiEatnra determined that each responsible organi-
- stion had an explanation. QEB pointed out that HEDS could not handle the quanity of records QED had. CONST pointed out they '
had no room for the QED hard copy records and believed them to be only duplicates of what they already had. MEDS pointed out that filming old records was a low priori +y and they wnuld not put T them in n form usable to the site. There certainly was validity in each position, but it was evident also, that each was concerned more with their own problems than with what was required by TVA. Each was aware of the problem of getting records to the sites, but there was no identified effort toward solving the problem and providing by TVA. the site with OEDC QA records as required and committed g Another aspect of this whole process involves manpower and c whether or not it was adequote to perform the assigned tasks. ' Sufficient time was not spent in this area to provide a complete I - evaluation; however, some observations are worth noting. Both the Instrurentatien and Electrical Units administer contracts i that are relatively small in si:c. The degree to which these . g contract
/ filec were orEnnized and their relative appearance of completeness indicated that their manpower was adequate. On the other hand, contracts administered by the Mechanical / Nuclear and Civil / Architectural Units were in some c'ases very massive in nire and complexity. These two units hed the added problem of
. - - e ATTACllHENT D '"6 l
O - i less specific specifiestions, work over what the tio t h f a c t u r s required additicnal Instrumentation und Electrical Units would be expected to experience. the units were basically Yet the the number of personnel in each of same. Both the Nechanical and Civil Uni'.s expressed difficulty keeping up with contracts regarding whether or not the Insperwork was completed.
'not kr.own if this was by personal preference, It is not related to workload, or out of necessity. In either case, no information was a
offered s.affed. whic~h indicated that either unit felt it was under g Similarly, no mechanism was described as being used . l j by the branch chief that evaluated the unit supervisors' work with regard to how well the paperwork was hnndled. Such an *
- evaluation might be appropriate since paperwork is a v e r.y ;
important part of QEP's final product. The Veldments Unit did l not maintain running files for their contcacts; the regional i of fice did. Periodically, about three months a f ter the cont ract was complete, files were called in from the regional offices. , { , I The one file it had on Bellefonte containment was very large l snd uppeared complete, but was extreniely dif ficult for someone not entirely familiar with it to use. - and descriptive intelligence on the fileThe inadequate. indexing ' may not be related to staff size, information may or, p.w p". Although problems with QEB's records appeared well known by all within QEB, little effort appeared to be expended at end solving the problem of providing the sites complete andidentifying usable QA records. a this investigation to put QEB recordsEfforts were started and described du in order, but none were described to usebility to them. itprove the flow of records to NUC PR or their Even if QED's records were in order, and if ,, CONST f ollowed it s demunstra t ed prac ticer:, either QEB. be stored in separate f! ling cabinetsthe orQEB sentrecords back to would With NUC PR receiving only CONST records, the records were incemplete and could not be used to prove that cont ract speci fi-cations for equipment had been met. Furthermore, the need for - CONST personnel to find information for hTC PR in microfilmed $ records indicates that the records are not usable to bTC PR. , Assuming the regional inspectors were performing their function, and there was no reason't'o suspect otherwise, at ment Therefore, was shipped by the vendor, QA documentation existed.the time equip-between the records stored by NUC PR SQN, CONST SQH, and QEB records at SQN, Knoxville and the regional of fices and records passed by the vendor or subveniors, the QA records should exist. The data at the vendor's f acility beconies Importent i QA data. in those cases where TVA does not have all the required Of the contracts reviewed 4 out of 16 appeared incom-plete, lacking test data and therefore ic11 into that category * (B7226, 83630-2, 824204, 83530-1). f Efforts en were started by QED during this investigation to develop t index of all contracts requiring QEB source inspection since .- 1965 and including, among other things, records disposition. F
. s r. , w.,
- ATTACHMENT D page D ot **
I '..- O O , Efforts were made to develop the program for a data base for QEB l recorda. It was described as being capable of retrieving infor-l mmtion on a document level and would include such things as heat j numbete and serial numbers. This system is not operational yet, end only has some test data in it. Supposedly, it will also have CONST QA records entered into it. This type of system was needed badly; however, it is not yet the solution to the problem and if it is not, handled properly, will add to the problem. The program was developed without input irom the QEB unit supervi-sors and without NUC pR input. Granted the program was devel- I oped under a task force with NUC PR representation, but that representative stated he had no input. It appears that at present it will be Just a QEB tool, With reBard to NUC.PH access to the data base, the only ?!EDS terminal in POWER is in the Central Office. The sites do not have a terminal. Further-
- more, NUC PR, according to tiEDS, does not want MEDS film; there-l g fore, this system, unless accepted by NUC PR and in a form they
! . can use, will not satisfy the 10CFRSO, Appendix B, Criterion VII requirement. In addition, the use of this system will be for current data and old data will be added only an' time permits. , If one considers that most of the equ!pment for a nuclear power l plant has already been purchased and delivered, the data. base M, R will have limited value to NUC PR. l y Recent procedure changes for QEH require vendors to supply a list of documents that will provide proof that the cornmodity satisfies the contract specifications'. This should help elimi-nate the problem of negotiating with the vender and certainly provide a checklist for the rnaterials engineers to check for contract documentation coe:pleteness. The changes in the program and actions described above, while necessary and well intended, only address symptoms. They do not addreso the overall TVA problem of collectinE and collating in a retrievable mann'er information from several divisions and trans-mittibg that information to NUC PR. In order for the QA records system to work effectively, the overall problem must be addressed and solved. This will require a cooperative effort from TVA top manaSement in POWER, CEDC, and OQA. B. Usability of Records by NUC PR f NUC PR is the ultimate recipient of all QA records Eenereted during the procurement und construction phases of the nuclear power plant. As such, they must be able to use the records once I they are turned'over to them. To ensure their usebility, the records must be retrievable; and to enhance retrievability, the
. records should be edited down to only the essentiel records and ,
) indexed in a manner that is understandable. l t
ANSI N45.2.9-1974 states that the steraEe system for QA records l i vill provide for the areurate retrieval
- of information without undue delay. The standard also requires an indexing system I
ATTACHitENT D Page M of M 0 @ E ( that indirnten where the records nre tu he stored. ID-QAP 17.1 I regulics that Ql:ll provide document-level indexing for engliuered i equipment and folder-Irvel indexing where appropriate.
- Retraevability without undue delay is diffleult to define. Some hTC PR erployees clelm that the information they have been requested to find in the past has been found in'a few hours at most.
Others were skeptical that certain typen of data, espe-cially mill certifications, could be locatrd after CONST left the site, g , i l - 1he cunt ract filen nt NUC PR SQH are indexed to what is called the Inlder level. At times the folder is the entire file. tis ny
- files were poorly organized. Also, there a re many docunients in the files that are not required. Examples were film of enve-lopes and machine copied test patterns. Stfil, for small contracts,
( the retrieval of information, if in fact the information le present, would not be difficult. But for large contrnets, the low level of in h xing, the poor organir.stion, and lack of;cditing would present a real problem in retrievability. *
.@ Still, a f air level of nenr-term re* levabilj ty could he e'xpected as long en the people responsible
.s. the orginal coller' tion of U,'.7
the records are available for coni.ultation, either in FN DES or CONST.
The overall lack of uniformity in- the entire crea of vender generated QA records makes the long term usability of these records suspect. ,, The Enllefonte ville containment contract which was reviewed in Knox-in a Enod cumple of the complientsens that might crise. This was a very large file--several drawers full. Since it was en a later plant, the file was in better order and better indexed that those nt SQN. The piece of data that was requested was located by QED but enly after consulting with the inepector et ~
- the regional office who set up the file. As time passes and the records are transferred, the availability of finding data for a contruct rue;:
as this will probably b g.eaoly reduced, k'I th the decreasira QEB workload and normal attrition, some of the regional inspectors may,be going to other jobs. This problem won encountered in the'NSRS review of SQN CONST during this investigation. records were no Ternennel responsible for rollecting and storing lenger enalte. , The overall usability of the QA recoris Jonnd at SQN is highly suspect for the reasonn stated above. C. Ab R ty 2 _f the TVA System to Meet the NRC and A!!SI Henuirements Since hG 1.88 endorece ANS) N45.2.9-1971., this cettion will nnly $ - eddrees the ANSI standard. TVA implements the stendard through the Topleel Report, the ID-QAPs, and lower level procedures. Generally, each level of control adequately procedur311zes the requirements of the higher tier controlling document for the fu 5
=.
ATTACitMENT D Page M of M
@ O apeelfic area dirlinn.
for which the contiolled ci ganizat ion h.is jur is- 1 3 TVA's procedures, with some intesprttatjun .ind it imple- $ rnrui rd, should.rnert the arquisement of the ANSI standard. O h
!n eteluol practice they are ont rumpletely implemented niid a prob- I Irm la encountered when different divisions interface. Not all required QA records were given to NtlC PH by EN DES. I.'ven t hough every organization believed they were doing their Job, the intent of getting all'QA reentds not being met. in the contani o f the ult ina t e user wat There was no overall rhrek of the controlling g innrLinn. Nanoters m'ay have reviewed the work perform"d by ptr-
- nonnel onder them, but no one mannner reviewed the overnll TVA QA sccords control.
D. p,n,lejv 3 nificance _ A logical concern after reviewing the previous portions of this T'
- report would be the safety significance of n pour set of QA records. In reviewing the QEll records, the paper trolls of quality for specific pieces of equipment, and'in discussions j wit h personnel involved in the paper trail, it is difficult to (
pe A state unequivocally that there is or is not a safety prnblem. p v:M To place some perspective on this question, it is best to briefly review the process by the vendor and the line organization for 4 aneuring n quality product. , R N The r-first level of quality is supplied by the vendor in its QA f progrnm. That program is reviewed by QEB to ossure that the , vendor can produce a commodity with the quality desired by TVA.
'lherefore, before a piece of equipment is offered to TVA, it has [
gone through the vendor's QA program and the vernlur helieves it (
?
rnce t h TVA's Specifications. k Next, the TVA regional inspcetor physically inspects the com- r^
, . rnodi ty und the documenta tion or da tn attesting to iti, quality.
Therciore, et the time of shipment, both the vendor und the TVA [*
*QEll rey.lonal innpector nre sat in f j ed t hns the equipment meets the Contract specifications.
6 A third review is performed by CON:;T mig when the commndit y , arriven at the site. 'lhere the MIG assures itself that all the equipment is accounted for, that it nic e t s the contract r:pe c i f i-ontJena, that QEB has authorized its shipment, and t! int any , vendor data to be sent with the equip.sent is ner9nnted for. The equ i ptr e n t , therefore, has three levels of inspect ion by t he " time it is accepted at a plantsit e. The QEI) unit su,n rvisors in Knoxville are required to further ini.pret the records to assure t hey are cecurate and complete. Exumining the inspection process it becomes apparent that the 'A i QLil regional inspector is thr key to assuring that the vendor mer t ft the contract s pe c i l i t a t i orus . With the exception of the m,
- r'u6.pp.4W/e uP;"f'?'FWE."C'"""'
Yf
' , . . . . . . . . ,3 , ,* ; .M 4
. J' i: ATTACRMENT D page 36 of 34 .
.o -p
.,. _z ,, ,
a vendor, and in some rases the HIC, the regional inspector is the only one in' the QEB organization that can physically inspect 4 the coneodity against the vendor QA documentation and the TVA ' specifications. All other QEB evaluations for a coenodity will involve a backup check of what was previously done by the vendor i or the regional inspector by staking a comparison between QA docu- '
/
esentation and contract specifications. Such a backup check could detect such deficiencies as using the wrong materials in construc-tion, a deficiency which should have been detected in previous inspections. The same would also hold true for a technical engineer's review of-QA data. In the esse of nondestructive g tests performed by the vendor, the regional inspector is the , i only one in TVA that can physically observe those tests and the only one in TVA who, in most cases, ever reviews RT film. All other TVA reviews will be of the paperwork certifying that a test.. s 9), was performed and that the vendor and regional inspector recorded *: ' the pass / fail test results. Therefore, all TVA reviewing, in the % ( QEB chain of paperwork, beyond the regional inspectors will only involve a recoenendation of documentation previously exacined by 9 f the regional inspector. For example, the 460-volt shutdown boards for SQN went,th'ough Q .,,h the norml review process--vendor QA, regional inspector, r and HlG. The paperwork vent through a secondary and tertiary revicw by the QEB Electrical Unit and technical. engineer. The shutdown boards were accepted, but during installation, TVA deteruined that the welds in the shutdown board, had every defect possible. No amount of paperwork review could find that kind of defect. - The probability appears very small of finding a defect in a cor.nodity through a paperwork review. At best the review might have established that the initial revieve were not made or that - certain portions of inspections were incomplete. Quality assurance records can be ef significant safety i pertence - in a number of situations. When generic safety problems are identified with a given vendor, either due to esterial problems, process problems, or function performance problems, it is extremely important for the utility to determine if the identified problem exists at the operating plant. This requires both the existence of the records and the retrievability of the records. In the absence of adequate documents, it could be necessar,/ to either shut down and replace or require some degree of verification. Records are also important in evaluating causes of failure of a component or system. Examination of QA recorda cey provide key information to determine the cause of failure or to identify corrective action. In their present form, QEE generated QA , records e,ay not be sufficient for the above purposes. V. CONCLUSIONS A. Vender supplied QA records obtained by QEB for SQN have not been toepletely turned over to NUC PR and t,here does not appear to be any plans t' do so in the nest future. This places TVA in
- r. en
- c ..e,,
9 0 violation of 10CTR50, Appendix D. Criterion Vll, and Topical Report requirements. Although this report examined the ilow of records to and at SQH, there is no basis to believe that this conclusion would not .,lso apply tu uther TVA nuclear faciliti:s. B. There is no overall OEDC etfort to provide NUC PR a complete QA file integrating both CONST and QED records in a usable form. This is in violation with TVA QAp pRH 17QPR-1. C. The level of effort being expended to assure ths.t more than g 700 million dollars worth of QA records are properly assembled and accounted for is 'less than adequate. D. The retrieval of information from vendor QA records at SQN by NUC PR is considered to he inadequate due to the poor organiza-tion, lack of completeness, low level of indexing, and lack of editing. Retrieval depends upon use of Individuals located T away from the site that a: e not readily controlled by HUC PR. D. in.re is no coordinated TVA effort to assure the adequacy of identification, collection, collation, indexing, and distr,1bu-tion of vendor QA records, mx, k~ [' T. TVA would meet the requirements of NRC regulations and ANSI standards if the current requirements and. intent of documented procedures were followed; however, their implementation, partic-ularly at the interface point between,various TVA organizations, is less than adequate. This results in a records system that r:eets neither the intent nor letter of the regulations. Here l implementation of the procedures in their present form without ! regard to intent and an overall control of their implemer.tation by an organization capable of easily crossing organizational boundaries would not solve the problem. VI. JUDGMENT OF HEEDS ,- A. A coordinated OEDC/POVT.R/0QA effort is required to assure prac-tical and consistent irnplementation of TVA policy regarding the identification, collection, collation, indexing, and transfer of vender QA records in a" form usable to NUC PR. This effort should begin at the office manager level with a commitment of how, when, [ and in what form the records transfer should occur; and the effort i should be continued by individuals knowledgeable of vendor QA records and ADP processes. This cont.'nuing cffort should be ' coordinated by an organi:stion with the authority and capebility , to easily cross organizational boundaries. B. A coordinated effort is needed by OEDC and NUC TR to assemble and transmit in a usable form contract files for all currently corpleted contracts and purchase orders on a plant-specific l basis. This should include all QEB and CONST records previously j submitted to NUC TR. . l
. 1 :. -
i, i, . e,.
** ATTAtllMENT 1~
0
- WELDM k4S
^
I J. H. Winebrenner n l J E O " l
$ MECHANICAL / NUCLEAR g , ,
}
2 J. F. Lewis 8 x ,
- x a
' b tl INSTRUMENTATION k
;i 0 H. D. Conner Dy C _
d CIVIL / ARCHITECTURAL
$ D. E. Smelser a
O i ELECTRICAL I H. W. Knox b e
= e m J w .
o W co 55 C '
" Q TULSA REGIONAL
, g hd INSPEC~ ION OFFICE 4e 41 ee C
+ ;+ e oy o
C. S. Bates 8 W
- a. .
f: u
@g ST LOUIS REGIONAL e
wg INSPECTION OFFICE
- - ' ~
CE . C. J. Tunnicliff W " M .. - W PROV10ENCE REGIONAL A
>E .
h INSPECTION OFFICE W Y -- S y a" @- :c . F. Y. Poss ' a a O g: w U e 8 FITTSBURGH REGIONAL h < .? Pco INSPEC 10N OFFICE
- 5]
mu $.$ w D. Pelecovich 5 @; A - 3 . PHILADELPHIA REGIONAL
$ 3* lNSPECTION OFFICE
, y V. C. Kolinger l
LOS ANGELES REGIONAL i ' INSPECTION OFFICE h hU
- H. J. Schumacher
' 0z u e
)'
b Si " CH ARLOTTE REGIONAL
- u. J INcPECTION OFFICE g
I ,- H. N. Brittingham , C M . y
- y, ElRMINGHAM REGIONAL U INSTECTION OFFICE
* .s.,cp't.ii:
', *i ATTACHMENT D
. . O O page 39 of M ATIAClltiENT 2 SUreiARY OF CON 1RACT FILES REVIEVED 1.
Atmospheric Relief Valves - 926E This contract file was on microfilm in the Knoxville QEB office. file appeared to be completed, but the radiographic test (RT) reader The i sheets were illegible. 5 hard copy of thic file had been sent to SQN CONST in two parts on August 16, 1977 and October 18, 1977., The CONST file for this contract had been microfilmed by tiEDS. The ! microfilm had been sent back to SQN CONST and transferred to NUC PR. The hTC PR microfilm of this contract file included a copy of the 7' contract, various correspondence, QEB and ti!G inspection and testing reports; but no test data or information on the RT film y s available. In a hard copy file at hTC PR copies of Cope and Vulcan p.ocedures and RT procedures with the shot locations were found, but still no RT 4,- reader sheets were available. ' ((.
- 2. Auxiliary Control Air Dryers - 83630-1 This contract file was on microfilm in the Knoxville QEB office.
file appeared to be complete. All information in the file was in The chronological order with the latest document first. A hard copy of this file was sent to SQN CONST on August 16, 1977. After the NSRS review at SQN, CONST personnel found the hard copy sent by QEB. It was in ' storage in filing cabinets in another building. The CONST fileNUC to for PR thisincontract the same had been manner microfilmed as the previous file.and the film transferred
- The NUC PR microfilm did not contain manufacturer's specifications, data pachtges, or certificates of compliance.
was in a more orderly format than the QEB microfilm.This microfilmed copy That is, a copy of the comon typen . contract was first and information was Eathered into Eroups of but not certificates of c &plience.In the SQN NUC PR hard copy file vere data pac lucomplete at SQN NUC PR. The vendor-related QA data was
- 3. buyillary Control Air Dryers, Dewpoint Alarm - 83630-2 This contract file was on microfilm in the Knoxville QEB office. The i ille appeared to be coepicte. A hard copy of this file was sent to SQN CONST on August 16, 1977. The CONST file for this contract had been microfJimed manner as the previous and the files. film transferred to NUC PR in the same ihe NUC PR microfilm contained a copy of the contract and the QEB orinspection test data reportspackages.but did not contain the certificates of compliance
\. o hwM , g ATTACleiEtiT D g rage 40 of 44
. a 4 Vertical Turbine _ Pumping Units - 92 joy This contract file was on microfilm in the Knoxville QEB offlee. The information was in two different locationn on the microfilm and divided by another contract. The image numbers given for the con-tract were incorrect. The reel numbers had been changed in ink, and the wrong reel was given to the reviewers initially. The file was not formated in an orderly manner. There was a large amount of test data, ce rti fica t es of corepliance, and miscellaneous information available, but the method in which the contract was set up made it impossible for the reviewers Lo determine its completeness in a reasonable length of time. A hard copy of the file was sent to SQN in two parts on August 16, 1977 and October 18, 1977. The CONbT file f or this contract had been microfilmed and the film trans f erred to NUC FR in the same manner as the previous files.
The bTC PR eierofilm contained no test data packages. It did contain 7 the usual information such as NIG receiving reports and several copies of the contract. The file was in a less orderly format than other files reviewed at bTC PR. .' { 1 5. Steam Generator Safety Valves - 92696 ' F, l 2[
' ' ^ Part of this contract file was on microfilm v. QEB in Knoxville and
! pa rt was in hard copy. The microfilm section included a copy of the contract and changes to it and a few types of required data and ce rt i fica tions . The hard copy, which was in the Records Unit flies being prepared for microfilming, contained date packages for all 40 l valves. The combined contract file appeared comp ete. The hard copy of what QEB had microfilmed had been sent to SQN CONST in two parts on August
- 16, 1977 and October 18, 1977-. The CONST files had b en eterofilmed and the film transferred to hTC PR in the same manner as the previous files.
The NUC PR microfilm contained a copy of the contract, QEB inspection and testing reports, some correspondence, but no data packages. The SQN bTC PR hard copy file contained manuf acturer's procedures, a copy o f the cent.ra ct , and test results for 6 valves (34 were missing). No ref erence was f ound at hTC PR in the contract files concerning the location of the RT film or the reader sheets.
- 6. Ice Condenser Seals - 82064 ,
This contract' file was in hard copy form in t he Knoxville QEB of fice. It was well organized w!th an index in the front of the file. There was also a matrix form checklist with da ta requirements versus da ta ' received for each component in the contract: This file had not been
~
sent to the QED Records Unit for microfilming preparation. Also, there was no record of it having been 'sent to SQN CONST. The CONST l file for tbis contract had been microfilmed and the film transferred to NUC TR in the same manner as the previous files. The NUC PR microfilm was poorly organized, bu't it did uppenr complete. It had more data U:an the QED file.
? .
N _ a . O ^tT^ cant"r o O ""S* ' '" There were test data sheets and certificates of compliance available g y which QEll did not have.
- 7. Ice Condenser Hinre Blocks - E23844 l
t This contract file was in hard copy form in the Knoxville QEB office. 'i It was a small contract, and it appeared to be complete. This file w had not been sent to QEB Eecords Unit f or mi c ro filniing prepa r a t ion. There was no record of.It having been sent to SQN CONST. The CONST file for this contract had 'veen microfilmed and the film transf erred to NUC PR in the same manner as the previous files. I
, l The NUC PR microfilm nppeared to be complete. ,l E. Aluminum and Stainless Steel, Honeycombed Cushions - 82034 Part of this contract file was on microfilm at QEB in Knoxville and
. part was in hard copy. The microfilm portion contained, among other ,.
I
, things, a copy of the contract, specifications for the items, certi-g ficates of compliance, and shippin;; memorandums. The.hard copy ;
portion of the contract file contained test data reports for all g' cushions. There was no transmittal of the contract file to CONST or
., s . to MEDS. The CONST file for this contract had been microfilmed anJ p'f -} the film transf erred to hTC PR f,n the same manner as the previous -e files, 3
1 The hTC PR microfilm contained a copy of the contract and changes to it, receivinE reports, and certificates of Bompliance for el Eht . cushions. There were 24 alieninum and 96 stainless steel cushions bouE h t on this contract, so there should have been 120 certificates of compliance. ~
- 9. Missile Doors for Air Cendition,ing Enclosures - 87226 This contract file was on microfilm in th.: Knoxville QEB office. The file contained a copy cif the contract and the usual correspondence.
There was no test data and no mill certifications. There was no record of shipping the contract file to SQN CONST. The CONST file for this contract had b en microfilmed and the film transf erred to NUC PH in the same manner as,.the previous files. The NUC PH microfilm contained a copy of the contract correspondence and inspection and testing reports, but no vender test data or mill " certifications. *
- 10. Reactor Surports -
75018 8 Part of this contract file was on microfilm at QED in Knoxville and ; part was.in hard copy. The miernfilm pertion of the contract con-
) tained a copy of the contract, correspondence, and some manufacturer's inforcetion. The hard cepy file, which was in the QEB Records Unit r files, contained data for all ecmponents in separate data packet,es. ,
The combined contract file appeared complete.
- The NCRS was told that '
the contract iile had been cent to SQN CONST in the 1979-80 time 3 n
qQQ3gMNOAM
,..s., .
NbN g ATTAC11M*20T D h888 02 I L4 period and returned at a later date, but their was t r a nsre i t t a l . The CONST file f or thir, rimt ract no record of this and transferred to NUC PR in the same vanne.r as thebeen had nitrofilmed previous files. The h'UC PR microfilm contained a dence, and shipping and receivingcopy of the cont ract, correspon-records. There sete no test data packaEes, reader' sheets. no mill test reports, and no information on the RT film or 11. Spare Diesel Generator and Exciter, Voltaxe_ yRulator - E25204 L This contract file was in hard copy form at QEB Knoxville. The file contained a copy of the contract and correspondence. There was no test data. There was CONST or to MEDS for microfilming.also no record of the file beitig sent 'to SQH The CONST file for the contract had been manner as the microfilmed previous files.and the film transferred to NUC TR in the same i l * [ . The There It. NUC was pR microfilm containedata copy of the contract. and changes to more correspondence SQH than a t QED. There were also ance. receiving reports but no test data or certificates of compli-
- g. y Some installation instructions were included. In the,5QH hard copy controlled manuals was a E D" procedures for performing it. copy of the seismic analysis and the copy contract file (considered to be duplicates).This was also present in the SQN The controlled of the other copy was not known. copy came fromthe theorigin h*UC FR Central Office
- 12. Level Switches _83530-1 This contract pressure tests file was were in hard copy in the Knoxville QEB office available. .
test data was.on file at the vendor's A document plant. in the file verified that ance were accepted. A materirls test Certificates of compli-in Knoxville, but the, reviewers could not locate itfile was noted .s being on file van available in the contract file. Since the Chicago No test data ReSienal Officeto office has been closed, their contract files had been sent from that Knoxville. The reviewers looked at the Chicago file for files, and large numbers of"Eest data were f ound, much could be located in~the normal Knoxville file. i file appeared to although it was less organized. be more complete than the Knoxville office fileThe re6 onal office There was no record of the QEB con-tract file being shipped to SQN CONST or to MIDS for mi:rofilmin g. The CONST file for this contract had been microfilmed and the film transferred to NUC PR in the same manner as the previous files i The HUC PR microfilm contained several copies cf the contract
, cor-despondence, certificates of incpection, t data f or hydrostatic tests, and certificat.es of complianceinformation data sheets were not co=plete. The NUC PR 1 .
The test sheets, test duplicates) contained ceismic certification,1 erd engiacering reports. copy test date(considerrd sheets, and The switches had originelly been all listed as L
NVA$b M'M
*^* . .
. . , e
. h ATTAC& LENT D h rage 43 of 44 requiring QA; but
! since many of the switches were in systems which did not require QA, memorandums had been written deleting some require- ! ments for non-QA switches. l 13. 6900-Velt_Switchrea r and Trans formers - 54495, This contract file vos in hard copy in QEll Knoxville. Tt.e file was in the QEB Records Unit files and there was no record of it being i transmitted to ttEDS for microfilming or SQN CONST. The file was well ' i organized and appeared complete. A copy of the contract was included along with data packages, test reports, and ce rtificates of coepiiance. L 5eismic certification was ovallable, but that test data was not in the file. The CONST file for this ennt ract had been microfilmed and the files. film transferred to NUC FR in the nnme manner as the previous The HUC TR microfilm contained much duplication. Copies of the
, l f' contract were included, both blank and completer Seismic certiff-cation reports.
and shortage reports were included, but there were no test d The NUC PR hard copy file contained the seismic test report
- l and analyala but did not centain the test reports found at QEB. '
- 14. 480-Volt Switchgea r and Trens formers - 54523 ,
M k.$.y'"3 \. This files.contract file was in hard copy in the Knoxville QEB Records Unit This file was neat and well organized. 5 stating that A note'was in the file tent data was with the technical engineer. Otherwise, the 7 file appeared complete. Information was contained in the cent act file that,found. was af ter acceptance onsite, about every type of weld defect possible These were corrected by the vendor. The coepleted contract had not been filmed or sent to SQN CONST. The CONST file for this cen-t ract had been as the previcusmicrofilmedfiles. and the film sent to NUC PR in the same manner The it, hTC TR cticrofilm contained a copy of the contract and chauges to r,eceiving reports, certificates of compliance, and correspondence. There vere no test dato packages. The HUC PR here. copy file contained certificates 'focompliance for seismic anlayses, ; equipment manuals, and apparently complete test data. transformer tests, 6
- 15. Accumulators, Pumps . CVCS - 826:10'1" This test data contract was file was in hard copy at the Knoxville QEB office. No the los Angeles available in the Knoxville file; it wrs all still in Regional Office. ,
files marked se completed on May 7, 1981.The Lon Angeles office had its The CONST file for this . contract the same mennerhad been as the microfilmed and previous filen. the film transf erred to HUC TR in The ef s,ppendices hTC PR microfilm A, B, and C. file had a copy of the contract and three copies It also had four document packages. ; A note was present stating that the RT file had been returned to SQH ; HUC TR, but the location of that film could not be tietermined. j 5
. _ . , . ,,.m:v -_%- w '" - '*="
- M Y '
- t. -
. . v1 ( .l
, , , ATTACID1ENT D Page 44 of 44 16.
Dellefontc h ainment - 85617 1 This contract file was reviewed to determine the means of retrieving data from a completed file, it was in hard copy form and had only recently been reviewed and sent to the QEB Records Unit. The reviewers asked to see information on a piece of a polar crane bracket, 3-56 M1-1, FA 3-55-5. with a telephone The informatier was found in about three hours and versation between the QEB Knoxville materials engineer (section aupervisor) and the inspector in the field offite to dete rmine the vendor's method of cross-referencing. The person indexing the file also helped in locating the requested document. The Veldments Unit Supervisnr indicated a need to add additional l intelligence to the file .for case of information retrieval . at 5 l ( .
'w i
DS ( .y Z* ' k;s , ' '
*l 5
e 0 I O t. e 4 i b 4 w 6 5
I. 4 i 1 ATTACIBfENT E NSRS Investigation Report R-85-07-NPS l l 9 i e am
)1
,#,C5
, . . . .')' ,
#~ ff 1
1 1
, t
( A l
' )
4 f 1 e- ,1
..j j
i
.l f I
?' .e '. ;.. *
'l' '
*- e . ***Q . f.;.+ 1 >. i . ' : 11
., .. e; e; .. * .
o. i t : TT.NhT.SSEE VALLEY AtTDIORITY FUCLEAR SAFETY PIVIEW STAIT t.; o REPORT NO. R-85-07-HTS . l
. l l
SUBJECT:
1 TOLLOV-UP REVIEW OF QEB RECORDS INVESTIGATION I-83-13-NPS 1 DATES OF ( REVIEW: MARCH 18, 1985 - AFRIL 15, 1985 , i f! \ .
- N TEAM LEADER: '
! .f- > . R. D. SMITH I ia. ru DATE ' j
, . -)
- g.
- TF.AM MEMBER:
R. C. CUISRAW DATE N O
> AFFROVED: '
O
- h. S. I1DD DAIE O .
O s G 1 k 1 G E
- f. I ,8 -
1,'. if[ .
,jfl * ,
h, g g
.,, l t c ' r :y, . . ,
,s . . . . . -
u - [ l
- l. . , . .
.i ~
l TABII. OF C0hTENTS ,, i . Faae ', ir I . '
- f. Background . . . . . .................... 1 4
II. Scope . .~........................ . 2
, i III. Conclusions /Recournendations ............... 2 IV. Status of Previously Identified Open Items . . . . . . . . 2 V. Details .,. . . . . . ................... .
5 (' A. B. Corrective Action tianagement Quality Engineering Branch 5 6 M C. Sequoyah Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . : . .. . . 7 g D. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . E. Vender hanuals ................... 8 I 5% UN V. Persocnel Contaeted .................., 9
-sw VI. References . . . . . ................... 10 ,
.i ,
e C t W 1 l l O .' '
. 1 O
o .
. i.
)i .I '.* !
y I g tb 1
.. 1 i,
0 I a 6 e, l l
.J
l m:. t . m - s p s y. y ~ m w pj g.7 yy% 4:'ypppg
.y mmagQ.gl' y, gg ,
I. , g
.. . q. f i . . j The original ' Nuclear Safety Review St'a f f (HSRS) investigation .E !
I-83-13-NPS 'found that' vendor records assembled by the Quality ,I ,f,!h . .
.i Engineering ' Branch,(QEB) were not being transmitted and incorporated . . ,: .1 3
_l into . the ' construction reccrds for Sequoyah Nuclear plant (SQF) as ' ' '% '
- -. - required by TVA procedures. It futher found that construction records '" l %* '.,. l to associated ivith QEB source inzpected procurement filmed and trans- j C mitted ".to .j the 30ffice of Nuclear Fever (KJC TR) at T>QM , were not. .
indexed ' to a :1evel sufficent to allow easy retrieval, and the com- f j k pleteness.of records at both SQN construction and QEB was in question. ll
. As the .organizat. ions involved in the collection, transfer, and receipt
- of the records ' exhibited interf acing problems at that time, it was ,
i reccamended"thatien interdivisional task force reporting to the . l Assistant . General Manager (AGM) (Technical) be formed to correi:t the . J problems. identified and establish an effective records system. 4...n w p:n . q , : ,
. The ' implementation of the above recommendation was delegated to the ii 1 E tianager
- of"Engl.neering ~ Design and Construction, further dele sted a
' .* "9 .
jointly to the Project fianagers for Bellefonte Nuclear Plant (BLN and l i V . Watts Bar'Euclear Plant (WBN) who est.ablished a task f orce chaired by j,". .
h' the Assistant .tianager of Construction. Through the ef f orts of that .
.b
.;N, ta sk force,: which was in existence between December 1983 and ' April "
j bM 1984,' considerable progress was made toward improving interdivisional
-'. ' h:'
'W communications and the ' improvement of a records maintenance and N retrieval..g.stes.7' sy ,
Of significance, the task force brought about a chzoge in the require- :. N meat that QEB , records be incorporated into construction records cod _. l ',
, . transferred . to .NUC FR in total. NUC FR identified those records it V '
o required at the site for'imediate eccess (e.g., construction records), g ,: tbose that could be retrieved within a few days and leccted elsevbere h ND i within 77A Federal (e.g.,' QEB records records), repository and (e.g.' these radiographs). vendor that could be f Organitetienal orwarded to a ; .' . . i g . y I assignments were r.ade within the task force to effectuate the changes
& a in record locatiene and ease ' of retrievebility,. procedures vere pre- i..
'l
, pared,i and the tast force disbended. Unfortunately, the corrective -
~o -
actions . vere not. totally effective.
. T ". . . . ,
~h
'. . . Since, disbandment'of the task force, individual organizational effort
- ve re "nndervsy n to ' implement their essignmentz, and improvements in -
> Y
records .*mre ? s een by ' USRS. during this fellow-up review; beverer, i. t records retrieval systems vere not yet coarplete. QEB records for SQE ? - ESSSTand : principal piping ^ contracts remained unverified for coeplete ' ness 'and tl.4cked easy. retrievabiltiy. Information: retrieval continues : c tide'very.cependent upon the ne=oriet. of people et SQH, VBN, and QEB.
! Open itees lef t by the task force vere being followed as an ancillery #
i
=- function of the Office of Construction (OC) Qulity Accurance Brnoch ,
(QAB). tianagementTovercicht" of ':cIl in'dividal' eiforts was not seen.' si [ r! : r. p l!
' j.
.b
- L f , ' '.
spa -
,, f 58 . .;
g ! . - - I
'. 16 II. SCOTE ,- -
The RSRS conducted a f ollow-up corrective a'etion review of the find-ings and ' recommendations associated with NSRS report 1-B3-13-NTS. - f This review covered the activities of the Of fice of Engineering (OE), . ,,, e ,: i DC, and FUC TR regarding the This accumulation, follow-up review storage, curements requiring QEB source inspection.
' included discussions with personnel and the review of selected records at SQN, k'BN, and QEB.
[ i III. CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS R-85-07-NPS-01, Hansger of Power and Engineering Appeletment of a l Records Manager 1 f conclusien i upper management coordination entity was Throughout this review no to resolve progrs=matic problems er to ,, identified as a focal point It appears that ' h establish priorities and schedules for coepletion. the upper management involvement that was present during It the ta s k N f orce era has been lost through reorganizations and retirements. . fo, is essential that:cpper management:.become involved ence ogsin and,to
<Mj continue"its involvement' until such time. the as'present.systes TVA'si tremend '
v W old. vendor
- records are in' retrievable. order..and 31stEJtheEsppropriate'! records ' retrieval of.
placingC nei/~'vsaddr' ' rec 6rds system proves .itself ef fective '(see -section V. A-for details). N Recoenendation l i O It is receasrended that the Manzger of ' Power and Engineeringd appoint an f7 upper-level manager impevered with the responsibility, autberity, se 5 organization 41' freedom to assure that records assotisted zod . with the o procurement sad installation of QEB source inspected equipment materials' are as serbled, i verified for completeness, indexed, and
'O stored .for ' retrievability by 'present and future users of those records.* That spointee's scope should include all U
ment of. .a schedu,le f ora co.uplet. . ion of.past records. . . . 4,., , IV. STATUS OT.FREVIOUSLT IDENTIFIED OPEN ITEMS 1 : :. 9. . q Tne memorcudun transmitting report I-83-18-NFS to the AGM centsined ' one broad reccamendation.still requiring action, that rec 6soendatio each of the issues [ been divided into two separate recemendations as follevs. l 4 l e
;i 2
l , g i 8 1
~c - - . - . - , - _ - . , .,--3;
" ' '!f, . ..
h k (( . rf I-83-13-NPS-01, Examine Findinge of NSRS Report (1-23-13 NPS) , A. 1.i ne ,; . and Take Necessary Steps to Identif y Actions Required By the e Organizations (PO%T.R, OEDC, OQA, and OGri) tot **
- 1. Develop an Integrated Records System for QA Records that ',,
4 Will Satisfy the Needs of HUC PR and OEDC -
.g NUC FR has identified the records required and subdivided -
them into three categories. These subdivisions are docu-mented in procedures and supplemented by memorandum for j site-specific construction records. Assignments for records Records inder-responsibility have been made by procedure. ing procedures have been prepared and are in various stages of implementation. A TVA task force was working o.n vender manuals. This item vill remain open until the conclusions and recommendations of the vendor manual task force have been evaluated by ESRS and more experience is gained by tbe I Office of Power and Engineering (F&E) with the records indexing system. (See sections V. A and V.E f or details.) 2, ' Correct Implementing Deficiencies Identified'in the Existing System 2% l i -4M ,y
- a. Most of the major problems were found in Lbis area.
'Ib QEB records were not adequatley indexed and there was N some cencern regarding their , completeness. Efforts were under way to place coepleted contracts into the established indexing format and have them filmed by y RIMS. The fnore .evoluminous' ESSS and principsi pipios-contrsets,mvere , still? unorganized sed unverifled iort o completeness. QEB stated they would receive the
> highest future priority; however, no schedule for coe-pletien had been developed. (See section V.B for O ,?.. details.)
.3 b. A113conetructierf T recordsIfor>SQN hsd been trans ferred A Records or'.S veres in ;;the , fint11 et.agesTof3. filming.
o Retrieval .Indexinga(RRI),sys, tem was prepared butl Judged not, totally' ef fective'.because, it 'did: cot preclude thef 7 " i a
.lI' .)
I "
'M . 'k], need;tottely...upon%rtodatl' 'rgtp extentPthe m i
- i l '
.,. for> details.)
j ' ' 1, c. , Construction records for WBN vere being identified for J transfer to hTC FR. An RRI had been prepared and coe-I
' h s:unications between OE and bTC TR st WEN regarding
' records and indexing van active. The - eechanism for f '
selecting OC records systees for transfer, establishing I transf er priority, and records acceptability was less Records formal than it abould be to be effective. requerted during this reviev vere retrievable but this vez dependent upon people's - memories. The level of _I
r.
,e ,
.. .,l-. . ,i i ,
indexing and cross reference espability described f or 5 l
.the records vben ultimately transferred to FUC FR
, should reduce the people dependency and provide a very v usable set of construction records. (See section V.D .
. f o r ,de tails . ) . '
,d. Continued upper management coordination involvement at ,
a level capable of crossing organizational boundaries -
, l
,is considered necessary until the problems are solved
)
and records systems prove effective. This item remaina i '/ 8 open. t(See section V.A for details.) 1 i I
. Provide Documentation Records to Each of the Operating
. 3. j
' . 31tes as Required by NRC requirements and TVA Comitments ,
l t QEB records are no longer required to be ensite. TVA proce- . '. , f 'dures and the Topical Report have been changed to reflect J.
- that change. - - h l
I .i - T
- An ECR '(GEN QEB 8401) was written for VEN and Bl.M identify- .
D ing noncoarpliance with 10 CTR 50 Appendix B, criterion ITII, , ! and ANSI,N45.2.9 regarding QEB records' indexing and retriev- .
'l ;g" FSRS found the specified corrective actions .for *h Z.h ability.
that FCR had been accomplished. ; ;. QG l~-
- t!
N Procedures exist to accomplish the transfer of records to [ j SQN. These records are now or coon vill be transferred. ,9 The retrievability of records is the subject of iten V.A.2 'h above and vill be followed and resolved through activities *]p N associated with that iten. This item is closed. (See ( O . se tion V.B for details.)
- 4. Clarifv Organizational Responsibilities ,
D Vith the exception of a clearly defined system for vendor ,
- i O manuals, organizational responsibilities have been defined.
This ites remains open prnding the resolution of the vendor i O . manual, issue. (See section V.E for details.) c E. I-83-13-HTS-02, Report Back to the DGM on the Planned Actions and Schedule for Corpletion..of Actions 4,
.. ,,. , ,w .
I Two reports. were made by the Manager of OEDC to the ACH
'g (Technical) regarding the isrplenectation pisos and schedules of OEDC ' and NUC IR. The plans were predouinstely p'rocedural in l
- nature and .the schedules indicated vben the revisions were to be '
i., coepleted. The corrective ection was less than adequate in that I no schedule was provided thet established vben the records them- i l selves vould be verified as complete and indexed for retriev-f ' ability. At the tiere of this review the OC records trantfer for SQN was essentis11y coeplete and, therefore, no sch:dule is
) required. , VBN by procedure bas until six e:entbs af ter concercial g ,
4 l J t
operation of unit 2 to transfer records; however, a shorter time-
' 9 H ',
; f rame 'is preferable by ESRS for those records systems that reach ' "
' coepletion. . ' QEB, however, has not completed verification and indering of their records for SQH and VBH nor has QLB establiebed .@.o'
. a schedule for doing so. ' This item remains open. (See section . - -
l .V.B for details.) .
,; .. " f ,
.c j!{}s I
V. DETAll.S .!,i . 19 - A. Corrective Actica Msnarement I
. lAs the original investigation found interface problems between
; 0E, DC, and NUC PR impacting their assigned responsibilities, it -
3
.was recommended that an upper management task force espable of .l '
* " crossing divisional' boundaries be establiebed to further quantify !
and solve problems identified in ESRS report I-23-13-fps. It was f urther ' reconnended that the task force report to the ACH . y (Technical). !' Through a series of delegations a task force or j
, enemittee was established under the chairmanship of the Assistant
< lianager , of , Construction with the task force reporting to the
; e ti Projectj anagers for VEN and BLN.
j 4 .x, b W Representation on the task force included a good cross section of Il MNfac personne1 ' f rom OC and NUC FR and included representation for ' Office of Quality Assurance (0QA) and periodically QEB. N . Through that task force NUC FR developed a three level system of records which was incorporated into procedure ID-QAP-17.1 and N formed the basis for dividing records responsibilities. QEB would retain, be responsbile for, and retrieve information f ros
; O ' vendo: records under their source inspection program. Construe- *
- tione vould assume recpensibility for construction records asse-3 eieted with vender products ,af ter the items were released for O j shipennt, by,QLB. . .
,, ,:: " e t ~
O .'I ' fin # addition,h the tesh force developed an indexing system for ' ' Tha t .,
'.,@. records ~to b2. transferred to FUC PR by each project office.
indexing'i tystem was called .RRI, and generically procedura.lized O
' t.
"* ?vith inpot ' from both OE and KUC FR in OC QAP 17.2, " Records u J.,t -
FD RetricTal Instructions." Each project (SQK, VBN, and BLN) was to
'hd develop' their own site-specific RRI.
h* 'M' ; . !r m:s ,.y n.~' ' % Vl? ,,'
- 5 In' April' 1964, the task force held its last meetieg thus terai-1984, by memorandum, the
,'. ' ). nating ':its ' existence. On June 8,
/( Project tianagers for VEN and BLN requested the Nnager of T&E to reassign' responsibility for follow-up of R-83-13-KFS findings to I OE. 'The finneger of FLE did not concur in the transfer and further upper ran:gement involvement in this issue could not be ,I identified, Since there vos no further upper management etten-tien given this project, itsappears that' schedules'f or coepletion ef - QEB # records,. anivers .to - prograce.atic problems, sed f ollow-up
' . of : tash iforce: epen itesc ?(which vere; belog-l tracked ias 'an 'ancil-
" laryi.f unction by 'the'0C QAB) rerlin' unaddressed.'
l} . 5
,w i
'. E Vith reorganizations and retirements, the initially involved. y l
l upper management personnel are no longer in positions to assume ! . responsibility of this important task. While the Freject . Managers for VBN and BLN are still concerned and involved with l the records associated with QEB source inspected vendors as they i pertain to' their ' proj ects , their positions do not cover tha , ::/ entire OE , involvement in all nuclear plants. It would be appre- '
' t, yhf; priate to reassign 'the overall responsibility of vendor records to a ' manager' organizationally capable of assuring that the >
,j efforts of OE, .DC,"and NUC PR are coordinated and accomplished both., timely and effectively. ,
I l l B. Quality Engineering Branch , Based on NSRS report I-83-13-NpS a generic NCR (T ~1 CEN QEB 8t.01)' . l vas written stating QEB vendor records were not easily retriev- , . j iable and that records were not trans f erred to the designated , , i r
- permanent storage location.., The corrective actions specified f or ';
." p that NCR. vere accomplished, namely, procedures developed, people $i i . trained,iand permanent storage ler.ations redefined. Eevever, the c
&'! ' original problem regardirig retrievablity van not solved. '3
; ,,n m. m n. :i: e s m ,
z
. QEB developed ,an' indering systes suitable to their needs and .if l M, g% - defined it in QEB-EP 24.7. Work began on processing s'pprori- e i % 4.- mately ,650 f t 3 .of compl ted nuclear contract records in A N tiarch 1984. ' A goal of 5 f t fper week was established and highest -
priority placed upon SQN and VBN records. QEB esployees were brought in.from the field offices to assist in the effort.
" At the time of this reviev QEB had processed 126 f t3 of records l
<> through Tebruary 28 3 1985, reflecting a processing rate of approximately ; 2.5 f t .per .veek. Of those processed a pp ro xi-
> cately 37. percent' vere for' SQN and WBF, 2B percent for ETN and g ' BLN wity the remaining 45 percent of the processing effort going. ;
- tevard o ] plants.'~'.While' recordsthe of deferred v
statistics shew or cancell'ed cuelear original goals andplants and fossil ' , priorities .
; verelnet being. met,' progress .vas being made. Two of the five :
o -
' QEB isections have a ccepleted almost all of their records, one 1 section!has' its ' records in' order in hard copy, and another is
,. # Of. con -
}'l QlJiH' .,,/ .Y ,",, ,f,: placing.it* Iprioritiesj primarily in the VER,piping SQNcontracts' area.
cerdto,DSRS .are,1thc [. major.. NSSS,.'and principal
~ .1
.! }
.. - .. M foriSQN;and VBN< whichrhave not been.vorked on since 'the original' s
.!, ,i !. p}-
e_ y NSRS'771ETe'ifigation.."- QEB ' management s tated tha t increased - i :' $ytopriority the QEB would be'placed Inoxville. upon staff was thosefrom coming contracts a field and a to of fice new help addition i
',, p in tha t c r e a.)*. ' i..
'a , i
_:.'J
- .. . i; ,
!! Reasons were given as to why the processing rate was not 5 f t 3 ",
; per week (e.g., lack of personnel, other priority work, RIMS not }*
able to keep. up); however, no information van found that indi- ' ceted OE sanagement was avere that QEB precessing (verificati >n j i of record completeness, indering, and entering into RIMS) would r
?
e k --
[ i A _'_ ; W + & .y . . , m. ..- : s. . ...-
* .- - ;; - t. * . " ' 'ATTACRMENT E page 9 of 16 [
]
take twice as long as anticipated (i.e., four to five years) or that they concurred in the incressed time. ~te original estimate placed the processing effort at about two years excluding any. ; increase in the number of completed contracts. In additica, there was no TVA upper management of ficial (discussed in section V. A above) to oversee progress or provide added impetus. To evaluate the -retri.evability of records by QEB f or SQN, QEB was , requested to produce manufacturing data for a flow element in the unit I reactor coolant system. That information was produced in I about two working days and, considering the type of information
. requested and nature of the request, NSRS considers retrieval of that information to be outstanding. Unfortunate 1yr;the retrieval.
of that'information:wso;notydue to"the QEB" records retrieval sys ; tem. *iltNa st 'r'eIrieVed 'b'as ed'uponVvbat: people M(bbtb present and ioreer..,T)M,ewployees)gremembered. JThe t' exercise, higblights .tbree be , records ;ere 5 currently retdevable but . dependent r' points OT6%1e;j, W:.(l[ 2)*pe6)1Webb'difiist' be iconsiderediii"inte's'ra1 part of. a < ret.riers1Gyntem,'a"oid E(3) theTdcvelopmenf of a retrieval' cy sys tem UwillWdif fl' edit.. ,, _ . . dM Considering all the ebove, QEB should take steps to assure that the NSSS and principal piping contracts are verified, indexed for M.) retrievability, and stored (either hard copy or RIMS) as soon as i.y$y g is reason-Sly possible to produce a quality, unable end product. C. Sequevah Nuclear F1 sot 0 N 0C at SQN bad co.rpleted processing a11 of its records. The geo-eral records (training, certification, etc.), hed not been pro-O cessed at the time of the eriginal investigation. Since that 7 investigation, the SQN RRI was develeped and the general records were indexed to it. The records previously flieed en plant rys-
.) tems remaired as they were found during the eriginsi investigs-tien with some additional indexing.
An 1 RRI i bad been" prepared :..tos :.enbance NUC : FR" retrieval of DC-7 - records.P ItS vas '.reviewedt by NSRS 'tand" judged to. be . a good description . of we - records available .but of ,little value in locating ;thef records. Various pieces of equipment were selected by ' ESRS to deaccat. rate their records retrievability. It was
' f ound tha t records retrieval was dependent upon the collective memory of four individuals, a lot of searchios, and not the retrieval system. Two of those people were NUC FR employees and two were DC employees that would not have their present jobs in the near future. It is understood that sloce SQN pisot systems records have already been filmed and the hard copy records destroyed, the task of developing or retrofittiog an indexing i system is extremely difficult and in s or e *c a s e s '-e.m y not be justifiable. However, the future usability of those records is dependent upon just such an effort (probably in soee cases a manual indexing on a frame-by-frame basis). As SQN is dovn to f our knowledgeable individuals, it appears imperative that addi-I tional personnel resources be devoted to the indexing elfort.
7 T
1 3 ..... l The system for vendor manusla was reviewed and found to be in ,h'.k good condition. The manuals were indexed, systematically revised, , i. and controlled.l.~ A question was raised by NSRS regarding vbetber '! or ' not any of the manuals were considered ene of a kind, and , f' - -
; y.:
therefore, in need of fire proof storage. SQN agreed to evaluats thatconcern.,p .
~
g, g O D. Vatts Bar Nuclear Plant
. - . fjt0 NUC TR and OC personnel at VEN vere in the preliminary stages of developing a system for the verification of records completeness, 33
' t . .;
indexing, filming, and ultimate transfer of OC records. At the . time of this review very few records had been filmed and trans-ferred and most of those were being redone basso upon the diree , - tien given by the task force dis usted in section V.A. and the . The RRI was understandably not coeplete RR1 developed by VBN. , and vill undergo revisions as new systems of records are prepared
~r' for' transfer; however, the format of what was prepared appeared - descriptive enough to allow retrieval of information estaloged and filed under that system. Both EUC TR and OC personnel were ,
- consunicating 'about ' specific records systems and the level of ,
u indexing required. Current plans and enginates include 100 per- - cent verification of records completeness and computer indexing
""D) . ; , '. of about three million entries on both document and folder level indaring. One problem identified with the current approach was 4 the apparent informal structure of the transfer process with regard to identified interfaces, priority for transfers, sod for-
- mal acceptance of the records for completeness, readability, and y retrievability by NUC PR.,
-) At present, 'through ESRS requested DC documents on QEB source inspected , contracts , the records retrieval systes at WBN con- ,,..r ;
h struction .vas ' determined to be very people dependent. All docu- E sentation. requested was found indicating the required documenta- - ;t [ 7 tion was enaite.'. Based upon the future level of inde:ing in the ,
, ' l. .
RIMS systes, people dependency should be greatly reduced and time ' ;. ' '; 3 D' for retrievability enhanced. - 1, a .. .- c . .. w , Vendor manuals were controlle'd very well. They were adequately r- . indexed and revised.
- One problem regarding the lack of as-built -
drawings ifor:the solid state reactor protection systes had been identified and 'vas in the, correction process. No other vender
- manual ' problems '.had been ^ identified. One enheneesent to the vender manus 1 maintenance program was the identification of those plant procedures vberein the u.anuc1 was referenced in the front of a ' amnual. . ' The 'supervison of document control and vendor :.
,y" nanuals 'section identificd several areas where the section was ,
trying to improve its programs, i E. Vender thouals il
] The currently appliceble procedures for OE, 00, and FUC FR vendor
. r.s out i control vere reviewed. They were found to be selectively vague in that implied responsibilities rather than specific 8
l
f l responsiblitie s were assigned to each organization to perfonn . i
~
the same functions. As a result it was unclest as to vbich ! maintained control over ve, dor manus ts. - {, f organization actuallyA task force was developing a new procedure regardin .
. g,. l tenance , cf., vendor manuals which should correct t.ba t problem. .. ;
I t Mf ; V. PERSONNEL CONTACTED '
'(
A. Of fice of Nuclear Power ) g [
- 1. M f l
Records Officer, Document Control Unit j C. Cannon
! M. M. McGuire QA Analyst, Quality Irojects Staf f f k
1 & ,. l G l
. T C. Birchell Compliance Engineer T. !
R.,L. D. Cowart
- Quality Surveillance Supervisor D !
J. R. Crisp . , Admi.nistrative Services Supervisor l
. Z.!M..Imbiri . ' Support Services Supervisor - 'Y] Y N Compliance Supervis>r j' 4 GJ B.'Iirk I.3
' l
. Document Control Clerk b{;_[g D. O.!Lockmiller Regulatory Engineering 'fr
, i S. B.' Miller .
l c L. M. Robles O&E Superintendent 'g. Plant Manager ' N P. R. Wallace Inf ormation Systems Specialist , N. M. Velch
'I 3* VEN N
.R. J. Blevins, Jr. Information Systems Specialist !
O Administrative Services Supervisor R. T. Chattin Drsving Unit Supervisor
- R. L.iBeatherly ,.
' Ccepliance S, ction Supervisor e
'i p
'. . ( R..,C..'Sauer ." ,O&E. Superintendent x
,: ' ' ". . E.,
S. . Villis .; o , B. ' Of fice of Eartneering c' *
,, P. D. Andersen -
Document Clerk, QEB , s E.iG.iBeasley. Assistant Disizion Manager 1
- @;i. ~'
3
'..h%terials Engineer, QEB e f,[f;'jhiy@. !: 'J.i M.i D." Conner 'l Dilverth. ' *
, Directer, Division of Engineering and Technical 4 ; ;i i h::.G., , .WTi.mi g.- T .- Sestices
- , , .i .
' Administrative Officer, QEB t ,
' V. C.' Grstes' Meterials Engineer, QEB .
h H. W. Knox ' 'Information Systems Specialist, RIMS
' V. Koger 'i
.Matericls Engineer, QEB .
J. T. Lewis Chief, Information Management Systems Staf f , C. L. O' Dell Materiale Inspector, QEB J. W. Oravitz Chief,QEB J. L. Parris Materials Engineer, QEB
' D. E. Smelcer Section Supervisor, QEB J. L. Snyder
' hatericla Engineer, QEB J. M. Vinebrenner
[ 4 I c j .
-n
r i .T f K'1,' t ' ' ' pgge; 12 'or 16' [ "I L'"' I g .', / i',f j M " 3 ' C. Office'of Construction p ' .' J, l , .- ., i t 1.q'c.'
.; ' Central Office *. t.,
..; * ' . , . . ' t 't .'s 't
'.,jf Assistant Manager A .1.C.'Kelley ,,
l ,,' ;; ,J.' T. McGbee Unit Supervisor, Quality Assurance Branch
'6,",
i
- i. g ja..R. A. Pedde Assistant Manager . . .g
- J. E. Vilkins Retired .-
l *
"d
!. 9
- 2. ; ' S.9H, ,
l .' Staf f Supervisor, Office and Civil i *. l D. A. Bateson ' H -' '
' Engineering Branch t
M. C. Shivers Engineering Aide, Office and Civil-
; i-Engi.neering Branch ,
-.; .4
. , .c
,,s 3., c:f,
,,'. VEN , , a
,. , r. <
Supervisor, Instrument Engineering Unit i-
* - i, R.'.V.
.l
..j M.'S.'.Forster Johnson .
Supervisor, Document Centrol Unit '
., ,i; iM i": S.' A. Luck .
'l -
Engineering Aide, R5 hit. ' ,- 2
'i
,' .,* J.;E. Smith Supervisor, Document Centrol hit ,a x.h gc.;,y - .
W;d - ; D. Office of Quality Assurance , N . J..J. Enightly - Supervisor, Documentation and Data Management J. A. Mcdonald Chief, Quality Improvement Staf f S. L. Patton, . Records Officer ,, j VI. REFERENCES i '. so , d FUC Power Procedures
! ch . .
l 1. 31, 1984 .- .. g }' FQAM ID,.g.2, " Vender Manual Control," dated December o,-
- 2. ID QAP'17.1,'" Transfer of Quality Assurance Records," R4, dated
- July 10,'.1984 , "
Io- ; .-
- '.. i. ,'
- 3. NQAM ID QAP 17.1, " Transfer of Quality Assurance Records,"
L i . dated December 31, 1984 ; l g.p :Q,;;j. _
'.. p:1w'.q;yypr.,.. ,1u 3 .: . r . ', .',, . . 4. ID QAP 17.2, " Quality Assurance Records for Design and Construc-1:, ,' tion,", R1,,' -.
date.d June. 8, 19 84
. .. .. - I
- 5. HQAM ID QAP 17.2, " Quality Assurance Records for Design and Construction,";' dated December 31, 1984 4
g: l'
- I
- 6. H-0QAM, PART III, Section 4.2, " Transfer of QA Records from OE g# . and OC," dated October 12, 1984
; 7. . VEN A&tinistrctive Services Instruction Letter D-16, " Retrieval of ASME Code Docur>ents," dated January 9,1985 10
.i
- 8. VEN' Administrative Instruction 4.1, " Interface Responsibilities," N"
'; I.
R9 :[! y ,,;- , .? ' ' , 7 3 i ,. . e
' f ' .g Engineering Procedures ,,
- 1. QEB-EP 24.37, " Product Coerpliance Data and Quality Engineering .t bq*
Records .- Processing and Disposal," dated .lanuary 22, 1982
. .I :g ;ij
.; i- ,
- 2. QEB-EP .
24.58, " Handling of Supplier Records," dated February 9,1979 l .6 ,,e ; #,- . j Construction Procedures .o
,I
- 1. OC QAP,6.2, " Vendor Manual Control," dated September 3, 1985
- 2. OC QAP 17, " Quality Assurance Records," R3, dated October 1,1984
- 3. OC QAP 17.1, " Quality Assurance Records," R10, dated October 1 l '
(
. 1984 . ,,
- 4. OC QAP 17.2, " Records Retrieval Instructions," R1, dated October 1, - a 1984.
f , VEN Quality Control Instruction (QCI) 1.08-1, " Records Retrieval,"
@ 5. <
dated May 15, 1984
' {.' '
N 6. VBN QCI 1.40-3, " Universal System Program," K2,' dated October 12, , t 1984 . ,. Correspondence _ ., g ' I Hemortodum from H. J. Green to Charles Bonine dated August 10, 1 ,. ,
- o 1.
1983, "Bellefonte Nucleer Plant - Microfilming and Cataloging of !? QA Records,", including attachments . (DOC 830811 007] n..
> ;,i .
.3,, Ws. .
/. . ', .
lU .
,' 2. Besorandum from C. L. O' Dell to nose listed dated October 4 1983;,pendor Records, Study Team Beeting Notice, Third Meeting" :?. , 4 o ,
e , o ', , *
' -t n Memorandum from H. K. Sprouse to G. H. rime 9ns dated October 17, o*
- 3.
.1983, "Drsit Vendor Records Study Team Report" "
..
- 7. ;!.. .13.%p P
- l .:
'?O 4. a,hemorandus'from R. H. Pierce and W. R. Brown to These listed ff-}' :.I .j;;' '
y ; n.......y,--,C : dst.ed November,3,19E3, e..
" Meeting on Vendor Records" (EDC 831103 .: . ,
701
.. 2.n ..,. y ..: q .
,, i v'
s, N* -
- 5. Hewerendum from J. A. Mcdonald to Those listed dated November 16, '
t h . . . t:" . 2,4! .
. 1i 983,'.;.".Transmittsi
. . . . . .. ;., ; c.g . of Revision 1 to Quality Froblem 83-2.5" ' ,i, .:. :
f.
' q ,; ,
I'I '
- 6. Me,orendum f ree Charles Bonine to I.. S. Cox dated November 17, 1953, " Transfer of VEN and BLN Site QA Records to FUC TR" 3
.i ,1 (DOC,831117 001.) -
S -
- 7. Ee.orandum from J. E. Vilkins to Those listed dated Detenber 5, 1
- .1963, "Transf er of Reccrds from Construction to NUC FR" (DOC 831205 M3) :
11 '
,. r ~
'.t r ,
. I ;
}
~; ' ,"
- 0 -
. ATTACllMENT E Page 14 of 16 fs,
- 8. Memorandum from J. E. Vilkins to Those listed dated December 22, 1983, " Transfer of Records from Construction to NUC TR" ,
(DOC B31212 005)
- 9. Memorandum f rom G. H. Kinnons to G. F. Dilworth dated Jsouary 5, " l 1984, " Vendor Records - Interim Report," Administrative 1y Confidential
- 10. Memorandum from W. R. Brovu and R. M. Pierce to Those listed dated January 10, 1984, " Vendor Records - Interim Report,"
Administratively Confidential i
- 11. Memorandum from R. W. Cantrell to V. R. Brown and R. M. Pierce dated January 26,1984, " Vendor Records - Interim Report," i Administrative 1y Confidential
- 12. Memorandum from J. E. Wilkins to Those listed dated January 26, r 1984, " Transfer of Records from Construction to WC TR" [ .'
(DOC 840126 002) LU 13. Memorandum from Vera Koger to MEDS Files dated Febrhary 17, 1984, "EEDS-QEB-Supplier Record Files - Meeting Notes" [.,h,[ (MED B40217 005) i eM 14. Letter from NRC Region II (Verrelli) to H. G. Parris dated
,N March 13,1984, " Inspection Report, WBN and BLH" (A02 840313 006) j
- 15. Memorandum from J. E. Wilkins to Those listed dated Karch 16, 1964, " Transfer of Records from Construction to NUC TR" g
(DOC 840316 006) so ,
- 16. Letter from L. M. Mills to J. P. O'Reill;, NRC, dated March 29, 1984, "Retrievability of QA Records, VEN cnd BLN" (A27 840329 006) l
!O 17. Memorandum from J. R. Lyons to J. E. V11 kins dated May 24, 1984, l o "Ve.ndor Records, Requirements" (OQA 840524 402)
C 16. Memorandum from J. A. Coffey to C. Bonine dated April 13, 1964, *
" Transfer Request for Duratien of Construction Records Generated '
-, j at SQh"'.. ; (DOC 840416 002) l
- 19. > Ueoorandus from J. E. Vilkins to Those lirted dated April 13 1984, " Transfer of Records f rom Construction to NUC TR" (DOC 840413 005) ,
l 20. Meoorandum from J. L. Parris to C. L. O' Dell dated April 16, j 1984, "Procencing of QEB Suplier Records" (QEB C40416 004)
- 21. Meoorandum from J. L. Snyder to J. L. Parris dated April 24, 1
1964, " Monthly Activitiet" i
- 22. He orandum from John A. Paulston to L. M. Mills dated March 28,
- 1964, "VEN cod BLN Retrievability of QA Records (KEB 840328 280) I 7mi I
12 i m
.<-:j
1 i
. .: U .
- . .i: -
l' h d
- 23. Memorandum free J. P. Darling to V. R. Brown and R. H. Pierce '
- dated May 8,1984, " Vendor Records - Ti,nal Report Action item" :. '
(LDC 540510 701)
' {\,i
- 24. He.orandum f ree J. R. Lyons to J. E. Vilkins dated May 24, 1984, , ,,j, ,. . L
" Vendor Records Requirements" (0QA 840524 402) +
p$.. '
- 25. Memorandum f rom W. R. Brown and R. M. Pierce to H. C. Parris dated June 6,1984, " Vendor Manuals" (EDC 840607 702)
; j]
11, 1984, t l
- 26. Memorandum from J. E. Wilkins to Those listed dated June (DOC 8406 .
" Transfer <-
of Records f rom Construction to NUC PR"
- 25. 1984, .
- 27. Me orandum from J. L. Parris to J. A. Raulston dated June "SQN, VBN, BlN - QEB Vendor Records ' Noncen.formance Report" .
(QEB 840625 003) '
~
- 28. Memorandum from James P. Darling to C. Bonine dated June 25,
- r, 1984, " Transfer Request for Duration of Construction Records
,; , '{
Generated at YEN" (L68 840524 823) , M , bemorandum free J. L. Snyder to J. L. Parris dated July 3,1984, '] 4h i l
- 29. '
%,d " Report of Activities" .
i
, q ,
- 30. Letter from L. H. Mills to J. P. O'Reilly dated August 1,1984, N "Retriciability of QA Records" (A27 840801 012)
- 31. beoorandum free J. L. Parris to Those listed dated August 28, -
l
, N 1984, "SQN, VEN, BLN - QEB Vendor Records - Fonconformance Report" - (QEB 840828 005) i O 13, 1984, 3
- 32. Mecorandura "VEN ,, Microfilming and Indering of QA Lecords" free S. A. Burt to Tiles dated Fevenber(VEN 841113 151 ..
g ., '
-m : ,
19, 1984,
- 60. .
- 33. Memorandum "VEN ,liicrofiining free S. A. Burt cnd indexing toRecoc of QA Tiles4"Jated Forerber(VEN 841119 1 4 O -
I 14, 1984, z
'O 34. Memorandum free S. A. Burt to Tiles dated December (VEN 8412 "VBH l
,s. microfilming and Indexing of QA Records"
., .. , e r.. q .
, g Memorandum free'G. Wadevitz to C. Bonine dated December 21, 1984,
'(* ,
35.
"EBN -- KRC Exit, Meeting Fotes - 390/84-86" (VEN 841221 014) l 1
- 36. Mesersedum free H. Conner to QEB Files dated Februsr7 26, 1984, ,
" Meeting Minutes - Vendor Information and Configuration Control" i
(QEB E50226 001) .. j Miscellaneeun
- 1. Data Package on item Fo. 1-068 L227-0002, Peactor Coolant Loep
/
}
Flev Trenacitter end Associcted Asserbly (UEN) l 13
~~ ~ - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
' * .f, .
{.k:, , , s, N I ', L % ,I , ATTAClIMENT E Page 16 of 16 ' 3'
'l
- 2. Data Package oc Ites No. TVA MK-68-7, TVA B/M-47V465-3, Orifice Flate and Transm16ter for Unit 1 Reactor Coolant Loop (SQX) 3
- 3. Informal Note free J. L. Snyder to D. Smith dated March 27, '
- 1985, %ecap of Study on Vendor Records"
- 4. Contract Inventory Worksheets from QEB
- 5. QEB Computer Inventory of Vendor Recorda Completed L
- 6. FRIDE Data Description Form ,
- 7. Miscellsocous Component Records Retrieved upon Investigator Request (SQH) .
s' e
**T ,
e.s. ....
,Y.
N N
'3 O
iO ' , lo 1. f :. ., T l
.3 lJ I.
) -
r .
' 14 n
i 1 l ATTACtE1ENT F l NSRS Investigation Report No. I-86-129-SQH 1 1 1 l l i I i r
' i f
t i 1 l 1 T 00 4 pv4) j
;l4;.) l l
[ l 1 1 e i l
. i i
l 9% i t 8 i
- o .
.f g j ATTACHMENT F Page 1 of 7 l
TENilESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY l
]
j i I UUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW STAFF l NSRS IllVESTICATION REPORT NO. I-86-129-SQN l EMPLOYEE CONCERN NO. SQP-6-002-001 , s l i
SUBJECT:
SECOND FOLLOW-UP OF QEB RECORDS INVESTIGATION I-83-13-NPS l i, DATES OF INVESTIGATION: February 6-14, 1986 1 INVESTIGATOR: ![ [ l 79,T W. R. SIMONDS DATE' ,' y r ge)
*i Ig zm, l
REVIEWED BY:
'J.
As C. CATLIN [#- __ .7/J[f4 j
.i DATE l 1
AFFROVED BY: !/_ ' M./V ~) 0 Wf D. STEVENS DATE ,1 1 l
. i o
)%
f g 4
~]
ATTACHMENT F p8Ee 2 of 7 I l
- 1. BACKCROUND A Huclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) follow-up corrective action ,
investigation was conducted to determine the validity of an expressed employee concern received by Quality Technology Company (QTC)/Ernployee Response Team (ERT). The concern of record, as summarized on t.he Employco Concern Assignment Request Form from QTC and identifled as j SQP-6-002-001, stated: . CONCERN: QA Records are not identifiable and retrievable. NSRS Investigation I-83-13-NPS identified f problems in 1983 and NSRS Report R-85-07-NPS indicates g
. problems not corrected in mid-1985. OE, OC, and I
. Nuclear Power Records are cited. '
An NSRS follow-up review of Investigation I-83-13-NPS did find that corrective actions resulting from the original NSRS investigation had not been completely closed out. The results of that follow-up review ( are documented in NSRS Report R-85-07-NPS (Ref. 1) along with n recommendation (R-85-07-NPS-01) that the Manager of power and i Engineering appoint a records manager to provide upper management coordination for resolution of the open items which had been identified. l l Vly II. SCOPE l
)
{
/. . The scope of this investigation is defined by the concern of record. It is that problems previously identified by NSRS i investigation I-83-13-NPS, and the c6rresponding follow-up review ,
R-85-07-NFS, have not been corrected for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN). B. The scope included detennination of status and progre'ss of the open items identified in I-83-13-NPS and E-85-07-NPS as they pertain to SQU. , 1 C. The scope of the follow-up investigation also included discussions with site and task force personnel who are actively involved in the resolution of these items.
,s..
III. SUmtARY OF TINDINCS A. E-85-07-NPS contained recommendation R-85-07-NPS-01 which recommended that Power and Engineering (Nuclear) (P&E (Nucicar)] appoint an upper-level manager empowered with the responsibility, 8 authority, and organizational f reedom to assure t. hat records associated with the procurement and installation of Quality Er3i neering Branch (QEB) source inspected equipment and materials
) are assembled, verified for completeness, indexed, and stored for
. retrievability. The recommendation further stated that the appointee's scope should include all past and future QEB source inspected procurement for SQN, as well as Watts Bar and Bellefonte, and the establishment of a schedule for completion of past records.
1
1 1 I
' j
- 7) .
ac
.J I
ATTACnMENT,F Page 3 of 7 l f T&E (Nucicar) subsequently informed NSRS (Ref. 3) that an f l appointment had been made, and identified personnel who would J provide assistance to the appointee. Following the appointment, meetings of the nersonnel were held on September 17, 1985, and December 16, 19ES, to discuss resolution of the open items . identified in NSRS follow-up review Report R-85 n?-NPS. These * ) meetings are documented in refererces 4 and 13 along with specific l action items and schedules f or resolution of the problems. l IV. SIATUS OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED OPEN ITEMS i l A. Develop an Intenrated Records System for Quality Assurance (OAl j Pecords That Will Satisfy the Needs of Nuclear Power (NUC PR) and I Office of Entineerint Desinn Construction (OEDC) l
- 1. Paragraph IV.A.1 of R-85-07-NPS states that a TVA task force was working on vender manuals at the time of the first NSRS a
(
- f ollow-up review, however, two areas of concern were identified regarding vendor manuals as follows:
- I
- a. A question was raised by NSRS regarding whether any of the C2.1, manuals were considered "one-of-a-kind", and therefore, in need of fireproof storege. This finding was addressed in ese paragraph V.C of the report.
Subsequently, ID-QAF-6.2 (Ref. 15) was revised to require that those vender manuals ut41 iced ac plant instructions a will be maintained as QA records. This requirement, in combination with existing requirements of Al-23 (Ref. 16), ! appear to establish adequate protection for vender manuals for Squ. .
- b. 'The applicable procedures for vendor manual control were found to be vague in the delegation of responsibilities.
A task force was developing a new procedure regarding the maintenance of vender manuals whieri was expected to correct the problem. This finding was addressed in p .ragt apn V.E l of the report. Subsequently, ID-QAP-6.2 (Ref.15) was revised to more clearly prescribe organizational responsibilities regarding the control of vendor manuals.
- 2. paragraph IV.A.1 of E-85-07-NPS also states ,that recorde indexing procedures had been prepared and were in various stages of implementation. It was further stated that this item
- will remain open until more experience is gained by P&E 8 (Nuclear) with the records indexing system. This matter is
' discussed in the following paragraphs.
l O e 9 i 2 i
.=
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ . . _ . _ ____ .._A
l
-O I
ATTACHMENT F page ; og 7 f B, Correct implementing Deficiencies 1dentified In the Existinr System !
- 1. Paragraph IV.A.2.a of R-85-07-NPS states that QEB records were not adequetuly indexed and that there was same concern At the time of the the first ~.
- regarding their completeness. efforts were under way to index and NSES follow-up review, l microfilm completed contracts; however, a schedule had nota been Initially, established for completing the overall task.
completion date of December 31, for1987, was setthe completing by the P&E task overall (Nuclear) task force (III.A) However, a recent commitment was f or all projects (Ref. 4). 'g made that appropriate manpower resources willbe 1986, will ce met evpended for SQN to ensure that a dead 11ne of June 30, l (Ref. 13). QEB is utilizing a four-step approach which'
' i includes identification,' location, verify completeness, and microfilming of the records ,(Ref. 4). ,
l Sequoyah has concurred with the parameters that QEB is using to However,
'T' index their records (i.e., vendor / contract number).
site personnel normally must request the records by Unique Therefore,' efforts'.are in progress Identifier Number (UNID). l to provide a cross-reference between UNID and vender / contract l numbers. The Equipment Qualification Inf ormation System (EQIS) ' is being investigated as the link This' to provide this
/E$[4 item remains open.
kaiw' cross-reference (Ref. 6 and 13).
. j
- 2. paragraph IV.A.2.b of E-BS-07-NFS states that P11 OC records l for Sequoyah had been transferred.,or were in the final stages I of microfilming at the time of the first NSRS follow-up review. .
l
'Hierofilming of all the recordsHowever, underway at the time of the another 175 cubic feet of review have been comnleted. l contract-related fiits and various other records were )
discovered by SQN-DOU personnel in warehouses vacated by OC, in SQN-DCU and addition to several files at other locations. RIMS-Chattoonsa personnel are working to microflim these 1 additional records and have completed filming about 36 cubic feet. Manual indices will be established for these records pending resolution of problems 'Hierofilming associated with the Recordson an is proceeding Retrieval Index (RRI) system.
"as-soon-as possible" bcsis (Ref. 10, 12, 13 and'14). This item remains open.
- 3. Paragraph IV.A.2.b of E-85-07-NPS aise states that a RRI system was prepared but judged to be not totally ef fective at the time of the first N3RS follow-up review. I UUC PR personnel subsequently conducted a review of the RRI to
' identify deficiencies and initiate recommendations to correct any problems (Ref. A and 7). The NUC PR review confirmed thst the RRI was deficient in several areas and recommendations were made to identify all OC record types and develop detailed instructions for the retrieval of each record.
. 3..
t
-p '" '
- c,
**- ATTACHMENT F page 5 of 7 The P&E.(Nuclear) task force (III.A) established to resolve the
,open items of E-85-07-NpS has taken the recommendations under consideration and has acted to establish a sub-task group to
" rework tre EQN RRI using original RRI guidelines" (Ref.13) .
The chairman of the sub-task group has met with cognizant personnel and is proceeding with efforts to rework the RRI. A date for completion of the task has not been set. This item remains open.
/. paragraph IV.A.'2.d states that continued upper management coordination involvement at a level capable of crossing I organization boundaries is considered necessary until the !
problems are solved and recorts systena prove effective. , This matter appears to have been adequately addressed /by p6E (Nuclear) through actions discussed in paragraph III.A above. ,
- c. Clariiv ortenizational Responsibilities ,
7 paragraph IV.A.4 states that with the exception o.f a. clearly defined system for vendor manuals, organicotional responsibilities have been defined. Subsequent revision of ID-QAp-6.2 (Ref.15)
, j[]34 appears to adequately prescribe responsibilities for vendo$ manuti ljpte control as discussed in paragraph IV.A.1.b above.
i D. plenned Actions and Schedules for comoletion of Action l
- paragraph IV.B of R-85-07-Nps states that QEB had not completed
! verification and indexing of their records for SQN nor had QEB . established a schedule for doing so at the time of the first NSRS fo116w-up review. Actions taken on this matter are discussed in pararraph IV.B.1 above. , V. CONCLUSIONS /JiD RECOMMENDATIONS A. .conclusien The employee concern is substantiated in that corrective action items shown in NSRS investigation I-83-13-Ups have not been l completed for SQN. However, specific improvements have been achieved regarding vender manuals, and work is steadily progressing l toward the resolution of sthe remaining open items' identified by l NSES. , B. Recommendation I l ' I-86-129-SQN-01, Continue Monitorinn {
') .,
NSRS should continue to monitor the status of open items from I l I-83-13-UpS as they pertain to SQN. [p3) t . m 4
o ..
( ATTACHMENT F Page 6 of 7 DOCUMENTS REVIEWED IN IFVESTICATION NO. I-86-129-SQU AND REFERENCES l
- 1. Informal Hemorandum from K. W. Whitt to H. C. Parris, " Follow-up Review of l Qualzty Engineering Branch (QEB) Records Investigation I-83-13-NPS - l j
Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) Report No. R-85-07-NPS " dated l
- May 28, 1985 (t.02 850529 010) l
- 2. Hemorandum from M. C.,Parris to K. W. Whitt, " Follow-up Review of Quality Engineering Branch (QEB) Records Investigation I-83-13-NPS - Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) Report No. R-85-07-NTS," dated July 1, I [
1985 (L16 B50624 840)
- 3. Hemorandum f rom }{. C. Parris to K. W. Whitt " Follow-up Review of Quality En62neering Branch (QEB) Records Investigation I-83-13-UPS - Nuclear l i
Saf ety Review Staf f (NSRS) Report No. R-85-07-NPS," dated August 14, 1985 (L16 250729 883)
~
.f 4 Hemorandum f rom R. A. Pedde to Files,'NSRS Report R-BS-07-NPS - Follow-up Review of QEB Records investigation - I-E3-13-NPS,. dated September 19, 1985 (Col B50919 004) .
s.2% is y J.i 5. Memorandum f rom M. 'M. McGuire to 3. A. Pedde, "NSRS Report R-85-07-NPS." 40hi/ dated September 24, 1985 (L16 B50924 833) E. Memorandum from M. M. McGuire to R. A. Pedde,'"NSRS Report R-85-07-NPS," dated October 29, 1985 (L16 851029 887)
- 7. Memorandum from M. W. Madacek to M. M. McGuire, "NSRS Report R-85-07-NFS,"
dated November 13, 1985-(L16 251113 895)
- 8. Memorandum f rom R. D'. Guthrey to James P. Darling, " Configuration Task Force - Activity Summary and General Assessment " dated August B. l 1985 (R25 B50808 BE1) !
l
- 9. Informal nete frem J. P. Yineyard to'C. L. O' Dell regarding transfer of 00
' records to NUC PR, dated June 2B, 1985 (B25 B50628 002)
. 10. Memorandum from Alva LaMontagne to Nancy Welch, " Office of Construction i (00) - Sequoyah (SEQ 7' Site Records," dated Septemlar 24, 1985 (A31 850925 001)
- 11. Memorandum from M. M. McGuire to R. A. Pedde, " Action item 9-17-3 of NSRS Report No. R-85-07-UPS," dated November 21, 1985 (L16 B51121 802)
- 12. Memorandum from Alva LaMontagne to John Ed Hayes, " Microfilming Sequefah Construction Records," dated January 8,1986 ( A3186010B 051) 9 5 .
i
l s Id , ATTAClutENT F Fage 7 of 7,
\
l l
**tlSRS Report R-85-07-fiFS - Follow-up.
- 13. Hemorandum f rom R. A. Fedde to Files Review of QEE Records Investigation - I-83-13-11PS " dated January 9, '
! 1986 (C01 B60109 003) r ! 24 Hemorandum f rom Alva LaMontagne to 11ancy Ucich, "Of fice of Construction l (DC) - Sequoyah (SEQ) Site Contract Records," dated January 22, 1986 (101 860122 051) l I 15. 11UC TR 11ucicar Quality Assurance Hanual (flQAH), Part V, Section 6.2 (ID-QAF-6.2), * " Vendor Manual control." revision dated December 31, . I 1985 i
- 16. Sequoyah Instruction AI-23, " Vendor Manual Control," E71
[ .
. ~.
f . 1
. . l
. ..-, .s ,
1
.n. J a; + . 9 .
. l
. . i
- 1 1
e O e 4 e C 0 t e 4
- 6 .
41
ATTACletENT C i l I Hemorandum Regarding "SPONSORSillP OF THE DilAWING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND PROGRAM PLAN" l t b 6 T. 4 h
?. .
('l"?MT.1 g'%-p .-
.g e
O q 9
%4, J
3 5 0 1 9,
Sf%%flIlb ,P. 'W TTQ $ Y b' &MW Y Y b N Y h h f k.3nN3Wr$ f' $ , Y h .' N.. pg/.80ydHph O
.h %
b J4 8dhNW gwp. w. wbfh7I .,
.v. $f wp.. .bE([U'@Q b
%>M@e.Uh. *1 e mY w . .w.. -Qpl' s.i0 s'v
,C ' cpretleff, ett,eter ef xuelear. acilneerley.m n2 c-r 55 "835-C !
. 4 J
$'W' N d C S Robertson. -( Acting) Directoriefihuellar..Berflces,11,P ,
6, m y * .leJ Cbstraan. Ntht
.b v.r pen!0 9) g.gyw Configuration'Cpatrol,'Issk -
E yk, ' {! ~ W'n r i .M
, Fo
' wp. gly}M4 h iDLIld j pL.
' Iq .
w,
. [ ""I ' P.
l' W I
'MU
.y A.'
-QF"g!
.I
9 1I SYS i k stNt t 5t0CCL5E a%.n@IP OT. THE DRE'ING MANA0EMERT W. M jS 'W' TE@.h,QW d " + :1;j ! M Q l' W :.,'i N % N q ta(etentess.t i g M 1. Ybite' dated-June 30
. y$% L,
'Qdf (I
~
g%n , GM,(y L25860630E33)yU remorandum to.S.'lMfW,M"'ip)W. DT. p *'J.r ,W [h h
' , ,1986. yW n l rdpa We%'M(fPm',1flf m .h,M '
i .g ' i p * *' $ , , y"5 p N 6 y&,_ N
^
e - t l h 7., !2 f*y.+. hy [w[2N; Py seemorandum ~
. October;19.jl984,40EM841022,007)..';
c *? to!R; 7
' ?'W.1 Centre % ; 11' da p
i attnagepeatipecgram.' the DMS .ef f orti cust be as sumed k..,gr.Withtheitsebedeleddevoler-ent:ofacorperstlerconfiguratienV p ., y3 by.c.,,
%y, a.,
p spenser to a @ [* 'g ' i,~ N 'ig'aalaationTcharteredtoileplement'itbeDMSFregramPlanandprovide 1 [ I l .
.id. # 7 riegsaiids61ntenance.WIbelattachw-in Program' Flan [yidentifies.the:']4i'r. .,
( M M d fen f l'glicab ic al.C o n t r el' ;T a s k; F e r e s j sh ( CCi!3 Dr s wi ngl B a n a g eme n*'t S u b ts : E .N Vj i
.netivitiss andrecc:nnendaticM M.Q QWf4 3 r' i N. [
&Y @OW DASG)l & & % &isiestabilthtg}ssecrperate Gro & 1?!$ W $.D ,hW '. h k{h* 5k )'.
b ? l
/O hf sineQ[the;0ffleelef/.NuclearjPeverI(ONP)f.th's!DivislenlefjHu c' nfigiirit!'cis[stns genentirregia' nNithin' e '9 # h.
8.4 E: isecoi=nendf th's fellsintifQ@gj@ h . 4 1 ,$dg M assciallspensErhblp$hO Q.h Tp;t .$e61cf@s7(DMS)'.\w$fWQ'icEIDES 11rr$ k'. f*[,)#. -hh[$IMNDMMM M M.h, bT.[Kj. 'T..Lb f- h y <i. f i {
' 'hNfh'M t N Olhj
\Q t
.MM.,
;w nc
. . .W < l. A -
J. 4 ' hg%'d2oDMSsassume:thejresponsibl11tylfer.ith'lacbeduleicce @ler16iwibtstion erltboy MSIFecSetalPlan.' g D e yJ/ 7tdii!.. 4V n G.W Q.U b.' < 5' th y.k,. d$3 d DtSiss ' g .. W.MMWFpMiESMnW,qip%@W Wt
.eie?/.@W a
'W,%fffCf'.p 5 e c=s the. re spon
'*NNh.:O r6tinttining f
T E 4N sibility! Ek'Y P.?h'f M e@kkh*D. SiG U ui'% h MM) M4h4i i. L Y',)the I ylP i
&y%,,(l[W&.&"@4.c.Ibe:'Icnetlenof,DM g l ,,
MW rD' 1
, .i. 9 i hw 45 lhbethww m.m p.ww.:yy!(DRC) n tnda theg Ehtbe;Divistemic!!Micisarjconstruttlen
.j ; y.d,y.,j wi v
- p. % m ts h i nic .
M 'p a, ' Q' * %' hi'egbir~cesittifer[ DES 'I la s it4;diretters f idsht tf y t thelrEsbej t'"andilent-te - rs' f unctlenal il q, s - } W 1 .N h."ffp %,fj , . M. Nfleids hat '-
; i '[ 3 3.,;.3 y !The M WH . Q.WWW" :Ti',they;proilde @W di,tQ'intfjftd.T* 5$%fQi
.Q ~ . ' gidh;'W5J -; 1'.2}10.I ! l' ' j }!
i
't i ! 3;Wl DMSG (or. equivalent) remaln@:throug ,
.the,eempletlen,cfftbe' gh
'y . : .pm ":h 3 .6.
..in;1ccentatien of the DKS.Pregrem Plan. i, ;". . S* c"' : }
il K ih s,.... .f . . < . q.a) @ y g , g g r f'^",i '
- . i. y':h 1
.. "Q.F.; d7 "g.gniebecis /p.) qt.. .Eetifl, entlnut .to;ebate;the DESO g(cr{
e . . , ,,
}4j i eq k.M+G%.
M..thesuth!Das.treiterrianaemp1 Ei !Mtlenx%e[d@mn:$yWf( Tc ' - w.; u..r..qm...,, n,.
! [ .".
t m4 : g me
.MMK1 gm@.m.$e!
y .a WMJ.e.:n,i.
. I ,en, . Afjr. r,.....q.
,,4 M
- h. t w/f. e -f yr m,ae e ao ?y,...N'I...,.h! g.., m t ?. 2ge g& fYkf . i $N'a,ff
. hs;!ih+k$o lt
.h,. yb . % ..ADy).v.mf.d:p;pW'uf 'g.9
.ma'D U 9% Q w %,.uo.
" a
, n8
- b. . .
. ' '. .: ';, m.
. l " t.,WfQ j [2. b.P75 n4 cm.d.04 ;.m ne c we't.emO:
i c, h.g mh ..-
? .T i wh
- a . p,hi',' ;,
1 ; pi.;oip
. %;M d g
- h. ? N.N' N N $ $;mOh pyrga-o.r.:b..".n.r w p.. .
1 . knY, W Cy.7 b s.o.pM.W;t 0 YYh E.a_aamma= E E M M E N !aE M @a:.mmmmm m#A W MM55h w a
1 i
.. . ?
j!' t C y ((7 U2 I i "O I b T \ 'iUI m Wr- +. &a.a. g,t a,p. , m.n.I' ,: b$
%,<,g.gV.a%
. Q w!h..
' .,, k u,, g..e"%e ,.,L' ,q g . f. g .if t. . , ;" q ul ,
7 . .. x ...C .Drotl.!f y f, p i
' ' ; #, e , o. ., i w ..*,-
r W ... , < q5 c . c fteb.*tt'en '
.' . . .. u mr. ig): y, ? I 7 - "r ,
%.. .?.
fijn.,Q:: i
~,Q11 W.y yg,A,,%a ,.. .LsMsotsstr.or
" atnen in .ouvidam: gg rmain 9
- i. y A. pimu.u. :. i..:c .w . W,pw.E.snm (ons) .c ,mMwp -
i;.L o 1 f h b'N"N h .h .N nr.se.u =" W h J I h< ! i g['4 .,Myto %a V t, L y"i. +'N .J. ! ts. 1 MW 1r.y kk v :'r 4{? p mp Ww ,,o w M.um. W m "ttere..WThl'v t , ts. . uVid I"0. .u ."3Jt..u .p 3 m
- a y' c.pp%f& i W
hgy cj . !!,,.wyA.M.gi h5'[hh g .m .d.i.b a J m..~ f!.'/.' N,,,t.
. . t v.,-
o outne1.__ ... . ::h,.. Wy m u ,,. iM r Mi,4 4
%y :
>M.u
..a w,t '- a . t : .n .,.. I p@:,.
- w a y pr. q g;'.k"?'Ts ! # l-l.:i
!,n M[ g:0; l ?,a > . ppr.[, ,n
.4 . .. ..
l l' m, -
%tDG:Ecarin.
(" Ma $ li 3 p.lp.itues.nt;.,.eJ gu'ahiL ttach= W nt) i:'.n!:. F L.0.?x hb m d i5 & $' M b , JW;6ph*1.&N*ksw h v34.rouu n c..pedan.r'Nd mpa y%p&g&@ pqwpw w".se ,
%:. p.ai 4 :
ce . . p 4 u. a <t.4Wzoon.s.,un a m n ggbppeg.pnspp.m:.; t., p y g$.).p!: r ;
- h. *r 6y_ .,pg.:
r$4 3 p Id t dteiat.6 4n usu c m <ai mjs c W ggc.0.W.0 ,; .p.3i . y.hp. 7 m g.c' q "I,:.M ' g's.-g/."uun':.t.r.*4sAycm%p;; pnecuneush ';n;ns:sB-t9 y y k 7 . g . 0 y, . W .ro
%q
'! Q 7;.. Q
. t
.ghj, [e M.s ,'
h9 g- ' jg , 4[FA il p wysealgv5 c109),c-tg (p't d 0g yt hff wt A@ sw% gift ti lMpu$m @b ca j' w.W 3I w { w#. o!@ hj $$
$.e g p$ M hp$ @g O ef4$m .y hl i
nq ph b. i Y.4.k. k
%w' am.. a . .- 1.s:i khh e
$.q; - wg,.,!&$6 m r m. ;. ~h .
r.n.g. 51mM1?g wx rg vM gg. g?"$ws. wh; m;T%g.,%.4 g; bh.a_m,t f.4hpn y m ig M:pr .p :R, . 6'}'Wjmy't:fYw n p , .? Up t +..
- I +r '- y '3 Ni I'
' M:c:p$ b g kM.i'
- l .
0N
.h! 2fihM$l "h:d .h.f.hifM' Njj;'%'!IM!.h'hh.('(d
'i .
u.. c M & m& N &p a " k epe , m@.4.$ mi..n
%?d"t.I.AMhgs,p[k"ddw$pkh.v.npr y M . q$h- hib h wW !M i
*- 1
~
ap$e$: w q E M i M iffWi W W.M@
- h. h t
e, %3e. .T 6M w..p em" ; . .!wn a a
.M.HE'VM m g'y $ Mph mr , i W;7!+!!$
f a' nM&y9..~ . 7.T@%d$5%@s. i q jid li . WMg, p5hd[. T@k U.]II. .awMm. ~g e .mPhy.s ..
.s m .v w w n r
$$h thh
. , 3 ,.
,- - .. - u , ,.
^
, n. , -n ~
m.., ,gg QfQ'!pi.n
' Y
[s;im)ssam Ne g e. w& h h N k k h MOWM v . w
.u . ,
a n.
. o)g.pc.m.v .T w ,'
i U" ri:d. s.c.. n-{d IO '
$y e ir,q f .y p$enw34.a.<.
,1 7 eq,,.'55 N.:t . Y .
P e ,a . 0 a I t.
.'r
" h; a:.tqqq.V,i.' m
? p,, ks..%.W.01).pl':.',,. g y,W1.g.
- " J ll U i.1 ' ' 'i9 W; H
.. o:.r u l' q t
b "3 y} PNM5 '.r%m!] d W 9 M"' M
,j^!. 'i
,b...:q'),jt!.f.p'i.(
. i' d !I 1 F
M[. T ii ) j ,-
]..' f4{ * );ljh,ii i .l "jTP tv ?]h. f ]' .Mj 4t h..
4 Fp .7 q ,.'- bl.,.sji.r.-. . .. 1.(.
;([j l t
,q d gTHCF., D,T. My ,%U
.w..(:NIi g
v,.%*: r: J,w.b'. , .. e m . n. w . ,sw . .a"g [
. ,MID. ,
, y;:El [. F.i'k[emp3 U'.M i p h -
w,[jh .
" 'i ! "s :'? . E! "- ' T.I.h i
- - T
.wr,xh v'sl k.4
& R
~
r ' r, rain:) Hm:: Inn ,"8" gp:.W 4
$. 4O<%%.a tW.g,.&,d:gh 5 "
?w."An na' s 9 k s
F?,3...,s 93...aqquu , Z. p,. F 4@r h ',,a%., a 4 p %iill g ,
!;' l,P 'Ui'.
.' g c
4.Sjh Dr4 if a %& : u,i1986.r p d r 1 .a M.saQ..th4$n!f.o<
;. M@.i;4sj.ldL{
'.de','x W 'E e'""
et ..:. 4;r.(4f' lik #.p, t fil(.dd. A i p &.w w 26, h yM, p. ;y su gy :a gi;3r.s. 4 7..@m,x.119,86.41. p 4p q a ionjf.,xA.J..q.%:.mE s kg , m%g
.i a M
f..W M!i@,pm.q@+m...%p ,i e .n'q$:ynhw:j);s. ifgIi se 1-q pp 4 e w.pma fy f .. qpw.. b '. .. - 1
! ,. - m 3 N;(3nW Qa.:. m).nio.p,@d.'.,N ENdidN i[ m- ~
9.n.d.!.Nih Mng!.t qpk n l h .Y:.hjr iM a: k h
.3 N *$. .wkh N ~4 m '.D9E WM W. hP
~
N,'.@v u.
<;,q)1[*hgi .
[' b
%j p $q W dp*. g..!dp w @j e.w e
fgMh3b.y;E dT P%W nh e N j;.QIEMW
- .- MMM MM %v.H&m&
w s W pr.:. g g
%w&a)s#egwA@h&
#m e.ppriW'. y %pyi gnffi.p. wm.m.
&j o .em...u.. u i
m m
. . n . a y , .. . n e&
6 n mwmQ.9 i .JQ" .h )H+% e q
#1ggr D n % m v.' ii d gh /
h,.a
- h. m 4 is.gjf! Lyk 4 m .. g) ogry J ~ h N h h,.@ h hh h '
- pd nh. Aidg4,P.' pM!it.~;3rong 6 . Nf.!hh
- p. -
p ro p%pW., s i. a il i ' f G 4 r.i% pf g g d N E h'i h T! 'l ) Q. .khkW$ihh N 3[ VmfhaffhN.d@h[f!h$o$
~
94 g. .b .a 0S ,, .x v ta % p & m . m*M t %.a v% %.a m m pkt.J Gh e: W hi .p.: E%a
.ye,.'
ms... n a u: Y_.'\;d . . % w0 em- .N !d
.W
+p c : ao h .n .. w x pa
.e d gt.:.7 9 . v. m ;: + q.h.u N m,cr % n N'A, W. d ,P w n G e a;
m B[ :W
- te j v3Rd.c%gr.gyq!,av.,3's;fyg/#dy'l,ip.fyjgyj{pr,j
.c e p. n. m.::. .w, 4
95os6.oz ..e , 'a U.,'.W : ,
. . d e.;:n..:;:.
=
;i'ap, vs'!) "
.:a or ve. w.a
,x . s
- 1
.m,Lu i . ; ; - ..t w d .I r i ,:.t .j
. i M vOI ' '"v
I- (;,.k. .).M. --] i.
.i t,.s.4.;t' J *
, ,N Ql . 'l, ' y
. y . .
*! 1- if . *d '[ , , .k .* h,h[ U h 5 ; ..
n"P . WW '"U ~h a It . r.EcW. Mu e W G m W,.W W W a y'd ,h@>! p ,;*O - -- ~ ,
+ y - .* .g . ; .,rg.7'r :,
.g@.3.: W D i:, M . W L . yq...J % W , ~ m *; .L
$I
'. t t i
'f -
'ff h. [ W :1. t h f'1{..,,jb.lM,%, h l
.'e.eg.q.A. h.' w. $,. :. , Klz..I, - i 1g,
;F.1...n!!p"g.?'..0 jj
,- i m
- a. . ,: ,P .i '
bate 4 De s c r i pt ion 'e f Chief,e. - l rn M lor'P":s@h ^ l , h' (gh. A 4/28/86 init al'issus [ h'. I'.h ;
' i Key! ed to ref a t this Trogram Finn a i ll6/26/86..
' I j
kM % .h'. .N7.; . ' '% sn . interim Program until the ONr Docutnant,} fg i l l' !;i ! d.gHansgement o$- Eystem. Program Flane are ' leptemented h;h. 5 h h[p[k :.,(7' W, i. h, , fb $' M'.k.,l
)'; Revise scope f :h of this rbN Program !.. Finn 7d te f
! p f ,NJ,Tg[W ; N. .! .
.4 F;;lnclude selec t docuernt e , t o r e aso ve the h: t g, f, s l I,(h'[P T
W th r. Mh[JIM)dr?
,c ti lN te A O; '
.. e developmentef,theConfiFurationControl,jl
' Dravitig Module, and to reileet h jh'" .y.:.',
p l I.1JE'g . t %.3 J 3"c ;j...: ' i CJ M'gh< y,' b iI . organizational changes. ; f. . ' l i,
, qq .q l F/t { t'.%.
3 ; if
$ f'Nl K "1 Tb . . i,I , T ' .i. " . - ,
.. t 19 b-i '. 1
,,,',,#'t8., r. e.n A, , , --
t] . N. n r.w., y ;.'...+.J o .,., .c .i., o. .
;i ]
I e . .
. . , . ,, . 181 3 ,a :* o
. i).c T. .. . 4
.e W L'..h .e1a-a ,..C. . e i'>; o,. e a ih . . "
s.' .+ L a . - . + '&lM]i,q. g%l W, y . y Wp h@,W-U, W a m. .i '
- 4 I .' t
~' i e.
M,t.,x.&,.. y&.. W,. W m '.... pa...m..N #w:n. . f.i;g IL..!ainfm}% d,7,3;'mv..i,b' p ..) .. u. F MW q%.v a { d. 94 ,d,
.3 7a. . -
J y
;- ;.'9,, .
4 r .
,,4',, , '. .J . r, .Q's
&.. a r .
v , . O, ,.
. .I .: .v .m;,. .
3 1, {,.L;I,' p.i'r. r. n. .[L...o, . i , ,
.;. :*i ::l y
8 s ivi 6
.. et fods.. a ,i.e ; .; ... . ., . 2,.m 't'i "l.if. ' ~,' 1 il . . .
i' 1 M' "'M Rj 'i ' 'b t'h i
'. - II?:di @q:,[,
s . n . 4 . . r #. '.. .
.e
'9 i* *M
%3 JF iVi .P.) t 4;,pS I.IW i .wg jd .W i W,' q M' b i.t.'e fy Q :. m , s,, y;. $.c. {
rgmy@n,gW:}t.w.q,'.y.f 9.: 7..'W M WN$g E..,l< 0, g;M,P;8s,N W,- 4
@9 ] M,.
b,.y g. %aidi g J p .J e/w u i
.cmb &Myl .n p gr.,
- > H S... M.i.,,#,;
q. e .4. c 1". .9s .y. e b. a. 1 1, .- .a r. *. . ,. y
.e . .
- t. n.
. I' .@ r..L
~^ .,, $
..g.
%p.j..: i.pl l
.k 'a 3
.*. 5 ['. h '., . - f i Y. .a - '
I h li .b N f*.. mA
.l',' . i & n. w . u . n w x ."N.,w;iil[
? 6 r N, i'W 'T ,E '"J4 ti'.!j 'i' 9' Ti':' ' ' . M M 'l [ *J M ,
m; N n';t,. M p.W .l.', p %.I .x 4q' '.. WW.*,.m.j;p,'w,f P i y ,. m e
. .w. .
,I; O': h;;...$
# ; .; H m m u k!.:.:.u.M.W.iN.M.,' a .g r ) r F. v,. Pt. *. '. e.. ; i..; ; ,:i
.i M, ,pN m+ ig t f . e.. l . 41.;pn~. i
(
* .v i
- t.
s , '! a j t.. '
's..e,'i.c..,v,ia.,E' ' i' Tt T.'. ". " t'.V ' : ' ,I '.'j !:i fll . .-
C,5,3Itf@WITSidY
/,'4,fN
.4 .
F .'$pimf...:,. i . '". i o. h
. i,l' ,{6.q
,lN;f
- ' L l
Hi[i N l '.'.% '.'6; d 8lf #" % ':i' i * / l'i* :t W L i;'.; ' P r l '.i ? .' '- i .. ' . i !.f. . 4,. .:d,
,W,cff I ,. 't!.e + :* ' ' b.7tM ' - - $ s-
I'..
' , { .i . -
r ,'.,. , ,8,.4,, . , 3 '- .;i
,l. ,
b . "'8 -h, c ? * - 'U."4
]
' M b'.'1 b li * ' i. ! '
k 'I ,h
<,. . . .(";: 4' . ' .;.'* ' }mi }' .m, 1.<0
.h f.
< l .. sh..<p. f) w'. h4. . ". d' , , . r.s...f .y.iW. .. 1 t pi .D' . a; ..#.i::4.c: . ;:l.&:
a . . .;1.. o ..J q . a' .*.1
' ;i1 ,
M. p.d:g.*..y:Walp . . . n .. e4 ,8. n: . ;':-
.n.
ill!.i.eh.=f l M U .g;f, , *b,i L J 2. Eb 'h'
..' ..'j ,:e/pi
.k.eU ( }1.,. .v . :",',9q, 9
@ [U b td I ich O . .lI 'y T,j'['
g iI.. d I , '. ' { . k[/'A 'j' 74 ,;lY).h. h.., . . J . 6m n t . i..? 4
" d'.j' i
7@4 i{m*9J ?. ,J. .i'.Q
'. .p.M{)h n.
. g *)
nd l.e. .. A 4. . ., g. ). 6. : p.g.hfMi/.4,'.l'T;.A;M . 8 i.l* .). m. g c..rI:l,P .:.e. W..,is- ,s..u, - W ! ! v e e . ,.e k,5 p . % .s L EU r:t
.; ii ! a..gt.i-3 mi....d:)r.g,
( . . 4
. o. i
-1 j v, y 8
W .er:l t.', ./,L!h.> ai . u%: pJ
,,.r/jh. 3, , . . . . , . . .,:,, ,4., il. '.7.
;f
- i. . . . . V' .' ! $ps .j.r.
l i ! ..p .' .';. *i. p2.* . , M. . 3,,(p. . (., .'/ J ., . , ,
,. a i, l L .", R. ? .l. !". l *
- r. e , .
4.< > .
. . r. n. .: n.* s ,, ,- . v t ,p .
. " . , ' , g .,
. , c.".gs.r + %. .u'..;g
. ,; r,P '. .;; .d 'ri N-x.O..:1.J'6$ . : g.AWpt t. r!. 4r ' O.. . .. J. .i !R. .,, *, ;h! h . . ".. . .. . p .3. ),
,, , . ;. ,. p I,t y e ,r.htp t pf ! &q .';i: ,!
pr,.S 4 t $v,9, NJ.1,t! n.N.,.....
# =m>;@g.* .
14 - -
.lj,t%.W, f Q. ... q; >,r .. :
,';: M r yd .,y e.J : ' '.c, .1',.:l;pf 8 !.P.,c.r. .
5/ r
,,J.;$,~1:4,)m::g 'f.y@,rC.. .c.,, r. ~, :piat1.b)ty 1 .,i h"r - . b p .. ,.. N . . ,'.. S, .r, i
.o.,
., . . , . M. . , ,
, s y,s. s....
. . . , i
. . . a. ... .
.,.s,.....
q
...a. l . ; . ..:. n 4 . .: t .y L .s s
... .v . , , . . c.,m . .., .
. . < ,s.. , . . n C'. v:,.- n. .,,,,n .. ...p,..s.,,.
.c.,.:.v..
- p .... ..,,. .:.. . . .
... .,.. ,. .. . .,. ....... . .i ,,,,s .;
........,,J.b,.. m... .. ... m...4. . . . > . y : .3. ..
3 .. .. . . . 6.,~,. . m. . . . .a .<, a. .. ,i . .....
- a. . t ,3 ,#!l ' ' , F .M c; "/fe }, ] d.' '.il'!c~;.1,
, J./WR g I.p ,
. . *ilj . , ' l ~ .-
!, I.f !
v7. ,. d ;,;.
.s. . . ..w.',w. m.i
.. . . 4.l rN.*@y*.
. :m. t .
r /m.ma,.. .q-. ../ .' wt, ' )- ,u, .m;: i .; , . c. . . . . . c.
.J l
.[.h h,h , , '. '. ! . ..,[. 'i,:h M f.f; [ . c ' -. .
,,,' , M -
. s. .. L.w,. - . usoss.c2 . , .;.
m,, , , ,,,- g' ,y .. ,,;l..n....n b,: : i *. ., .. .r. :. f .'t / 7 11
;'% 1.-
m, .. - 4: ,. , g, t y
.;f!.i .,p ,.
4 '.RJ f U!., NI. y r ." c ': .3 J U. ' I.9 f
' . ; 4'4 J ,. !I '
h**h h)2p .k4'thh . 3 F ' ft '; 1 i,r,.1 ! i,' t.:k. . {M,M,.i d '"'t
'c:;/ ' " O' . l %; 'dh 4 "'b I GMM$1bf' 3'.b,D'*/h'.',# .i: ., , H :' I4 ;;M ,d'y/.b WM * "
yn..v.M. . .,.? \. ...:7: MMM.MM#iWsW M
.~ pa. .-.,1:l:k,3 J-% .c' .;.; Li, ~ w .....m-m w u, .nm~r ",1 *. b, +hq%. . &usw.m
. .n. . , ,f!m:%.
. .o. . ;,A,orm,b.w.,mg-c., w.,*f.. =$
n.u.
.. m .
l
_...__.m.=.- . Q
}
~~
' ~ i' }f f ,{.h M.h.h. l i m f R
- l
!M, W p it;[j&r$y:$'d orkogn 'Y 4@..M @kei tcj'N:h" . ,.0 i-Vey@. 86 , ; h kgj klu , ia
.,pg W"fiJ!f'3.4)i k; :, e # @'[},h hlN
' k' Y. .*,f. !NN '
.1
~ . " " 4 'i! c .
7Ast NL'!y :.) U m.. ,. i
.- '1 -
Whi y, i f
. i l
e (
.w . .i, . ... 1 y .3g.m;altqscorE.w....~............g. ahawm i
p KARAD DiENT 8 UHM owr ARI m-. . , . ,, ,i . ,, , . iq .nO.ddm .; ;%4 . , e , }u k;' kl. p.w, g. \ ' r :,:, q.m;.jk Q ,
.N 3. " J'i .. . .;..:./. '; . ,. . . 1 l ',j[a
$.3 Jp tiJ. p,M: # 1i i .
.? .
pg[' gp r.II.M.:,A EACRe *' W tor C .c . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . v. . . . . . . . . . . . . ' q k q ,y . Kg.. ey'. * , ; %. 7' - qq y 1 c+j;,s . J I y{.g. @tg. ha j d ! t a.M,A. s .tv , rtoaRAM' ACnunES -... . . . . .;. . . . '% . . . . .. . . 2 .. .. l 4 r, + h.. M.i ; *4 1 t 1"$ M urp n
,M%g< e.mv 'dsornARE DEvnomENT.
- ." . . ". 'b . .
2 . . . fb "Rt r . :. l . . .1b ..
'"r .
l F . 1.H k 6f'"%.fA mM. i'"?':F' s z.~ e *W rRocEDunES . . .
.d i
5.; J . m s' ;.
. . .>. . . . . . 2 M.sh F m %" Ai b &llM ih
'. :. @. .hii. . . . yg y )<..#y j i t @) 'W" S;pM.@ DATA nase InTEcRITT u n!9 N . '?'?i l
Ma.g 4 li .., i.g;cg,g a n.e. .a. e 9 . 3 ]1,iit, g N. . g y$, z;.j' f.gN g.. l gm, . g .g..MWe.""~"c" .- r '
%s... %e . .% u. .. nf. m.., _.. ,.,
3 .$ y. ' *d l p' " k. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A 0 b
' ! c.
hpli,t [% p4 f , h p;>p ., c
..................4 o w , d s L.
%v:g b.dh.
..,i.
y h) :TIIJ. . M t%i.ii':';d REFORTIFC , . . ' . . . . . * ,: W ct .
... . +. g. o i
.. inhis . M'Pf}? 1 jj
' " h y'W
,l QAFTECIII A,.;DHS SOTWARE DEVELONENT[IMPLEMENTAsDN ?' 1.). f '
gT*@Mg'gE.i@Wi m .e N
.v'i :i:' W, ,o t
- rl.
i SCHEDULE h)c. .I'.'. .. A. .:t. . ". 'L. . . .
" ' ' .:- 5 :.E
,m I.1 ]G ,OI s 1 3
;j ('.' . m,%plp;.,,p py.S e"p
- 4. . . . . .
W.?'.M]. .{"}b,p:q:'.3 '.'a! i y,T.$y.M *! ACUnUES ' . ' . .AfD.p&
.e n,eV.* .. -
x, so .,E., . W l+ yt. j 'h,:E ell:c.46' 0 AFIECII; EdDHS FROCEDURES IMPLEMENTAMONh;
%;h .
- ) 'p@k... ' .
y? i
' T, .Y'd'i '
M TE[' 0w.. ACTIVIT a.f -d[o c .IES m:.ARD[ SCHEDULE f,.] .[f[:). . It . I..j.!r. . '. Wis, 7 M s,,w,., h ,'L h , ni N, h% n.m.v.,w, +w+ nm.Jw. F[$./s. y.
.ie>ils:ip. -.w
.: ~ . w
,., 9:.."4. ,itd9g mfi . y du
,. v' {i . e r -
s '
..e. '
g,j.. . c. , Ue., gi.r AF
, w b . TE RD II .C '
,C Wh t.ipt UMh,']g IMPLEHERTAMON.ACHVIMES.d
&g"g'J @hh .SCEEDULENQ.;f.1.]" i.f.ldlM'.P g,p.9 .Q. Wm..hi(yd. Hy*-@M ;,DMS DATA q (p.
g3 2$
.M
, m. p,.&, W ARD
- - $ w[.Ui!.I.t.'.Y.".'. ..
.~ 1... .,:. c.
. 8 ?,6 .
c ji )Jj $ hW..
.m.
^i G - rat. ..... . n s. .e w .. m. a n g.c r.q, a v.n.q. e.'im..
,. c . .
- i AFII.DII D .DHS EUETASK
- CROUP M Md!'I
'f'. 4,. .?.7 W."; 1 M "- J !L E' 3I
"?i.:'EJ .l[,J. O.'.}k gIrl -{ .
. ii ~'
RESP 0HSIz1Lin ES $ N .F.'@ d c M :I,u- .'. f ." :.l'OIh' N - i
% [M) }yi:;s AMI W[hw@h!'Mg,Mf U3...CAD,;0EG ...tM N <rM @ 9 & 'z ANI!.AUOH I
f' $ M 'q 'j ' ;i lJMd Di i jg- .*of,, vf(M(.N"nff ( 71 Y,4 AUW .f;? W.'Qh. ' }Q., .:l'jj lbr:!., A t )
- Mm .' eV . ;
- h. , r khI;MNh. .m'M.r.p'lt'S@;Q.4. hh.h'M(pil
.IC !"d.i.'.5 ::y .:t tp. l
- i. bhh bbb'b h m :W@s n jl
$a w w$ $q % n: h k},n.s.c j tW Eh u. :Np'@M !I m... N, a
. .. e. . a .t .. . . . . , . c .
.n.. m , . . .. : . .m.<y~1i! "g' ' .-H,tw...e. . .... ,
c wi'.t, D,5j ... ii 4
.r ' .;f. '
hi yT?..J,y' '.J ':t t. .h. ,P". .': 3'l ' .' ' ' .P . g. y .. g' , ,
- d. dN m!e, N
. w.
r g.n
.. w.w.,..w.4..~s .- v Ni.. k. emy m d- >y d,m;Eh. ,.,..m:n.w. .e!N.3k'yd! ~
v..n.h... h;?hi.b. .k
. k'p ,h h.,. %k.L. h. # .. .../ p s ,h, V r .c :!w': ," .a~.h N e N. M 1h)\,b.2;)5 I a ' p: M" . m!d 4 k k . -
'l -
M
+t a e% ~ Wy 9 / mE u2:m...u ...,3iw m W.~.~.t- W.:.m I W 1iU.cWm$ 1B f W b:T.:: 4>
J 'H' 4 5 q (f M'i to.>4.0 ' . I * '. P 8
%pty9 " !@.',W:!.giM
! ",'t"!':'$' C. b' .lyh i.h ":W k 1'.1
'yd'M.W4,: h p9 '.'A'.. F.k;shIU'! '.I j'f' j.!*1 !; - Wi'T.' d
.'.a.< N.N' l
' ..m nes. l
! f I .RfF '
.# T A- .n
%y ..:p p$
W t: W. W M W. . h =.m n %
..mw".u f W Y' .5E, ".
n n. w.;
. b : " "J wU ? - l,f.&.h; H
.e l W
w,.m..,.. .u. . . . .n: . n.. s.. .4 n, .o i
- c. .n m M... .,'];J;fia'l*> ' : .~ .
1 , .i..
'a t . t t :' ; J . L.
y . [c#4M i ,
.kN1shUk.h!.iM.i.!,OM'.'.tN.h.j...;;.hh 5 A.%.y.lk,:.'h'si.y h, l!i er N.h q* -
h.
..'bk_.__
m p M % e P~ ? y'N.%@ AC.a i 0.f?0Sih m a mp,h ;p g, exce, h ln QTlN $ N 'q 5 qM f:l&. DT.T b 4.M':i, . QWp.ith.'pur[.ese or this negr.. rt.n(ts:te provid,'sn gaev.r
.w4 h tivit s..ee m ilshed, in progress, .nd ptenn.d to .sisell.h ,n e t. bi [, $
qI'hj%W.,$ Oh/M.y,;/.h leplefortthe suOfntficeaofiMuclear Dr arever w in g Ha n s NS Th e T t,
. hrP ement'Filot l (DOST) (OMr), ,f
' .r..h y 4. f:l . ,
6
%4b,.h U 4N- h..:; (tgQPlan aed.DC5 covers package
' thetracking Y F": Mi arProach t'P 4Cb .'d k: required systen,q?q f!h m? ' " l ;to i.bQy %."/7' 'Sensure,
] .'
h*h.,% M M/I,Y Mi% 5 W % ;3A7!h hr,/'"7hiapproach isa nd to'!'pl define' l' the'e W if M j rollable data base that 1>rovides.the design, construction, f - I W .;'.g N'M db$.@!j forjthe f p%.. ( $"pM'*g"[ operation'orgainisations with the espabilities dual-dreving change control method throughout the transition to(2) providel-M (1) l')* 1to l the!Dealgn Change Supplement :(DCB) change centrol s>ethod. ) 0l ' !! gj, %a,g W%4,jhl;(:'dt, ' '@ /j awing,'11mited document,* DCS, and ECM pack t.)
;M
.J j' t
Q'h y.., This Progree Plan server er an interim Tian and'wlli[U h(W'.]
.(
.h Y be superseded by the Docueent Hanerement System and Chante HansgemntM g s a !
h,y % h..h(k.' feperation cycle, ,i f, System (CMS) prograe plane._ ;These' program plans will address ., eg 8?-V m$
' [d heapabilities to satisy CHP,requiretsents ,k jA ) fo
( dO TQ'q pnandement /' f or'lif e of plantp M, M othtrl,0MP,information systems lforf equipment , ;esintensnee , .matarla1s
^
and '.f or ' integrating 4
/
"bf inter
, ; { g2 f acing d(
Y with
.W d. gM : u;
[i. 'u@. p planning >and.s cheduling, reco t-e%I.-i Mp
%s p .Gl,G11[W W y NIhK%.M M 1 @]khW4hin(q) $$fIQX.hj.Ch MQ@k V." h. I .
h k? Q. k SCOTEW. h - Y.' ' O' k' ' Hhi . !! NI jgp M I pk" yTg%qThis1 Program: Flen' identifies'andfjetails'three e f forts :(1) y5M so f t 3)pstarbase.idgrity'inplace'which: i
*MP. j.h %ji g:.Yhdevelopment. (2),proceduresiandj(hhoffice of$tcleahlPever3(ONF)/aMf,hiyi$ f
%? j . .-T illd,tpen' cceple tion f provide'3 t .
f . ji,', g gM. {g 4 j r
[g.I/@dr.syeg'and M.W. control,/ and; provide istatus d
. iavings !nece s s arg.f orfcenfigurationleentrol."d,Ij"g!%@@[J S ll=ited y',Qh.
,accountieg idocumentJean
'f
'for.ia11' .,M
.pbIq.
change Q f L/ y g:tt! h TQ@iTM Sj '[ggYp' y f1II. tis.my@M!bMMPhp. Wy4 j L . ' 7 . .Ng @l 4 4$ib V W k
- p $(@j TACT.CEDITD jff,,%}y g JM3g@ ,#f -
l I r M d W.bjh)f hp ([3 ybhr@ghti J byjel ific 2 cespu terized: c peced 11mited!capabilitf hsdquestionablei,6.Thererytte= data beseLintegrity/ uhl, i. purpose, s Ih@y ,,
- q.im# h W"andqweregriv'en)byjpoorlyjenf orted;;proceduras."f,Deta
!ithf requent. c it atleen W %j b u
- Q ?,% / d! q rpfgN *,t andl u s a r; triining we r el ic Eif fliWt dr e s ul't &5in
'@"End ficcf ficist:les.QF%@, $
$k.W5%EOp$ihWE $Ib
%5f &.r 1td December /'1J3 BDMS wasiinpletantadaltojef f e
.,,,m'y 'L '
~
!' CW.
h( Np"d;'ltifesatien prailously'previdedny three. engineering 7 l . cystees?.[,Ths'edventageslof 'an, online 'cehputer' system shared by the't: ' b ;" Q.d'W hT b bIM'h. M M@desister/; constructor,Tandieperaterlto; ttack the ce=plete 11fe eyele ' E h dN .o
@w%ggHm.ypf;controle.;7.sktreree' 2 e.hf(dradnis% -
roved!.y(c1Mbihand - cctr))'recen PDe s:...o...,
$w m m.
.u
.m. o. .m- m, w ,hw., -..g. .e. .. . . .,',,4 , ._. e. .. . , , ,
w..s.
=
. ,e.w.
a , . ,e.&.,, . .y ' .. S * ' - 1
'n ,h. m/ ,n'! m
-J m
- '.g.,: m,w.. mc .h t ;.f
L l .MJ .lU t
,M
. . h'l d' .eq%p,a' ..3 qw '
RAU.pW .
"' P 7; o, , .,
.W u gid ;. n @m 'aW'h;u c.:
...ep.k.W. .t . % ,
. e gc.w ' w .c: '. . 'l,p . , ' .
'l ;id . ;u'9.! .
,.,!,M :.1. t .. . ;' ,
.. i_
.W aq < 7 , .J. e 2
. wV :i 7w' ~1 '. ::. m ;;~e.~i c.g
.i (;,. ..v w;;e,, ,,;. i ;
.. o x s . . :. . - .
a s. v.i" "m- . 3
' p ', , i p , u)I 9
L.: s
- b. :f f. ((. h , L N.( { .
7 '. :'h: (,,l! .' d -
' m: in r ".:.,, :. . , i 3.h [
- e 4 .
,!.g.g p q j [ ,,., g . ;j.
p ,N'p.d.]F;e .
.ch", t !."). . p , . ",'y b
)
, w.c a..~
I a.,w.wnawam.mayg
-- _ ~ --- - - - - -- _
._;,..,,..,. nyp
'p, p : w. ~ v. . 7, ,- ' ,. .. ..% :~+: ,
yy
.,.: hw . . . .
Adtber0C.TIlalso recoreended *that j!r9f tvers iptgjetypeQbe>U-devolere l l
* 'l.
My g j ' .defloof !Pplant! lup1 mated l i
- and 'itto support s'sipsle pseksged IM config N. s s' design,' vith: controlled k i l
' kv y ' configurat on 3in the forse of design change ~ supplements (DCg) dt?'U ' l yk i . design change output . Nh !
' : y.l, ifW '
k ,lM,,D.N iTWIMS,isubtask groi,'; "es ;f ormed!to proylde joyersight f or ths ?
- I,;@;;l. g' '%
h, y Ramlopmentiend K.hdadQ1e. h} program's ' Lap ementa drawing isnforrational nsedh',andi l I h, g -(.Il:c. y' 1I;(, )V f' M bl'i'? f prvpesejtbe t implementation'ofialistandardised' drawing manage
, y,:,$
l, 31Y.f' Pr ogra m Ac t ivi 0 t ie s d ,,W E
;"'i ' ', pf N P4GWW N
r .#h.4,y4 - 4lrl; , s,3 i.p ;gh y.*J i.{
- g. t m .ew .w O'I L $g ;
miA.%pThe"activltlEsl r
.'k . g" I ,SIp [$g
,
- support of .IHS;catergerlee into three J
.R%j
,, f,:, e fi's ' h(4.
forts,'. y,] k , fi i 6 W PT:if W (fii Vsoftware ': ? 'jl ,h development, ' '! :"' Q)d procedures,,andf@, ;N j .3 h j dat '
} 'f
lh :l , : ,y ' ,' i,. A."f1 So f tvar a ' Dev e lopee nt * . ( L , . H ', ' ,i ; '1' %* . '.i' P
'i ,
'M N:9; l 0
&(;fNi .hl f.
r.'p.,"4,id,,&,W v r.th" {-hh'i',;!!%.4']ll3tti1
.. o'T., ",1.'"r
,i
*. . ',., ~'s !Ci .. r,i
, *4 7, s, ..
,, J,i ; c f
ftZ 3., $g'; - g ji y "f ,. MP ' d,'.,vlg...P.r.,ogram Re >'qu rement s, .(N G"W,1. t j tlff
,2."...*'
, 4 r:H@y j h,q 1
} l9 Q s Db r . k! ,d I
'J' .
W.. n M.( l ;cd!7h7 QWf,M ,@/,'b'; I all'. nucle 6ar p ro j e n c t s . 'j 'k j ' 4, .!g. .,0 l N]O, Ib ";
<. ,t.q p, '
"' [b ' . % 1 T;l6 ,,(';r;.:-. for the DOS. design change ,
~
i b5 Ide status se ounti Ii M;;.5:
*? Id's .T Th,Prcontrol[cethod.NG N
~I N f' f
./Ihh1l5k,$ [3-..." N R k,' ;p M [ (N rWlJ[k G WbW ch Z; l.' % $ [ M,h!.f. M'N3" M N'i!!h' y ft '* :.
4 i !r W. ll h I
. -li rd yd.d>.' Q frIp..US $;rh./ Provide!s tatus accountIDgithroug
' ' ,s: modification /operaden't Q h'd% l fj.h,
'Wp&f '& '"n A L" V L.j WWWbs,fl 7:C
.-l
< % l k'
.M. 4 '" hL v
/
0.h'd' kb M,k:F'" htt
* &Mf.,,k h M 6 2.'.'d,h y,id[s qT,kM.@l.% *M 0 ? 0 '@ h ;l . W'M&e
&. $::y%lIiN YQ,%' A W'.?.jMINWW Implementation:Activiti d.YProvide hI dh5chedultsQyt :an?['N '
for ',. 3 .Ul ' ,I l &&&:='V 1' ' . distribublo iN? lk1W,itie j f" l
'. JIf'd)
DQ iy,$[IG,fl k h.l&y4pendix A provides 4theijlisting'of l l actdefined tv p yf b'?' !'" }. k
'Nhhi?.'f*'ItN'da.d. liO:.develep,:tMS, ,u WD ,cW.frrof,itware !to.,; support.,the , ; I. ,M 'h.; ; h re,,ju rements I Wi -? " ! 3 l N ' t 'RiT ' L. !
?
t'
'f R i T. 4.A i.d.0 eb ove'. D' M' ' L N:{ 2.??-"' I'
- f. 2, ,, M "$.[. ?. ... .' ?*1-0 I, ..;. b<a! ;
&;{. W.,%i I V.. . 'a. i. ". . ,.. . h
';&n..[. ,,$. .. pr ~. 3 l lC,h.;;". {..K e n :hpl S. .T.,..r e.c_e,dur e s '
- b. ,.g
. . $n ,$., .,
.*'.'.: s.
!i c l. . i , '.'.:i, ,.- : j4 .p */
. a J 'qw,r -
3q~.r s. ;i ...-, . ; ,,,, qs
- r o E ,ll..'" ,;Atta:'J.j g..wrJ-
. . . a 3..
8.en sr . ... . e m .. r+v ,
- 11,) M.i.hfl jp zk.g, . . . ,:. % . ! :, . i ':!
t .;s, at ? ;p mpg-([p p.n orag-]..Q't r..,. .;r : ',g k}.;;l.g . . N, 1 ',VPr$ gram, F. requirements.,?.'."N G . , ~'N*'P' d I s. d'4 3[3 We.T_rc f tl.W4f f lf %g'd:W. ' , l.]' ') h' i y,6 N [s . h;H V f[d. H, , f$'.I . [n:..I,! b hi
- i. Ma Michprocedureprogram.whicht'
- n - '; y D v m.,e.21l ;,wx,yEnsure"a.DP uppemwm%pn mm,..' r r. . p a
!S. . j fip 'ih4 O" ;y' ' Fi!5 ;"C.I.d Estab11shesteriterlito ef f ect's drawing pregram '," ,
wh
.hh i Nid controls : drawing
- Information,' and; configuration a ta tus. dh hdk hhM.b .
b %" ilI.NMd 'MI. b t .,C. W@h.;m,hp TJ1 rdDM g,.. b' f.N$/D. sensibilities.cy.*y,%. " c ,
?,.
'il ','
- .Nl[.,
;..J11'f[ ..
M' .li;,, ,li L f: h'n:c:h, 97,3. h+EsNtablish'es'i.eriteria:to "' ? Oh m f
;"' l'I 1; k;.)' h y_ ,7 -'M-;&,,;Ge.$.b.h,p.g .d';2 de fine d c 5De finesiras
'hf : . :' ' i . ;' .1 " ",g :f. 0y $1;
' hgi d.E[ Q.3 i O N I !NT t,b : h $ $f k h ' if Jp p p k Jd Ii fh , M tyd.W#TM!lMiT t:3.',. Y Standardizes.de finitions.;,,!g. Q jr,tM Y 'U :hiI M U fP NII,f q lN,G 'A k.d kd , $.;
.- 0;;; 5." Provides ~ f oriths , dual -drawing and;DCE de aitn change.M' y']l: '
j; .
!@' M !.i . .
.i.-t:h dr,,*;Ot p.h.,,$. i., M ',". . * .f.;.' '?.g.2f,w.
c en t r,o l .u rte. ,tb , .,.u:," od. .si .W b.; t.. . fii
.: . .r .(p.e..
; . i .!,' h :
.i ?
1.,,e ! l i h
^.'$',*
II
<. -. .y * . '
i
't . f ,$ ' ,e[g !r . 7- .
, i
% g3;p:p,$ . .;., ,
,,;,e,g! .
f f+' j p ! ',lI,8 ', [l ?.!, .,
$ E.':. h6 p;
, : , , J ., . -! !. "t mi n- ,. I f , : "T..
e ). ,- ., p ,
. o
.D. .,t .l.! ;,.a+.- *a ..i
. ! ; .W; ',, .} .>,.
W .Q.,
; ' . ' , . , , et . .
9 t ';, , ; * .p - j' , {. i . '
' ' i
.!,il
;b R *adj
,'T. m,v h W m m .lsp+) s . e':,*,f e j,$ w'.,'). ..'.r.. w : n w W.N
; [ ,[*5'--
m.. st... J . ,
-. . ._ _; , _ , , , g
. < r .m w
.- e r , . . , . .
m .w.
- c;.::;, ,.
- c . a ,. , ,
4 h i f %p q ,'"l i- b. > Ensure a DEP, lover tier'.ndlapspectin8 F0 Kl G',**.e2.$. y.'d d - is - ' 'd Freesdur ' ,g, . . , . 4,L .. ' h' ' f' f.l! h' q , incorporates the criterie god doppitions d U I. fig,h(!h ' tdY { i"W4. At roceduresuhTid W"M D '".;; 5[-
.*3 M @
KMW(fN-@d.i i Mg D. !'%'.a Pe., *"a" I' ~.,' ORP upperatier th'Haucand ==ineanaae' e' = r"8 o" a'aua1 k : (;q'-)i :( psm eystem. capabilities and provides operstianalJ, ,. di 1 g q g)g.w 4'Q b.'.W,7 M h.j g Ql .9.; p,; lt ' F '. With de fine e]W! tW F F.J1;t ".I h]M f, i? t,' ( 1
.4 ' '
ep instructi(ns,. 5 J . j* j, th M' j-9 .y. $ [ * " , '!;Q:I., , J ! NN h;d f M i4 2.':'. Implementation!
~ wmn,wn-un Activities .Behedule.,, ' i' i'an7d!Q' /
- h. I 'hrn
'1.
Sh:h p um[im , w[1 N Appendi I required'tdf}j: t f [ [ Mk W . h i.isif'p:,f'N M '.b
.Uyfl[
$hkE0hhh,b ensure.x B'providesIth's
?,
?
'"??"'"'N.&$i'*?$ i '
,M hh[d]j, l. . W h{/ Dh hi'f 'j I ?
i
),' .n b
" $k[l@. El$N T. yC. d Data t Ease ! '$ :1 ' P' Integrity,1.h'?.d..f'
' ." ' .;@[l" 1 I Y: k CN,'iw!.9. i lh")l,'4,M. ..af', Tk!1- h :h.OII.% '
- u. < .
s= R " uir- =*".t' ' ~
.,c mb'j t.
p mht
': y; >h gh. h.
c .- 5
- a. Define scope m of the DHS and DOSF data base.
3 N G P'!; ;'!,M. nim, [ '.; . .. / % 2 PAk $ a f. d '.,3.1 l' b. hovide . identification of c.andatory data elements.;' i4 jl k i: gd r.4{..efM;0 s,a f:.h{'dp h' r.d M'~. q. .i %u ch.n ,i , -s .$ - ,n
' in .
,t
*'i,W H!If,.)pdl.
. r , Jy;..N,. 'I #
P0 d
**'*.L l I, I i tj bQ.7) g r d, d kl .d fDS * * .-* jh 'IdE.. .*"$.d.,ds**
i,. .
..i'.'.d ' .p u
s,Gc 1M< Lc, w i$ gp.C.N. ;>..#, fil
*d
- ,n;N%w.'.Q r
*s:V fd~,y s r y. .nj.v.1
..,dt*
.: o, 'u:dt,ig.." t
.m. ;!.hovidej o
;~ ~ a';DMS w:
.w. ,
gand c b FM?, ' Q. ~% m.n ,$.h .a,.d f 3.s
.(2.!
S,w: firplementa t,iont s anActIvitie...p dgSchedule Q ,',. pe)n.7cmr.z .
,T ?:. " s h> j p g i.;n", 3 7 MOP i!' ' Y b ' $ k.
'p T C kQ .3.p .f,ph . M. 11stingio!! activities requiredjte. Uf Mf,@
, $?' (,g!s %} ' g[F,h[Cb @ 'N@kNMAppendix!C,p I .$.J':b %,'f[decsure th'e 'r.aluthned':of. datalbase c
- reliability
':d!U # Ph I f .dh)hk l. l bDMWWN: GiY~y?!.G.{:
'h'k "Y %
l f & $P :
$h-q . J jfDM%hogram' Ministration.1$ n 4); Q;6!By:}g,;.jlMi y' N., y[ S 9 -
bO! d Y Wfp4 'IFN.b../).fij '4 -l'M4 7 L% b. . h. MI a- i [,"P.'E. ND.IM@k.NrFi
, ; presently ;provided iby ' thelDivison 'of d dblip'ly bY ,h Nd[MEd i.$.@h,The
.A: pW.:,WM A. ucitar @gineer16d'ith@roers=. ; a d e.ini development: s t ra and tion' in plemets o f; tlen INS j/ i Tl
- g. dyh
. bcing 'ceerdinatedivlth';thel.CCT7; throughithe Drawing Management;g ' h[
N N k ; M I.GMr,#s?r:;.;./,Jirepresentativesi.f J /. Nidhj:,isubtask, iJ Group.pn[a,dditien', to' the';IHS' Subtesk Croup t 0 w i
't
$7 R~ t s] di d c:Ucentro11cdlthroughlDMS
%r W,g'l '
recg f sdainistrative: d coordinators representing T[f'
!1'i'he'responsibilityforthekh
!. ; h.Y,, . k,d e s i gn',1 ce n s t ru c t ici, TIED j o pe r a t i on s J
$4 h **', n Pi q 'f Mk f M'h d:%and?,respensibleffora,their3drawin
't ." ' ':1 1 ..M.i l' "9j P 1
$^ 'r 4
M D O forgadisdien'a dih d]r N eYrm:m. a nn n%e.e w4 n. e$r : y.f pGd,. a e.n m:- b&sioa;q* ?, ,,f .o. a=n nasoure. p< <ht*ig i,pp: ' ~/m';.. mf"J 5.p#
. i
&r 3., . . ~
g d, .
;i
~ Grou'p
. t v * ;p* %.
w
)
',' .llm. .eg s
g- &imenE h M. @qy.g yn'gDrawing'!Eanagentnt c.~
- qgyi Subtse;p:
e i!.,v mwe, m:.( h. ..g!. pw' ' .hX 'r%n Me g.dth, Mainlettativcifuppert%:bu:1p,y
- t. g4, "y. x 7;g,ap g @.A pg# cp % U+% 4 O f-
%s
*a <
':' ' o
- r. d ,d OL.;
! , irt ..J'i c u tu 11 e t q ;: @
W4 P1 4 p' y,d p ! / . t.' ..,.9 9 Jh:!p,g;pW rho :(1). HansreriMyk M .@;;qm~M,..w"QQ.p%' dN E' JM i. '[2. g JMhh ft[5$ j(3Q1nferr.ation System.; Specialist'tj, N..i:.f '1,
.pl T .G.. ' ::', .':' ,' ; ?.~
i!'d.' N.7 2. i.".(1) g clerh W$. w&, mM!T'n%',':d..t,$... I %,-Q. L
>i 1.:. < . o y_$yMMs p m , x .v, , .:
,4; 1n: , ,,p
,p tw,g ..pw: 'av.:j.9.
r.
, .o -. .a m ... ., ,.gw,q..,;g;;r 3 i oIy 3
;ga.n. g.y. ;;7 a y;m gh..
.j: ..q, y : . i:
t i i
.-),1,'; pl i
l
;, p.i.Y
..-6 , , . .. ,
ll I '
.t $,,(' . '
dd g
' ', h r.o,. w. m.t. ..ma,m Q
[.( d.d'
%* FEb.. ' a.U.'p'*.p,M.n
$. .,gdN,..w SWGd 2.
,[
.,,,4.$.m&,r,t.,d,e..-m.%s,P. d W c w wgm, .
n.r .qWM,3,
'.,, u.ed
~., m. .
w a.. . ._.,, _ .. ~ . _ . '
- . * ,-* .%.4r .h. -.w:,D u a .ll 4'.,hl>Q,.y y @ Q f 9 y. g ,
'- ,- Cf ;;. ..;}]') s - , . qi,7 1 ;; it ,, , C e W . 9 $,g[* gg((4)k 1):, Manager it. [ '
- Progreener i V o Analyst;
', 4 j
- 9. ;p < b ';
- i y h ., h..; jh.jp,%,:{a,@
, . . . ,* }c ';l o l p.s fl@y 7 ]'
g, 'ff 'j';-[);; [gi L
! W h n,'
s ig, b -
.. , 1 j'M1 y
h ,p
) j Ry s te m Ana ly s t "1 '
. ., > 7,,p py
- p,:iUp: ,.
> .g g. y .;.
d" ,'. o r
.,6i :,4'!c/*M'j .i W W $ [d!'] 9'id " C'N,yp,. : 'h,p 'j:
h ',.L$( hT16,MBACK1HG 0'lh I.. W % ' 'pllW
.,%h;/,f NU'gl'ga. 't.
be,!theIDK3 coordinators'land .ths T - t ergn ' o;~ 1 , 2 d we e5.h. Dd, mrhiQ,h h l
,M i hi sirpervisor,u:eet'to review'ths t ,: status'y.,ofgregracning 0
+
4 h b .. A
%ip'e~abl,ish A[hMonthly priorities ha,'9wa jfer futura r! york wmMWh'W and distributed ,Vp';.q (( $
dst ,p y , b utry! . 4
.hg "
f 'all(.IEB. user t i reports"arh 4 preparedfteviewed, organlaation'. that! provide; data, entry) e Into 4c rs the dats,)pse
.4 7, g y
ff g ( Khidentifyingeschorganisations.perjorqn , L ,jj ..g.J.All ::h: identitled,
, . gr f. 1j'h' ;(g,g 6
. 8. g k ,<
% rd" Y '. :! g,l gQ p n u p p i. n G'.N uionitored to.ensureicorrections.l . 7: .A*A'y.lh.,. 5
( . i :. q . .., N. h .jf f% hy j {.r h hvil$ UOBTIN , W. . , .h:: .f[yfj D fpith h'h.h [ , ' nt Subtask Croup forma
' rv$nghaa i,1 t
. i El n 1 e Chair n ag, based,evelopuant da a: ase
's tgl atus Y,c f j DMShO , f,
!j'
- '9fN,D r'eporti and te ';theedure CCTT,4.the sa deve lopmen,t.;
v, ,r
,,,1;d
. -N m .5 p:;h (pf g.
m q , .Mjhp. r ht'egiity,W,procgN..hpihNNdp%
' W9)'
M gI;.0 W%,[g:(l [-H.%(c h t i.w$.f.'5 i.l; if
, . ,,k M f,
' .t ii l h.5.N ,IM.f< p th r Gd;![31 T kI(h {4 4'g:,p
. ,d*, h ;* # I' R
L., 4% [J b'%y "ld i
)i 3'bgfic,' T fy!hp:ihg. !.
f W.p;"bip, t-la g,,K$[.q fb'&
'N k"O '%"P f;.7,0,V '- W .hu@' g3g:d h ;k 7, p ',t [q .
hl y' $.p, t' )0&q
.e gg: t ?
1.? ' h Y h,j &y. ;d h. ty &'kTf(!.'.fh' W kI : [l , I W 'ti n.
%srM m.r f.
$9. ,d.c:pIM iE M /1 V' ye.:
4%",jk.6q m .n a.p.= ." yi,f,n x. .h@ jti,s, .- $ tin.pggd[M i y-
?g in j g
l
...,.f.w :mQ w !w,..' ..!;4 %[d j M LQ%hhs0%h@r; ,, 54 u a; v4:p. m;
'm A,p , y & w
! , r aseQp.hW' . ' 4 w4 2G E , ?y U%g.h.w. .e h
,; & p %r. u ; w :p.., y k.m w.my,s p.v@yxp. .
wt y n%w:.=.Qv.- ..W.b..me pr.J.M
. npc., ,mqhm,e.. ; '
% d.
4+0~ g' W' ,$.odi.'.ii: J* j/.W C, t.J. i';: 1'b?b.. W, .d,..
, m r.
a* .W J f.r.:l7.f.. ,.? ;'l 7 e * ;'.;:.,.,),['i!.J:j
. ,2 .., p.;l .P.!.y(
e 4 p, . . % r A:; . t . :n j l , ;. d,.. .n (W;d;,t.d.
** ,g.
s-Q"y.d ^P g i:D
,,i,f.$ gk,.GiO.a.i:M...L.;upM.3:
p,: d :l:3f? .3!. W $1D G) C W .p '. i:'p V; .
.cm l, ;g
..L,;tj m ik.
a inr3
.k . . . ,m s,,. [yTT;3 .
m%'O.lipGb{JW Pf l6w ' yy!(]w@t 7 wprb, h'! yj>. .i. . yTyW. rhy'yW,p;gl;p'p NJp !,1N, p
. ' . * . f g ll..fql;,a,g
,'.:m,4 .u
'n !w{p,g ud a #iM,h.u[.y%. rpv .A.g.r
(.'.p..48"b.y.y@tMQ!!li. qh.m'rm. fp e
.W ;;**dib.dl'.
N#
, .W...w;;4.
py,:.gN, .(
% m
;.V, a iTN$$W(4;q.
, m'
,h' -( u ; gl,.hiimby.
#~ %
Jj%$
- '.m 1-, ~QI.y4.b@y,M,(,l' g.0 .
,T) 4 4%m A, .h.:'4m ;!rmMf%p 4W -
.n,!,w'qr,%m!:p.,i
/@%,:"ghtf.%
', .gu, . u, ,n.g p -a*g;:(
- .c, .
m PM4.< . .hq..,c...- ..s,eq,p%s - Q.w..cy..y.ps nhe .w %, w.s...,M { p d :$pM
.. .q-
- . : ..' Pr,9 ee
.. . q n ).,gt @r r ig .t . M.
ypj:. m%m.. , . . ' - m e:
; g g#.J M g;, y 2 ::*.pPJ h.;cf u
?g.M4./Jg .p'.mwgiq.uc.o ? M N.;W;,;.w) M ;}2cj. e y ...wEQp'A .mJJr.pM.ynu.'"
?! j$h M !a . hv.U L
', P. ..j.g. 1 y rW y m
- i. & , w ....,s.7.,. m n$,3 d @D gpJU[ 9.eumd m'.nF M;.H;fy'se .
nit:..;9,'g, .; e ,
%}p3f'hqh m.t.b., - .9..w.. .m.e.u.,v.; o de e m a. flfTf;' 'MW!MP.;;'! y,P)sC,'
;W,,, , ,
m m dte: w'ff.qd(r Tic,qgQ;:'!,{'y.h ....a y. _M. ., ., . ,. io
,w u w .w. .
w : w n: q 4 ,x w . m, m . s : m:q e,p.$1. u n.a y m% c r e e.p W, c.N.g,g.:.my:mn ..r.x,,prM t~ .y.1 s.s y p ;,] '.." 4 5,4..,p;Wp.r:n
%gg. ..fp2'.w:m,p..@M; t . e..o .
ph::.rn mr,.: w .p r t p ,.:.. . q;,1.
..L, n.:,;mzA.w.
2.e gep. h , u mH
- mp ::n:n a, .;q;dn:,a;a.aa;u.&nn:.y., u,::+Ly .
.n.pany.b , .u. ..pi .. m and g.w A p.y.o;y .,v:. e oe +
m.n wM w % m;., m ' - .!: - u . .. b,hW: ! Y, ,
.a i n. .+h w% i..[i /f (. i ,ma. j . l f, S,i[!
[: .j ! f.~ 4 .,, ,
~ a . a .: e .. . ,.~
t e, , u
,,w#'
~
.: ' .F e,: . ; . tm e 2 m.% 3 . , a. g/, n >y,0,sNc . . . g :, ?. l . h; 0 ; r..k,n:e a N .t .
,* ys .' < . n - J 6g ,
rMM). 5Mk
.y.]J sh).a. . . - l MW'3M:.ANb Y, ';.. '
,. fj ,,.) q ;.y .h q: . ' /.j;$i:f.i'N/h,. .;' s.h;k;,,:,hM2/5 lNi N >+ _.~
s
.,-e, l w r ., ..s ,s .
8 *9 8' L .s. . . *dI ..+-
,,_ _ -" ~_ _
., . q i .T ,
,i<
i w #.
,' s. - ,. , t.
,: . . ,< w .
.a A
, - xe . 7W'" :,4gsg, ;,.,
t* "?v ($ 4 m,-.,,,.'
; N-. _:5*.q.,.m.,'WR**y,"
~ , y~~%*M.8 -
.~
v Q : . .~ C i ' 7 g %, Ca*3Mi - Q h.ip.gJ.;m.W: . .,,'^*M..
.;A"W,.."Ls.w<w g~ u .
i a_ . ~..r.
@%hs,k e1_
.6 ~" . , .,~g._.
. g. r f.,, " a~. o -
'
- p. +sw..'WyyyMy.M_j,,_E" 9'
*f m*^$.:. . ,
.LWqTW~-
~
-Qy ~
g,
. Y
%..'p-
- t.,4: w.q.
- . n ,.
- _
Ms.k u' gx. u;. ec _ *M' - - -. - s. . A. O _ . %.. .. A
;W .gm,.. m. N~m s .
.= : ._ ~ . I.- ;
,.*;M%.~j;-K*_.=..;.6 Tg sgN"5 . . . , _ ..: M::%.
J>;s. ,C., =
. r4-c
, ~
.4. . _ ., ;gs .a1,,.
- n. '. "' ,. e, . . ~ cm+ we,*r' .7. ,W' .;-
& . .. =- n' r- e tY
_ . . . .=.. k W. . m
- v. %
, gc A: -
r, . 2
.- hy;}g'ggwV-l.{p; 2 .,-
t-r
._ . u. j.
3.u _i . h1 1b,
- w'..e:n,b~?z..,3.~~_.,.-
~
- t. P s - -
_ , r,:
._. s.
.. '% m T 2c ... . . ...
. . ~.-: , . . ~ :' g:. "= ..
~ .
3Frs5g*1.e.,.,:*M,~~..~":p h&W v.w ,,4. e . .: . . 3 .- . . _ . . . .. = . s.i; - d y, *
&. z...2.;- ;..g- .:. :.
e _.~.~= :.
,p. 5 -
*._ d . . ,. e . ;d.,*.,.a..~- .
. =: .: . . .
x4y - ,. - . . . . e' n
,.fgd .
e . -
. .r _.n:. I
._ y
~W"& .. .:.,.~.2=~- ~ . .: =.W
, e -
D .- , + - . . kWdb. 3 ;D.1 . i ,. yl- r n nc' M.y 4 . ,$ D - ,
.1
....i i ~ :%.. ~. . .. .- . - .. -
T';u.j
- c. . 3::*
g, .c . m W ... m . . . ., . _, e. = .= e6e& 5,,Er e ..- dn.c,a ,.- .2 .,~ n v W a; _ 4 ,
-t . .
T-
- m.. - .t . r ~ g
~i n "x1_ s: . . -. .. ..
e.;-
- q+h.,_p, ~1
- .m -s.
t g ;n> g "t ,~ e ?
- 7ws, .' . .w de g - - ~ :.t'n. - D. .
. ~~ -
..i e .
ta . ; e
'.i . .
~ . . . _:
"k8.g %l g,tg8 ; sd . . -
s.. ,e . +
.sa8 ;;~L M g . _ c,.f.-
t - ... p ,
, , . d 3. ,.f. on . n ,__.L.." .e *p - .e s a. . ..
. :. ,.-4
__.c- j< y. t ,e b u . h ,n . e , b :3 Ny. 3 . m~ 0 ~:m. .'. - m %m g._ .=$
,, ~- a ..
m a A- .,l : ._ .- _.,3 . h"41'*'g.y.e., o-x am m." e p . u;_~
.. .* ...t ..
' ' . m o - O . %. n 8 ~ . ". T o gW' .
~
. ,.1 w
g Apbc , o'ao ~ a ., g,:... '. , ,_pO . ~ . ;C. . U'.p.
~:.5 .
.r- ,_ -
rw :$ 4 ywr r h.- . h .
. .4 t, ... - ,.
%-- f;_ .
q..%.,e.CTT1.p~.T... .- . . -
,. ,5 .
a .. _ e .. ... "" ,. '.-'-";e_ _ . ~ .
. . m x.';a.W~
...w- . - .. .
Y.C i 3. PeK}$m.*4.~ '
. . ~. m m .. a . :_ .=M g_~q nw*.
. p' g ,
_y ~ : :., g
- ? .
.~- .r .
m ;' y -..'..s .ma. .~o. 5t
" C ~r - ~ :.2y..
C . . . w^ .
- .k' ..L c ._ EJr %
Y.Mi ."g.. 44- ._ =... , ;:, , . y 3,. -
.l -
.a.pn
- 'a.. ~i.. .
.:.r..
tu .g u. w.-.v: .m. #. = _. P . -~.
- .~. . ..o.,"-
. r. ~.- . r g.sf .a
~e.*:Wlam 3~~-
- e. 2 .
u a, .!. m' _ G g - :- .t ." . . .4
" c~ =.
- t. m.* . ~ ~
.&.w g, .
8 . 2
.n .-_ con.
.* ,.tA._
.i-
; 3 TMd' g*w~..4' .,. . . .. ._ '**M..~ tn ~~-'e~-
I . ;.
.~1m.
_ .: ~-f.,.vwc.*m
' . . v ,. w
. . . v ':
_.. : n...._:.p
.. x.- : f
. r'
..e. . .
- I
.. . ; g., . ..w.
- y. t _." . r .
. . r, p"Dw'r%..
t n- . ..-u:: ' :.* M. . . ., ,,.v..**. i
-9 e
e
.o.g wu
. c y . 3a. 4 n. - .
~
.n p .
. ~L. '
. .u
_.. ~
..s.y.
, . ^ -
4-- h ML W .4.g.
. smn.
..., . . - Gg.r,uvs .;
- . r 2
c e - ,
- r. : n a w .. a . .
c u . .g'a c~~.- . MSy- . e f . . . '.
%rs o* .<w.2.U..%'
;8
.- S t [ ,'%. O. taw a ., -
w.h . ". :- e _
...v . . .. . ~- ~-
,s:
- .v. S .H' . ~ :. . r '- ' ~... .. . .. , .- . .v. : &g.
.- t u...u o;t;., p.m., .
e . (n. n= g ' o..'s- :. m= , ,. rx: .. w- r.. : n e - .. 3 - f
.~2- '
..,r
%" n y.,,n.i ..;.s _. . .. ), . ._..
. e e,..:
.D .
ns u ,. m . gu s : +. ". ' a W . . . ., . . *
.- .L ._::= =3g
_ 1 t m.e . o' .
...a..
.,. gW : . .. ~ -
. n . u 3~
r1 cye. .P .: r. - .-
t.
fg L
, e. # a.4 ? e. t';- i . .. g ..
- - ..: . _ s. g %
C- 1 y. ..1 e.- .n orase, O ,.'s.~- .- E 3s*
~.
....u' _
*a...a=.w_=..c.{ :: .
n . .
..S' .
Y;MA..s. w'e9. u q:.;&'.s#O mw. c.m. po . . ..: _
% e n , tsr. h t O,* p".- .. :-
g .no. . rb,. t Mc..%.~ 3.:~ ' t . .
,. C' . . . ....
.l, d . u;r...D..gla .d = h ..~..1.'5*4..;.
e q c. . . : . Ns a a^s .. ,; t - . .. g s ". .. .t
. ..- rem h ," .r . .. ..
- e. ...c . . *k r :-- . g FVds .yi.'e.,. %.:'::.
p .: . ..
- E . . . : o.,sw. .: a.
$W@I,,.n n,r,.*,s.rror Of O. a. e g e aa. . 'd d ~k da . b..;
eW.,g..n:. ._.::';wc.1.f.:[.. .- a T- . 8 g .- . ;... .
- i -
a ;v r. sa :. . A c. . 0 - 1 T .,. t i7t g .sw y6 e. . 2
.gd e .. 7.
.....~.::'. . ~.,...: .h.
3,V. ...u. 5 . i.' y ae s,c S W M . :.E' y. A 'ynly 2 u .w, T. . n.
.n:
n g .,_o.c.f'lw,.6.pEb 'p apd t ' o e ,.,a, ..:. .y .;..~:..._.J~._
?.Y.ID C o.x..m,.m* .g nps e .pl~ .',.,:.-.~:,
. c
. . i.e ' e ' ,., ,, owo. : %.._. .:-
.. pr -
)
2 .g.
- f.p.on. c
. - o-a , : d .'+ ~e'e.*
.l
=
u O ' v k . ,.. :~ , .. :M..... .g..; a
. e , o ,t..% . e., .l f k- ,l .-
3 . - h,."_1- en~,
..le ca,. e v..:. '*.eveo*g M .
.#. 1 * . .'
.__~ ' . .
QWE .m3.,,.e .
, l s
...e.pn. m3L.N.l
.: f. 4. m%
tt;wV ,;..*t ,. . . - . .peac. :. O:., .;*.. < ; - . .. ._...a m. .. .
.. ..:. i _y * . .. :. 'c
._, n*n,~.: ' *,.a~. >. . - ..,^*r.~'.~.- ..
. v t e r... e..- R a ',
n
. .;. _ ~ . = v.f. -
MI r.T 2_yv.wo m e . D
's
. . . . : : 2,
_s.g I ;-p s ."%. *; ~- {a7 . e. D. .t.: p a.Mm:.. . .. . - [n,>
. .. :. .Y~ . .-W..::. . .._ -
. . (, ..
.1,.,",Wg '. 9.
y+A@i C.: d: . ,. m. p- - . . .
. ,.{ .' y 6 o. a ' .D , . ,
.. .. , . ~ , .. .
. -: .ku . *i_ 3 A. .a ~.,.3..MD..r.-;
3 . E 4, '
- n. , n a.:TA ..mx,w. / . . .
- . u" - .,. , , . ,e .m. . ..
sgW,.e,.~ g....*a..:_ .L...._ . = . ~ -. r G: . .. 'c . . n .... ;. .h .r. - . s'
=.-lT. . ' . .s..'; ....
y, M.Nn- - c.y.A e:x..u.- ." ~. .. . . . _.:..s'.-
., . 4.. 5.:..~=... ~ * .-
dWin. .":u ,a.n. a P v=. * -.. t :. : 4
.e. .., .. : _-
=.P._ .s q
.- .~
-..L._-
.y... ... : . . . . . - . .
u;. y.#?L n : .4
':.s *' .
'~. D . m..C,. . a m,:.o "~.l:
~...m x ; .. ~. f .. ^:..,-
. .._i v.,.*
. . ; ..f e..pf. . . .~
+ ~ 6n. mu r'..t,,=,
- .~. .
r
.y~w,y~:. .*. dr.';:..:v. %.
J .
. . ;. ; .l',,,.- .
P .. _,. .- 3:- s u~ .Nw3u. .~ .: .,1*s
.~ .__.a:,
.n,_, p. * . ...*yv. ? .y.,
sN. h~K*,p,N.W k '.. e - ,
.- ~.
.- , .[ 2
. e..
- - 7'._'....I,,~~. ce ,
' .~ .: e ,,' :. - .
- r. . ._. d...ps *p. . ,.'i .. wy,. . - m. m.9.:.. ;
p. 3 . s - a
- N@m. s. . ~.a d. w.*3q.t
. . .p*
w M~:fm 1*.
- 1. m.,w.,.ce y. . -
...,.s..
.y:mm.,ed_
,,.r .
. m;w.,&w..:,. L
. ,-r
.w- . :'J _
v ;. .~.e.n%,. #N& .~ n. t' ~ :. , M. I @; y '==.'m..,.
.q
..~.no _~
{. :
. * ~u...4
,m4- r ghE' .e,.m.a.
.- . - i m f. e .
g
. ; a . ',. . ,
- 3. :.a .% . v . , - -
. 't,. .-
.1
...~.L.'G t.
tP.3. e n, n. M g=;r ., y ,y* wep'24gs%74w;o..Z. w .
.( -
.f... .;, n g : Tc. GW'..2 o -
Wi I g:y .! .;: M 7 L.,.. :G eqq,.yg.@.y3p r:@..Wy.,, .h#._.UA
~ M3 - .
h t. x _. . M?a.p. t
.w~y ..I.y 5. sJ;*a.,.n.ef.h_.%r,:6..._
1 ..
..w.. . .'~..... .. m f
.y: .r, .
. t :. ..- - .
r.. r W. _ gL.12 l - .
,.p.. __...:.~.:._.._
.@ em . . 4. 4 .*-... .; . m eg.
, . .. . .. g n .. rs c t it @' ,
r .
,y*. 3y n,..n..4Lc..,._.,yp,m.*g.ng..,"^b'Tpr e.m.m d. ._...: ._
~. .. .._ . . .. . .. ..
e :m. .w/.. ....,.:...., .. g ,
,s.psy a
, sM.s ,m:&.
- t. ,. ; .; . i.
"QM . j%:.+ ..%.c t
e .e r ....- es v;.:w~.F.t.5"'. t
. jy
. . , .. .. - .. :. :=.
.. .- m
;,I ,a~. .r
~v.vn.q
.,m.
-o . ~. . ,.
.r p o : ..
4.s i~s et . p4.p.W~~ w3 1 g o-
- .. . .:~n ed.
. .5.
~. . :.a.
".'Qg?g.g.p.
3e s 1 C w.m . a m.n.g .. ..
,e : . 7
.- ..:.....m
- u. . . ..s
. .v s q~a,+h d w+.:m;. .
w y"spM.'::t .p.s-} , n. .'. :~K. .,; : ~ .
.r.s : - .
. 3i%q;.-ag g .e
~*.M.mv.w.,<_.d~ck;w.gw.io.y.c:... ..
.- vn. . -
.. :5._ . .
. .. : e
, s.. :.; . .
. . .. 1.:.:. c . .,-.. ., r... - c .. .iok r c ..v....
-~ ~ ..
- 2 .M;. a ,gs e
- N i ;,' ~ . . e wP: .
r -7,-- . P*. a - s. :. a , 9.r- c. .- a
.. .~ .f ,' . ' ., m ..A.e.. m. . _ ~.; . u..~ .. r. e. rc.O . . . cos.l- ....
... .p El . : - - . ,.
. . :..... . ..: .-~:
.ro .rs.w - a
.. o? .. . _
- s 2.a --
3 .f L . m p -
~~ ..u-: .
^
. % a .* . . . 3 . .n:.?~
- : ?
r . .. a.m.f.,.6. s . - .. Mbg,%..c. a. t!Nm y.n.% P .. .ew7 .i.:. g . ..: W.
. . 2 -
;., L.n. . - .
.. ... .. i._.. :
. ..; . ..c-.. .-..+..
.s . - .
- m. m
.*. .. * .- ..~ . :
,<.e.. .e -
.; % T5-'v .. _,-
..m
.~.~..
. $g
.,WO.yr,_#w":.....t~ ..1.w::
.2 .-
.- a. , .. .; m . .- . *
=.
.E .< . . 5 . ..-
y.1
.. . 'T:_ r , .
- n. . s.,.. . . e. . .
.cp n9 1
- s
- y ~ _ p .{9, v. q. c. .
y .. .,9
<p-J.._Ot..w[..y2.y~M'W:...%:.,..$sQ....:;_:
b(aMc. J ^J
. at . m4 .
,f.
,q w).wp a.g%p%Pm.mqg. y..L-a.
.e..e -
6 [). n h-
..i... C' . y ..
t,. f .,
.....s..
g z - n. I' j . N ,., ...-wa y q. 3u - ... J s. {. -
< - - { t]_ Wi a. .[G};.; 4. n .,.at.. .s. , .p4aM.,u [~Y.M*U w;d. .
- m,. L wpg,,,h,bjr e*
. . .. I
.tnr.t%a.'..&.
t -
'- C. -t
.t
\
' e-
,.< A *m1 1 _.- a {-
W_g.sge,Msi..g_vc.y_.,emW 4g%. 3 -oye- + n<r g g e. x.pr t.r0. ,gu..gt m. . g-M5MMM -
' r. r. y v.p.e o
- s. .cpu.bwpm.m.o 4
.4,,,,,,[-,., ,g c . w q.e g(!. 3.iF*p 4..
4 r.:am3.. .f , e s, m a pp p . ra - :., si , ki ?. ' T 8 % 'm . ' Puu
~ i h 4 'y' g"%'.U2,M W 4 4 4 1 ' n,2 * *i'1, d)i ,); l &rm.
f
- .i Q.,ya'. m{W.' n. 6wq w;. *% .- g.g. v
.; .r Uq:. k
- w. ,p.:n:(Hm. u 2 I x ::ns wug.
Dr. bg4 r
..i mu u wW.j. .m,4 a V .[ - g .~ .,.A ,:=g V* J. l y%
v G.
. w.g w.: l.eae.
M: AnllwO.,y r
, w. g. m .x .g g .gmop. m. , .n..n. o. .w~c .; , ++ , s. a.. g.g.
. s. ...
,k .
$ Wpld W % W S M . M: D. a:@,%%;hi 1
M, M..sW 54 ;3 WW s. ' Q M, . W
! . .. l 1
- PN. . ,k,HW I(I Q i 1 I ,).l . p r
y.M.d;,; Wp'r..::-;dM:.b.s.t
!dk[ p.
D.m' 9"
. I.'? d' '
' " ' '. ; 9 ;ll g.f E
- . yM
..d[g
- n x .g rp w. . q8 in'a i.9
. m a *
.t...vg. "nq j., e
- n .#i p . ,, u ~. .
1"
> h;M ' .y %
Ab).4Q.p a P W 3" ! t: . "
. l. . 8'
;1.%]W@ q
$Um,M. M. l I! 4 s
.,jh.
a;. [.2.Y ,
, .., .7;
'~
T . .'* =g.iM;$?- u,j M. 1 . tpL h '- 2. < ,
- .)Alv.i Q-.
iiG ,h. . .. 8 :o c ; %. . . 6.
..:.' .e ..u ,c q e le:ij-y :4 lla c3 N]'%
o ., a Wm ... m.w4.v'yfi N: . o W g.),[.'
/
- a. .4 3, -4 /u qm..".o
. 4. L. T ?. ~; . 1 '. ,.8- ~n 0. . m8 . ,e s' -
e,hr;; P 2.*j tg #.a m ,' H: e, 4 w g u.:*UE*eu. aa. H pvy- 48mu n 'y a s WJ @@> n e?. M.e .u.?;s,W.
;. :i : " mq:t Ml;W: d :::m..L. n fab :y '.mm4:. * -: Jc u a . p". E
..,'..y.,y.;u..u.,@q4;:;...E.hi)t.:a ,en..
.s e:.
e : z'f.q .
@p.,*. *
- n. . Q."y e r ..w
!c e g .g. g O!." > c' ) , .
n... ,'
;.:y 4 y,f;p, y .'h
.I,
- .y;,
- e .i,,c,,,:. (Ai,., ia ! .y. .;t,.,W.n.'.y;g n $$.n w'[
1:na w. nan. .g.wpp. a.n.
- e. /n.. ,.3. uc ,..,gpi ..Egng,p4,y a.
g m pwazt w,+ut W 1 c n w a. a
- b;bbg @,jp.h.. .u ,w.mh m; qg%c ; p.. e o e.ti d e d w m yL
%. p no
.d.. i.
? &p 4' k kt
. ... .m e .g w .s m:< ih Y m..Y kilhNh.kl om hh? .w . : .(3 flf e..sp ;
G.f
.b w.*nm. Am.p.pLg;$m'?:' ?lg?.
n, a .>.4.u t . :.w.9 p<a E , ec. y . c: c.pu.,
, ,r c
g; : m y.
- n v ; i vh .m ., T p. U.,
[t.4 ;.;. f.r.a..pn' ; . ,e , ' n4aeP...g'rs.. 8
- %:,..p q: a .J ' ' e, . .E .,. . ry:n;t). W. :,; a a
2,l4. J p t,d,.3, m L a.= + c,,iTu w, vf.6' W 4- .F:'. ,,,3V
, c. .
(f. Q.A, . s.,p;W.',[m.t b u, S. .'.o. , o ... . . ~ . . .- '
*.!. v .. e;,gj.l" l. e c e "- q"
,T,., g 'v:. /,j.i [ Mf;q. 3
.t
.vf *N e e s;'ee e.M,0 W c g4.!
.e ':p *
- t,f Ol,(4 Ii g j I !s.,n *lf'b
--s
* '.' ~*
d.4 - til f.U
.a!': y,% , k .* $ . .3, .3 h./$. m[,0.,m,
. C u;[;; '.j .; ,Q . ; < h.
,h1.,
,:;mN j- m,,2l. w - .a 3 w .n.,
- ..g M..,rp#.rt y 6.s 6.
=5
.:... fig! r.
e ,. .
. e c U/1 S, f i'.' ' ' :
. . ~e " . j. . %,.
', )jll [6,f 3
, Pie $r.% $ hm <d'u;3,J
.t .p..qV2 t a adj *F// u g
- o lij'8 5+* $1;'i,.
N {g y , A, a ..h a d: F2J.R. ? 9 "tt em : TI . . Hj r g, e ym. - pr, ' ..
;p)E we A. ;;t8,.. . :.r.::::r&e
, c: e =u .t.Mt p,,e g d .: ". .t : 3~g > l' .ua m..s ck m.n
- g , V,
,'s, !:h. .;3.E: '.b6.y .
hy is-khoh. '. !m. k. , :.:
,4 h
c h# ion. b....b.N*a . . < . , *"Y' J " N ' 'd h,1'd . . . w. .m1", -- e"" "w *"' C" * 'l' I*' 8 ^o e ..
!.i A h
't. 'o C L 2 68 .W M
*b 45l 8.: 0, fi 3d**,:Z .@["e#;.i
" c
.m:. Yto+?.nti -.c 8 'c t
- c r* ~ i
- e '
j . .c - f !<T 3,s.,,.. d.'. r." '5. . 3.$t.*8o- h M *cdehENf.)k,( ** *% wi n ; v t 4 "' I. 'E . U. up. ', e .
..r s.,P
. .E g g .I 3 .
.dc ;c.99 aqe ys.c.u g g.,M'[m a :s n j,e +
x,. i - g a s f ug .
. -rw t4x .y.i 1a Q q .muio,
'.< g.
kl.U!Ak.5%gg m&.cw3p
?:.
g.n h*,B %g ,.R.
)!:
p = :g'. r u n w
- g _,g/.m s
- b. 6{ Q:.
O F gy yajyh c mg p::, . w .M .e2e % h Mi pS.e .2f. p.Ne,hM&.dm'i eve B (t n M ; W .' 9c.d pt
-. ,.4 p
.v. w. ..[a mew:x...
n..n @. . . m .,:.'.: w:w...g.=w%.:,
.m v .w
,w .agr.q. .
,5
. w. x %,,,;:;'
. . ,e.:,,,.
- .n.. .
. 8Wir.
py 4:L.r ..b.#. ,,y .
*: C ff.P*. ' i - tg[.:q' rg'".W M C*..':"'. .g y.N 5.'l:..q3,..g).dm.:,=,
, r ,q. k . ;1 . n rpW,@i '.;;, p ;p. e< :.e 5
[3 ' . lie'.y*JQ M ': , 'l':* : .l f .'. .* ;& . !.I;. g/.h (;r; .@,;::J'4 ' '
, , , , ,J. a"%
a 4cy i';,. .i. , i ; O .3 ;* . t.
' i . _, w
$., .o. ,, W. i p .n 4..:,g. ,: . ,y a 3,.
e ', s3p. ..J2;n ; ,nw ;N. .n. . .' ', . . e.3r.ip ..aT t. 4 . ,, t,
. v."j p;;.,,.
, 7 u, j .n,: ,;,,.
.i.",.,,.,.....:. ., !' F
'E*. 'l
"' I' . ' ' ** '
*6:trh. /%.zw(( m :,,1 (..c.g e '.d /t li '"/-
* . , .N I . . .
. .m.a. m m e r w m y m w w p e6 Nwn w, ww-:<pfy.v.";/ct@.rfW,#MS&@@.;i,VFd?55:iEMMW d@M2:M
.- Q*.'-
.-.y .;;. .;, -p- ' . ;.iQg. - : ?Q =.=.,.
r-
, y gew . -
w:.e.f. ,.m~;T g4W,;+ A, f
- - ~ .
. P".,_.dr* r.
g =
'wgQw_._g.;.7c- g~. msg Em 1
'u
. , . . ' .g r
.~:.,.~.%
=Q f, r
W..gg. Mp:,:(.r. M3.,ae
=
a g. .-- %r. -
*==M.g- ::. .:.6 s.
Mt
= .
t
.kop w 4;:raa a ~~s. . .
6 3.Q.~.'f. , . :: m .s
' :. ~ * -
<-: .' t e.
_ h.. . m" A ~. y O ". E
.2' ;;. . _c 5,, ^G 7_ ::.'2.@.;..
- s. 's:. Ap .,,. , .
m@ ., .. .. - -~: :: - g.- . . akAe,- [5 ,' ^w;.@y e
~ .
- r .
1, - ._ .g
. g% .. . ...'a,.r.e,.e rt : c .
h _. ,y ML=
- _ :=~:~.r Y _.._,s, r~
f: % o a.x. ;. ' _e
- J ,-
- r x
M e 3., t e- . -7, : , e, .. ,c._
. . . : . , :f. ..
d - w.kLxyx_< A.
.r. t 4 ~ .ypw s , , -e66
@ q~T = .f
- , _*t,
..== :~. . '. : _
sg8 6 x. g, c.w.,. e . . -
. f'-j,,m 33g
&'g(b=pg.:1" f_
- _ v .w .. . ;. b w ~ ;.
. : y w=.
, g 86 p h i: r, -
;.pe g f,g ~xrm .e. . l 1
- -~
- _ ~.,.'=g__1., b - .=... . _dub.- .
- . . - - .~ ~- ,: -
C g 8. ,... bC.- =:,. ., . u ,,,_ _ ,.
%e I
~ .
- ' ,. .~-
~. ,~ T.}}