ML20236P086
| ML20236P086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1987 |
| From: | TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236N530 | List:
|
| References | |
| DAP-21, NUDOCS 8708120212 | |
| Download: ML20236P086 (40) | |
Text
. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- n ,
TITLE HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN' ACTIVITY VALIDATION AND L. SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW 1
NUMBER DAP-21 Revision Prepared Date Reviewed Date Approved Date o
g "IYw Q '*hhr , #PC O% da i %/v7 3 4 %d17 .
2/3,[ 7 O
. . -:-n , n. -s..;. ,;- !
f ju ![O.
, 9. . 4 f'7.
iTI;!] .
l E '^)
4 .. . . : .. f>f,.3ff[
L'.4 .
l
< +
,, b I! ,
,h ,
"?
s ,, . ... : r. ... . .. .
O )
i 8708120212 B70731 i PDR ADOCK 05000445 A .P.DR
x.
PROCEDURE DAP-21 HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Cover Sheet ....................................................i Table of Contents .............................................i1 1.0 PURPOSE ................................................. 1 2.0 SCOPE ................................................... 1 3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ........................ 1
^
4.0 INSTRUCTION ............................................. 2 5.0
('x- ) DOCUMENTATION..........................................14lg Attachments A INTERPRETATION OF HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES ............................A-1 thru A-4 B HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CHECKLIST ......................B-1 thru B-9 !
t C SYSTEM AND STRUCTURE BASES FOR SELECTION ................C-1 D COMPONENT AND DOCUMENT BASES FOR SELECTION ..............................................D-1 l
l l
l
/y
() TN-85-6262/21 11
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TE AM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOCEtEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW 1.O PURPOSE This procedure provides a means to confirm and document the I homogeneity of homogeneous design activities and establishes requirements for documenting the " bases for selection" of specific items for review (e.g.,
calculations, drawings, components) within homogeneous design activities for CPSES Units 1 and 2, and for selecting systems and structures (other than those identified in Rev. 3 of the CPRT Program Plan) for d
incorporation into the DAP review scope. '
2.0 SCOPE This procedure applies to the DAP self-initiated review )
scope. This procedure does not apply to selection of ]
specific items for DAP overviews of project activities or for DAP reviews of corrective actions that are controlled by DAP-20.
3.0 DEFINITIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 3.1 Definitions 3.1.1 Homogeneous Design Activity A homogeneous design activity (HDA) is a collection of individual design tasks that are similar in the following ettributes: 1) criteria; 2) design considerations, approach and methodology; 3) performing organization / discipline;
~4) design control process; and 5) design interfaces. The sum of homogeneous design activities is the overall AE O- TN-85-6262/21 Page 1 of 14 l
l
_ _ _ _ _ - - _ - ~
4 COMANCHE PE AK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE
- Number
- DAP.21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: 1 i
VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW safety-related design scope as represent'ed by calculations, engineering evaluations, specifications, and design drawings which are the products of these activities. A homogeneous design activity may also be described as a lowest common denominator task that does not include meaningful differences in the attributes mentioned above (meaningful being applied to the manner in which an engineer would perform a design task).
3.2 Responsibilities 3.2.1 Discipline Coordinators Discipline Coordinators shall validate the homogeneity of their discipline matrix homogeneous design activities and develop and maintain a list of items reviewed within the DAP self-initiated scope. They shall ensure that the bases for homogeneity validation and selecting each item are documented in accordance with this procedure.
3.2.2 Reviewers Reviewers shall provide the Discipline Coordinators with information as directed to validate the homogeneous design activities and to document the selection of individual items for review.
4.0 INSTRUCTION 4.1 Validation of Homeceneous Desien Activities Homogeneous design activities shall be validated relative TN-85-6262/21 Page 2 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TE AM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE i Number: D AP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: !
O ,
VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW to the attributes of homogeneity.
4.1.1 Identification of Documentation l
The Discipline coordinator (or designee) shall identify and develop a cross-reference of design documentation relevant t
to the HDA by reviewing Gibbs & Hill and THE documentation lists.
(Thiase documents are expected to be primarily calculations and evaluations.) Any other documentation determined to be relevant shall also be included in the cross-reference. For HDAs performed by organizations other than Gibbs & Hill or TNE, the relevant documentation shall be identified using appropriate project records.
4.1.2 Scanning of Documentation A minimum of five documents shall be selected by the Discipline Coordinator (or designee) 'from the set of documents identified in accordance with Section 4.1.1. to confirm homogeneity relative to criteria and to design considerations, approach, and methodology. The selected documents shall be scanned by a reviewer to identify if they reveal differences in these homogeneity attributes such that additional HDAs may be required. If the document population is large (e.g. , greater than 50) or based on the' sesnning, it appears that the opportunity for the use of multiple design methodologies exists, the reviewer shall increase the number of documents to be scanned beyond a minimum of five until the, reviewer has confidence that homogeneity has been established or it is clear that the subject HDA should be subdivided. The basis for the reviewer's confidence in homogeneity for such HDAs shall be TN-85-6262/21 Page 3 of 14 i
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE I Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: 1 VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW documented in the checklist described in Section 4.1.3.
Guidance on the interpretation of the attributes of homogeneity is provided in Attachment A. The items selected shall be distributed approximately even through the period of performance of the work as indicated by the current revision date of the documents.
4.1.3 Preparation of Checklists A reviewer shall complete a Homogeneens Design Activity Description and Validation Checklist (Attachment B) to document the examination of documents scanned and the conclusion reached by the reviewer regarding the Validity of the HDA. (The attributes related to organization / discipline, design control process, and design
\
interfaces may be reviewed and documented at the programmatic level. If this is the case, the programmatic engineering evaluation may be referenced as appropriate.)
Where it is determined that an HDA should be subdivided because of differences in any of the five attributes, the HDA chall be redefined as appropriate. Additional Attachment B checklists shall then be prepared for the new HDAs after the new set of relevant documents have been scanned in accordance with Section 4.1.2. The DAP Manager may approve alternative formats for the checklist (Attachment B) provided that equivalent contained and is adequate to demonstrate compliance with information is b DAP-21 objectives.
If it is determined during the preparation of the checklist that AH of the work in a homogeneous design activity performed by a particular organization has been superseded, TN-85-6262/21 Page 4 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TE AM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDUP.E I fm Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW the applicable HDA number shall be voided by writing the word " VOID" in the upper right corner of the checklist I (above the HDA number) and describing the basis for voiding the HDA number in the space identified as " Describe basis for conclusion." The DAP Manager may approve alternative formats for the checklist (Attachment B) provided that equivalent information is contained and is adequate to A demonstrate compliance with DAP-21 objectives.
4.2 Initial DAP Review Scoce The initial DAP review scope wra bcumented in Rev. 2 of the CPRT Program Plan and was validated through phases 1 and 2 of the scope validation process described in DAP-3.
g The basis for selecting the systems and structures for
( review by DAP within this scope was established during phase 2; however, the homogeneous design activities associated with this initial scope shall also be validated per Section 4.1. Within that initial scope, the selection of individual items for review shall be documented in accordance with Section 4.5.
f 4.3 Additional DAP Review Scoce The phase 3 process described in DAP-3 results in the identification of homogeneous design activities that were not included in the ini".ial DAP reviev scope. '
To gain the maximum benefit from the review asscciated with phase 3-identified homogeneous design activities, the selection of systems and structures for the phase 3 scope 7 additions shall make use of the " vertical-slice" approach.
( TN-85-6262/21 Page 5 of 14
4 COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE Numben DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DEE SN ACTIVITY Revision: I f VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF !
SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW j In the vertical-slice approach, the selection of systems 1 and structures is made to maximize, where practical, the {
i number of design activities within a single system or structure. In implementing the vertical-slice approach for the phase 3 scope additions, the following considerations shall apply:
o Where practicable, the selected system or structure the initial shall reviewbescope the same (e.g., as that selected for .
i if the AFW system contains a homogeneous not part of the original scope, design activity that was the system selected for phase 3 impicmentation shall be the AFW system).
o Where the above condition cannot be met, the selection of systems and structures shall be made to include, where practicable, systems and structures that have direct design interfaces O with the systems and structures included in the initial scope.
o If neither of the above conditions is applicable, the selection of systems and structures shall be made, where practicable, to result in additional
" vertical-slice" selections that maximize the number of design activities within a given system or structure, with due consideration given to the following factors (1):
- Significance to Safety -
The system or structure (including major structural i elements) should have a relatively high level of significance to the overall safety of the CPSES.
(1) If the system or structure is unique by virtue of the fact that it is the .Qnly one to which the homogeneous design activity applies, then it shall be irrespective of its profile against these factors. selected,
.f
()) TN-85-6262/21 Page 6 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK . RESPONSE TE AM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Numbers DAP.21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW i
{
Sensitive to Previous Exterience -
The system or structure should include designs which have previously exhibited problems for the industry or CPSES, and thus verification of' the system or structure should be indicative of any generic condition and i whether or not CPSES has appropriately de' alt' with the problem.
Inclusion of Desian Interfaces -
The design of the system or structure thould -
l involve multiple interfaces engineering organizations / disciplines among as well as the NSSS vendor, and design service contractors.
Desian Chances -
The system or structure should include design changes to provide the ability .to test the effectiveness of the design change process exercised by Gibbs &
Hill.
Diverse in Content -
The system or structure should include ' multiple types of equipment or elements and/ or perform multiple functions under a variety of operating conditions or loadings. Thus, the major engineering -disciplines should have !'
input into the design of the system or structure. .
l Ability to Extrapolate Results -
The system or structure should be representative of other safety systems or structures in complexity to support the extrapolation of findings.
The bases for selectina systems and structures for review as a result of phase 3 shall consider the above factors and shall be documented in accordance with Section 4.4. The bases for selectina seecific comeonents (includina structural comeonents) and documents shall also consider
-the above factors and shall be documented in accordance with section 4.5. The factors listed above shall be used TN-85-6262/21 Page 7 of 14
{
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEGUACY PROCEDURE I Numaer: D AP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I VAllDATION AND SELECTION OF
( SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW in a practical and balanced manner; no one factor is !
mandatory or should be considered to override 'the other l factors.
4.4 Documentation of System and Structure Selecti 2D Attachment C shall be completed by each discipline to document the system or structure to be reviewed for each
- homogeneous design activity.
4.4.1 Listing of Selections and HDAs All homogeneous design activities subject to DAP review (i.e., both those in the initial scope and those added through completion of phase 3) shall be listed with the
) applicable system or structure. The bases shall be documented as defined in Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3.
4.4.2 Primary Selection Basis An "X" shall be entered in one of , i following primary-selection basis columns for each non eneous s design activity:
o Initial Scope (i.e., the homogeneous design activity was in the initial DAP scope).
o Phase 3 Initial Scope System or Structure (i.e.,
that which applies where the homogeneous design activity will be avsluated using the initial scope systems and structures).
o Interfacing System or Structure.
o other.
TN-85-6262/21 Page 8 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE f Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: 1
( ~
VAllDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW j (Note: Where more than one design organization was identified in phars 3 as having responsibility for a homogeneous design activity, each such organization shall be listed in Attachment C as a separate line item.
Furthermore, if additional homogeneous design activities are subsequently identified and validated, additional appropr3 ate entries shall be made in Attachment C. If all- t the work of one or more of these contractors within an HDA has been superseded, no selection shall be made. This fact shall be documented by entering words "HDA voided - work superseded" in the " Comments" column.) i 4.4.3 Secondary-Selection Basis Where the "Other" column in the primary-selection basis columns is marked, the secondary-selection factors columns shall be reviewed and an "X" placed in each applicable column. This marking shall be accomplished using the factors described in Section 4.3. The " Comments" column may be used to reference any other factors that influenced the selection of systems or structures.
i
'4.4.4 Engineering Evaluations copies of the appropriate System and structure Bases for Selection form (Attachment C) may engineering evaluations to document the selection of be included in lM systems and structures. -
l TN-85-6262/21 Page 9 of 14
______________.___.2__ - - _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE '
l l .- Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF Revision: I q SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW l
- l 4.5 Documentation of Commenent and Document Selection Attachment D shall be completed to document the bases for i 4
selectic'n of specific components (including structural components) and documents and to cross-reference between these items and homogeneous design activities.
4.5.1 Listing of Selections and Applicable HDAs i All components (including structural components) and documents selected for DAP review shall be listed and briefly identified / described with the applicable homogeneous design activity. A separate line item in Attachment D shall be completed for each component and document selected for review by the discipline.
4.5.2 Uniqr- Items If the select component or document is the sole example within the system (e.g., there is only one AFW flow diagram or one large motor in AFW), the " Unique" column shall be marked with an "X".
4.5.3 Selection Factors If the system or structure selected for the reasons indicated on the Attachment C form has multiple examples of 5 the component or document type, the bases for selection of
(* a particular example shall be indicated by marking an "X" i in the appropriate selection-fastors column (s) of Attachment De I O 1x- -e2 2 21 >ee 1o t 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Numoer: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I
/. :
VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW l
If multiple examples remain after consideration of these factors, any other factor used for the selection of each particular item shall be documented in the " comments" column or the word " arbitrary" shall be entered into the
" Comments" column. The use of an " arbitrary" selection basis shall only be used when it is the reviewer's judgment (confirmed by the Discipline coordinator) that no significant differences exist among the items available for selection and that any one serves as an equally valid test of the homogeneous design activity.
Typically, the selection factors will more appropriately apply to components or plant design features. A number of documents will be reviewed due to their association with a selected component or design feature. Such documents are not " selected," but are reviewed due to this relationship.
For example, a particular pump may be selected due to its related design aspects and selection factors. A number of drawings and calculations will be reviewed that are associated with that pump to evaluate the related design of the pump. Such drawings and calculations are not selected,
, but are " tag-along" documents. Similarly, a design feature (particular room) may. be selected to evaluate a systems interaction analysis. In this case, pertinent documents g associated with that room and its contents are also
" tag-along" documents. These documents shall ng.t be listed in Attachment D, but shculd be re'ferenced in applicable engineering evaluations. Other documents, however, are selected due to their nature (e.g., fire hazards analyses, shielding or dose assessment calculations, flooding analyses, electrical degraded grid analyses, etc.). These TN-85-6262/21 Page 11 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPOt ~E TE AM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: 1
(
V) VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW 1atter type of documents shall be listed in Attachment D.
4.5.4 Extrapolation The Discipline coordinator shall determine whether review of the selected items can be extrapolated to the review of the homogeneous design activity. If so, the " Ability to Extrapolate" column shall be marked with an "X".
Otherwise, additional or alternative selections in accordance with Section 4.6 shall be made.
4.5.5 Engineering Evaluations copies of the appropriate component and Document Bases for
,- Selection form (Attachment'D) engineering evaluations to document the selection of may be included in lM specific components (including structural components) and documents.
4.6 Determination of Number of Items for Review 4.6.1 Initial Number The initial selecticn of the number of items for review in each homogeneous design activity shall be such that a minimum of one review, adequate to test the homogeneous design activity, shall be made.
4.6.2 Additional Selections to Extrapolate Results The determination a- the number of reviews shall consider the ability to extrapolate the results. T..e reviewer may I TN-85-6262/21 Page 12 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEQUACY PROCEDURE Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: I h
b VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW expand his selections based upon his own experience either within the DAP or through the conduct of similar reviews elsewhere. If the items selected for review in accordance with Section 4.5 are not representative of the homogeneous design activity, additional or alternative selections shall be made as necessary. In particular, two special cases shall be considered:
o If the the that selection within a vertical slice is such selection is not considered to be representative of the homogeneous design activity relative to comprehensiveness and/or complexity, an additional selection from outside the vertical slice shall be made that is considered by the Discipline Coordinator to be representative.
o Where there are a large number of possible selections in the homogeneous . design activity O that involved numerous individuals, the number of items selected shall consider the total size of the population; that is, the number selected should exceed the single selection minimum. The exact number shall be determined by the .
Discipline Coordinator using his engineering judgement. Additional or alternate selections of items for review shall be documented on Attachment D.
4.6.3 Additional Selections for Root cause/ Generic Implications '
Additional items in a homogeneous design activity shall be selected as necessary to comply with the generic -
implications, root cause, and trending commitments of the CPRT Program Plan (including the Design Adequacy Plan), and to comply with DAP-7. Refer to these documents for additional information. l TN-85-6262/21 Page 13 of 14
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - DESIGN ADEOUACY PROCEDURE I Number: DAP-21
Title:
HOMOGENEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY Revision: 1 VALIDATION AND SELECTION OF
(~)T
( SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR REVIEW f
4.6.4 Engineering Evaluations i
' The rationale for the number of items selected shall be documented in appropriate engineering evaluations.
5.O DOCUMENTATION An Attachment B checklist shall be ' approved by the Discipline Coordinator for each homogeneous design activity. Completed checklists shall be filed in accordance with DAP-14.
Engineering evaluati :ns shall discuss the selection bases for components and documents selected for review and may include completed copies of Attachments C and D as appropriate.
A Completed copies of Attachments C and D shall be filed in accordance with DAP-14 by being appended to appropriate DAP documents (e.g., checklists, engineering evalua'lons). c The review and approval process for the DAP document shall signify that the Discipline Coordinator has reviewed and accepted the selection bases for systems, structures, components, and documents reviewed by the DAP.
(
TN-85-6262/21 Page 14 of 14 ,
1
O v
ATTACHMENT A
~
INTERPRETATION OF HOMOGtEOUS DESIGN ACTNITY ATTRIBtJTES A homogeneous design octivity includes the following attributes:
o Similarity in criterio.
o Similarity in design considerations, opproach and methodology.
o Sorne design organization / discipline involved in performing the design (the discipline threshold is only applied to Gibbs & Hill).
O o Similarity in design control process.
o Some design interfoce(s).
Further guidance on opplying these of tributes is provided below,
- l. Similarity in Criterio This sitribute includes design criterio that belong to the some category (or type) and may be viewed as having similar considerations and application.
The criteria ore considered to be within the some category if differences would not cause o meaningful change in the onelysis or calculational opprooch. f~or example, applicable criterio ossociated with above ground atmospheric storage fonks include codes /stondords requirements, con-figuration, wall thickness, materials, venting and level measurement.
These criterio are of o similar type for various tanks, even though the specific numerico! volves of design parameters are different.
TN-85-6262/21 A!
I I
- 2. Similarity in Design Considerations, Approoch and Methodology i
This.ottribute includes design or onelysis opproaches/ methodologies or l
mechonics in implementation of - the design such that meaningful dif- !
ferences in design complexities or considerations are not contained within i the subject design octivity. Two examples illustrate how potential dif ferences in methodology are discernible, in the first exemple, the performance of pressure-drop calculations for water, boric acid, fuel oil cnd steam (before phase-change considerations) are similar based upon a common opprooch and execution of similar steps in the onelytical process.
The parameters used in the calculations are different, but do not cause o meanirigful change in the calculational opprooch; thus, homogeneity in design considerations, opproach and methodology is established. In the ,
second example, the performance of seismic onelysis by equivalent static
.h methods, spectral or time-history onelysis utilize common input poro-meters (e.g, seismic input motion, domping, etc.); however, homogeneity is not established os the onelyses clearly require different design con-siderations, opproach and methodology.
- 3. Some Design Organization / Discipline This ottribute oddresses the consideration for the some organization or discipline performing the porticular design octivity, if all other attributes of a potential HDA are confirmed, yet multiple organizations originate similar designs, then such designs fron each organization ore identified for verification. For example, if Gibbs & Hill and TUCCO Nvelear Engineering (TNE) performed a similar type of design, the design performed by each organization is considered separately. For design performed by Gibbs &
Hill, this ottribute is also token to the design-discipline level, and no further, unless it is determined that a discrete sub-unit of a discipline functioned independently. If separate Gibbs & Hill disciplines performed TN-85-6262/21 A-2
(
similar types of design over time, the design performed by coch discipline will be reviewed unless information is provided which demonstrates that the some controls were used for both cases and thereby resulted in comporoble design. During phase 3, o specific review of Gibbs and Hill organizational changes was made to determine the effect on homogeneity.
An initial determination was mode that the organization was stable over the. duration of the project with respect to any meaningful.impoet on the execution of design. This ' determination will be confirmed during imple-mentation of the DAP. All other organizations are considered to have been responsible for their activities for o limited scope and over o short period compared to the overoll project durotion. Thus, organizations other than Gibbs and Hill are not deemed a condidate for further breakdown.
- 4. Similarity in Design Control Process This attribute provides that similar design control procedures were used for the design process which governed the performance of the subject design octivity. Elements which are considered in this context include personnel qualifications, design origination, reviews, verification, approvals and interface requirements. The Gibbs and Hill design control procedures underwent some revisions over the life of project; however, the design control process is considered similar uniess the revisions included meaning- I ful changes which may have ef fected the quality of the design end product.
During phase 3, design control was concluded to be consistent of the programmatic level; however, this will be further confirmed during the DAP os detoils of implementation of Gibbs and Hill's process are deter-mined. For other design service contractors, their limited scope and relatively short period of performance do not worront oddressing this attribute for their scope of design because such conditions are judged to l provide reasonoble consistency in the design control process. Accordingly, l definition of HDAs by organization provides sufficient breakdown with TN-85-6262/21 A-3
_.U.-_______
i 1 .
~
1 l
respect to design control homogeneity for design organizations other than
.Gibbs and Hill.
5.- Some Design Interface (s)
This attribute opplies to discipline design interfaces within Gibbs and Hill
) and oddresses the consistency in communication of substantive design information relative to information transfer and provisions for design input.~ (Substantive design information is in' formation essential in develop-ing the- design.) It also addresses consistency in cross-discipline review responsibilities where relevant. The focus of attention for design inter-foces is to identify meaningful changes 'which may have offected the design process and thereby the quality of the design end product. For example, if the requirements for cross-discip!*ne design reviews changed over the life of the project, the DAP review would need to oddress the related design activity for different periods in time, i
1 O
TN-85-6262/21 A.4
O l l
ATTACHMENT B HOMO EOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CECKLIST DAP Discipline HDA NO.
HDA Title Org./ Discipline (as applicable) 9 Applicc6le Design _ Category Description of HDA i
("X"if applicable) 1
/_/ Bosed on few design activites involved, will review oil items in .
homogeneous design activity.
/_/ Homogeneous design octivity applies only to a unique component or unique document.
Describe basis for conclusion.
If either of the above ore opplicable, do not complete the remainder of this form except for signing the lost sheet.
TN-85-6262/21 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. O B-1 Sheet I of 9
. 'l ATTACHNENT B HOMO tEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CECKI IST (Continued)
- 1. HDA Applicability ("X" cil opplicable) l t
/_/ , Systems /_/ ' All Sofety-related Systems OR /_/ All Sofety-related' Mechanical Systems
/_,/ All Safety-related Electrical Systems
/_/ All Safety-related Control Systems
/_/ Specific System (s)(describe)
/ / Structures / ~ / All Sofety-related Structures OR / / All Sofety-related Concrete Structures
/_/ All Safety-related Steel Structures
/_/ Specific Structure (s)(describe) fi
/_/ Components /_/ All Mech / Elect /l&C Components *
/_/ All Structural Components
/_/ Specific Component (s)(describe) 1 i
pv
- Circle one or more.
1 1
TN.85-6262/21 B-2 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. 0 Sheet 2 of 9
~
i ATTACHMENT B HOMOCEKOUS DESIGN ACTTVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CWCKLIST (Continued)
- 2. Confirmation of Hornageneity
- c. Similarity in Criterio This attribute principally opplies to the review of analyses and calculations.
Describe opplicable criteria categories.
D).
List the documents (minimum of five**) scanned in the HDA related document popviation to ossess similarity in criterio.
Are the criterio similar? _Yes/No*
If "yes", describe basis for this conclusion.
- Circle one.
- Distributed approximately even through the period of performance of the i work as indicated by the current revision date of the documents. If there ore less than five, so state.
TN-85-6262/2 i B-3 DAP Form 21 1, Rev. O Sheet 3 of 9
)
ATTACHMENT B HOMO PEOUS DESIGN ACTNITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION MCKLIST l
(Continued) !
If "no", define the further dividing of the HDA required to have similar criterio'ond describe the basis for this conclusion (include subdivided HDA Nos.).
(If "no," do not complete this form except for signing the lost sheet.
Prepare new forms for each of the above HDAs.)
b.
Similiarity in Design Considerations, Approach and Methodology.
This attribute princ*po!!y applies to the review of analyses and calculations.
Describe general design considerations, opproach and methodology.
i I
List the documents (minimum of five**) scanned in the HDA refoted document population to ossess similarity in design considerations, opprooch and methodology, os appropriate. I
- Distributed approximately even through the period of performance of the work as indicated by the current revision date of the documents, if there are less than five, so state.
i 1
O TN-45 4262/21 i B-4 DAP Form 21-l, Rev. 0 '
Sheet 4 of 9
)
KiTACHMENT B HOMOGEEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY-N DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CWCKLIST (Continued)
Are the design considerations, opproach and methodology similor?
Yes/No*
If "yes," describe the basis for this conclusion.
1 If "no," define the further dividing of the HDA required to have such similarity and describe the basis for this conclusion (include subdivided HDA Nos.).
O !
(If "no," do not complete this form except for signing the lost sheet.
Prepare new forms for each of the above HDAs.)
-)
- c. Some Design Organization / Discipline This attribute shall be reviewed for the opplicable design category, it is assumed to apply to all related HDAs unless exceptions are noted in other HDA Description and Validation forms, if the similarity in design organization / discipline is ossessed for the applicable design l category in another HDA Description and Volidation form, refer to that HDA form by HDA No here . Otherwise, complete the following. . i
- Circle one, i TN-85-6262/21 B-5 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. 0 l
Sheet 5 of 9 '
ATTACHMENT B
- j. HOMO TOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CNCKLIST '
{
(Continued) l I
I Hos more than one Gibbs & Hill discipline performed design in the . i opplicable design category? Yes/No*
u if "no," describe basis for this conclusion.
. 1 i
(
\
If "yes," identify multiple disciplines and define which HDAs are 1 associated with each discipline. Describe whether multiple discipline involvement in the design category effects the manner in which the related HDAs should be reviewed (i.e., did they perform the some design octivity) and identify resulting subdivided HDAs (by no.) If appropriate.
(if the HDA' is subdivided, do not complete this form except for signing the lost sheet. Prepore new forms for each of the above HDAs.)
l
- d. Similarity in Design Control Process This attribute is applied only to Gibbs & Hill and shall be reviewed for the opplicable design category, it is assumed to apply to all i Circle one.
TN-85-6262/21 B-6 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. O !
Sheet 6 of 9 1
i
f; ATTACHMENT B
,q HOMOEWOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY U- DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION l
CWCKLIST (Continued) related HDAs unless exceptions are noted in other HDA Description and Volidation forms, if the similarity in design control process is i
1 ossessed for the opplicable design category in another HDA 1 Description and Volidotion form, refer to that HDA form by HDA no.
here . Otherwise, complete the following.
l Hos the design control process been reasonably constant over time for this design category (i.e., did meaninoful changes occur)?
Yes/No*
If "yes," describe basis for this conclusion.* *
- If "no," identify substantive process changes and define which HDAs, '
if not oil, are ossociated with each such change. Describe whether those changes effeet the manner in which the related HDAs should be reviewed and identify resulting subdivided HDAs (by no.) if appropriate.
(If the HDA is subdivided, do not complete this form except for signing the lost sheet. Prepare new forms for each of the above '
HDAs.)
Circle one.
- Reference to applicable procedures may be appropriate.
TN-85-6762/21 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. O B-7 Sheet 7 of 9 i
I J
g ATTACHMENT B
() HOMOEFEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY i DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION CWCKLIST (Continued) i
- e. Some Design Interfoce(s)
This attribute is opplied only to discipline design interfaces within Gibbs & Hill and shall be reviewed for the opplicable design category, i 11 is assumed to apply to all related HDAs unless exceptions are noted in other HDA Description and Validation forms. If the simliority in design interfaces is ossessed for the opplicable design category in another HDA Description and Volidation form, refer to that HDA !
form by HDA no. here
. Otherwise, complete the following.
Do G&H interdiscipline interfaces exist for this HDA? Yes/No+
Describe, if appropriate.
/"%
k Hos the design interfoce(s) been the some over time for this design category?
(Refer to Attachment A for additional information.)
Yes/No*
11 "yes," describe oasis for this conclusion.
If "no," define which HDAs are ossociated with changes in design inter face. Describe whether these changes effect the manner in 4
+
Circle one.
O TN-85-6262/21 B-8 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. O Sheet 8 of 9
)
j ATTACHMENT B HOMO {
[ tEOUS DESIGN ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION l
CECKLIST (Continued)
I l,
which the related HDAs should be reviewed and identify resulting j
subdivided HDAs (by no.) If appropriate.
I
__ i (Prepore new forms for each of the above HDAs.)
i Prepared by:
Date:
Approved by:
Date:
Discipline Coordinator O
TN-85-6262/21 DAP Form 21-1, Rev. O B-9 Sheet 9 of 9 l-.
2 l .
~. - - . _ _ _ . _
j I'$1 I u I i -
u l
1 11
~
lI5g I W wds O!j ;gq l
W I
& . I
$5 s ,
H ei fJJ O i b*5b' hI TN45 4262/21
^
C-l DAP Form 21 2, Rev. O
e e
~
O b l
4 h $
5m$
4 J:
8 5 1 c
5 5
s
]%
0E E d5 e
g3 Oig l b*
t u !
I I j
]
3 1 f!!
- l
- 1 I
l h h
.6 g
D W
f .1 'Ii l
! $0E l 5 wd l TN.85 4262/21 D-l OAP Form 21.1. Rev n
- - -- - - ---- m 1
^
2 INSTRUCTION SHEET l
(DAP's Checklist)
VOL. IV REMOVE INSERT DAP-M-027 Rev. O DAP-M-027 Rev. 1 e
O
\ .u W'
>3 *s, L J O MEMORANDUM !
F. Dougherty l To; pg. It[tP/76 l J. Vance/h. Brems
& =-
a , Distribution l
e MECHANICAL DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST FORM APPROVAL .
in occordance with DAP-4, the following checklist forms have been opproved for use In the mechanical DAP.
Checklist Form No. AfhevdL (DAP M. ) Revision Title-Generel Description Pooes W o27 I 84wace of hnar 7 " lI S L fad no vat w r * (G1L A GIL tT*Y Distribution l Leod Reviewer ( f. /.EVL lef t" )
R. Brems (w/o)
- 5. Korpyuk
, F. Schofer (w/o) N J. Vance (w/o)
DAP File 7.7 (w/o)
DAP File X.6 ~
6twsaw'3 ,
2.Mf.l?Y.b"l*)
. . . . . . . . , . . ~ , ;
e...~; w huMe !
r '
f t.. f'cMoertDE't )
c.s<eAAE(.wle
) n;;eive.m?;;in:L
, RB/db
( it t a w i on imts yt i 7p l o c e r a n
u s d u i y qf m
P h e n d t t o f i o a ne n t a e s o t n a c c e p l i nT i .
P S f e at T
i t r s . c ne f N ei g f o E v x ei n o ssm O
ey G is e ts t re s C h h e a s e ct t
T t t p a f a ni oD al /
T l i A
ab S A B a N N r U /
V / C E
n e n T N R
o pi o A S
)
,I iO t
t p
p i er e r e irc v c s u s r .
e s e d n u n nlaD n n o s r
. . D . e nr a i n t e e R O ol N N et V c N o
o ec t e .
h n c A 5
i s
i imtode w t o e ed f t F ei c on T t r i c N e r e n c i n l i r
u w e Eh e pe an e p o c e t
,f e r t
p o i v n e s i t
s n v n o i u E S A s _S T t f s .
taL i P P u c o r s t
e ne do ne v op c d i ei s o a t
es n t e e mSU t e d m y t c i p o nm t s e r o r s t t ( N n r o c o s f .
e A
V ,
O i e g a D' iss vs t e N I r b E O T A e
,s e gt; e t .- t
& a ev o p e W TI C r s . i pi c s a ~ P l e v d es wo ,ci t E P I i L r a ve 0 -
I F
!! t I e r icm % t n c r h oR
\ l c d e s i a o s sE E V od b r a i t o s e c t i v i
L y o d t n n D p d a ei t t e e Q v me w rimt F u e f
S ) 0 w al w re s t c c w r E 4 e r i g a e i pe a s a e o ep e i D 6 iev ro e t v n d t i f v on es iv g J
)
1 R pd e o et e e e R c s e R c r R r 1
a
.ir ve et
)
E : N o d n :
a n R Ri G A
o N n o n n o o E
r o gt e EP i
i i B e e ,C ei i s b l t t t M ta a1t N , r t pi a ) a a a E T u c c c t Wl T
D D0 0 t o R N E E de u r e l T 8 v e R 5
- t s t sf s
i r
o i
f n
e m
S F
M c t i vt A 'D i
c l
e cu i
- E L o s t 5 i
d l I
L M- n R C O
r n c e F 9 -L L
- E p
! e n e u o K P I A v( 3 0 0 P S C
i D V Q D R a '
E M C t C - r P e P m g A p O a s n B r mp D g ?
( s t o n r u inde p d e e p m e ita mr e t
4 t et v e o a 6 u se 1 b c tpen i t ?
r f e e r
r e
n a ms c d r p p
i l a e u o
. r re o es t i
s e f
s t e o t f N e t s s
t e
i s
s r e u s t
s e s r s p n y p s r
e ri -
.aR y s i
o t
g n t e
f e
r h t
w e rl c o p e r oe t i iy i ie k N c l y w c t l n n ui b f
g n v Oc( eiA ir e i
A r t n g s e t r a t r i R P l D t
s r n?
e e p e it s t
s E n ep d c o s e ed t e
~
i a r E I/ o l p y t I
V s
e e f p c o f e c
r v o s It n E
R J n t t i
t % a d e t
d o
i n
e i
a 0 n S e v ht s b t 5 i E c ? e n a s 1 o od e o r o T
U r nt e v p e r o f
r j ml u p B
I p a a e v o o o dy t e p
R e p g c p h s f T T re o W p o t de sd a n e r s ee s
t e r
e A W a A t
W p P w 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1
, t o e u i r c t ot i e d s ic o t l t
m et t a s a d git ch o n de ere s c e m n it c s f a t id trt e m i m e i o rg i s s a m n n .
l ie S tro pro i s i o e r e l
c p e in t
s s . p s g ipt i f no l
n i n e p s o i m w oi ai wd o y ic e t t e e r b s S iv ec at d a i of T
N e n n t i e c vt e d id E
t r e e e f t m ui r e dnfieg n e s s ut t l
s z iii D
C h ir ocye i
a i z r r p h o e ei T e d e g T nd v p
/
T A
S A NW U /
/ C
, T N
, A
, S y
3 .
y s g n b t n o u n
d n e o d i e
m e
t o
o irs n
di t
t m n ix e t r o a m
t e
e r x b u ei e
c aMiwe r it a e de d t
n og mr i
t a y t b m
n s v e m o n e
m e
n t e o t o n se Kr -* r m ef ud r ,
c e n e d m
ug e c o tp e o t p o o m t etr F r d o d e i
g N u nd it a
O tr a ed t n n c n d S
( N I o s ur e e ca o s a i s o t O T I A p t s c f ei n x u it a
wa t f t i o t n f
o T C P I I F r
e l imE e nn i c pst m e e y a c s .
i a g
\j R C R I
o .te a f t p f f w n S E d e s n r r it c a l pd i
e ur veo p e l
E V o ei s D v t l d u h m qt s d e
u mt e qpt o
f$ F 0 u a a ,
e e er v s s w e res iei w e e o l l r s e r l N i pt e e iv s e gu u z t
e e e e e ev v
R t t m s v e nh e ive sn z o
e l t R e t r R e n h
S
)
E :
G n n e oi A G E P t t r C e N , a at bm E T c R N i n u E E r f e N F M
o l m E d l u R c t
n e c t
o e u o i D vQ D t (
t ice h
t E
S S d e
t g a
) n M n i n ic p
w S
t e
r e o h s
(
t a d w s
- d r y y o e e t
i ?
t t s n d e v g i l
t e e d
i e h n i n o ?
m e d b nt e r h n n it a o e a s n e en f
o r t
e a a i e e e t t s t p e zz l l d h s c e o t t
o d i
x e u rq r
ee r a o di e n no t
t e p
e e t i M a rJ f p s c
, D de e e r o uo d E m t
e d
n i v e p d d e
1 v a oi e EI r o e t m e d t t t t
V d a i
e n at E
f r u s
o t r o l u s e n ue R e l s p g t o n o of p a i ni v h t S t t n in E w o e i
e ? s t po n r su d n T o T M N e s pei U l e B f b et tmi t atc op Q I R
T h
t 1
2 2
2 3
2 e e r v pi s n d
pe j h T
A i
w 2 e e e o s e ht e
2 2 wl W c W s iw 3 4 5 2 2 2
' lI
- r o c ie
- ud r e s
_ t e p lf e a s e h n se n o d t e s h
t e a s it ef h o t
c t f si f r oif o op i
y s t y
c n o c s a o u a a r
S utt q r ud .
T N c e ic c e m c t c s a E o u m c s o s r G e g el e s o G
C h
T c s a ie h s r T e p
/
T A
S A M
t /
W
/ C
. T W v S A
e R
) s e n d oh o o e o t t i t e t o d t c t e nd a n x n t o e r o e o g n a d
. i n .r o e n s o w ici o t t l it t ia isr i t da i o N a imM e a o t t
a e l
dG t
t n e3 d c e c t
n n t c a o t b i r
n e m te 3 m a e o ni r e
l n g e r m d m p s e e s e m
e ud c
o s e f
o t u u c e udit c n eo et u
s t
c r e R a
r p o n s ,d lp d ibs e n d oi o o t d c e y o s st ro pi g
i n y o n s dno eies im4 s
l t
G .
n t nt r i S
( M C TI ot t i e t n y sd a
wi s e is it o c e ,
o n o i a ni c
i r t 8 A a o c l t m t t 9 a lp I
f T C P ic r er isi ty f af s ic dec e c ., an c a s c i 3 o I o
I R
F f i o uq s lpn f n i d f e e. D y i d t I
y x e i t e f e s C R t t e t e t f r l
l i t i i v e le S E o s r e b n e ic t
o a e e u , E d e i r t
e e aT E V u ef uh e D u e d S e F
qt t
e nt
- a q st e
qf e S r p e pd l 0 w e e a R o
ie u r r e u 'n r
e s e t w e r w e o , d e r s w eiA v s u l
ie r e r r S u o e d is iv su v N i u e F t s t r v s t a n t e n a n e o e n o e n n o oc v s t e n s n e R e n E d f R e r R e e t e R e ei h
S
) :
E G
nn o o n n
A i i o o r
e TP N ,
t t a a c t ii t t a a 6s E T R N r f i n e ic tne E E o l s n r f ol m th F E M d l t s t R C L n u e e o c dl r e ct s O V G D e u o i D V Q D t (
it c
e t
O <
y p c
n e
i s
t r
? p) m d s o e g d e t n n e f
r o r
i f
i c d I
? e u t f s d e e o no l c t r s n r ?
u ni e i r t o t s ( o
?
d a
n i a t r s
e s n iere ig e c et r e y t e t s b i r ir e l e s s e ec f
v g ed c e a r er D b h d s n t e E t E it s ul 1 o o f S a o b E t d c a I
t h
a S r e e w V
E m m s ht p o
ivr ssel o l R o e ci e s e h h w t d e S s s it e r e E
T p p t a de s r
e r s t h U
B m
u m
u ?
s mr o n A g n t
I p p z e of R
T s s M
s r e r
0 ini 1 s h
t T e e 3 e e e ai A W W 3 W p W 2 c w 6 7 8 9 2 2 2 2
icie m
s s
e ieh s t ef h o t
t f r o ap y
e s o
J a
5 gd T .
N e e e E d s e U
~
a se rg G
C e s o h s r T e p
/
T A
S A t
l W U /
/ C I
. T I v A e S R
)
t o oE t S S
t s n e A e d o r E n
. m ao it a E o h 00 s l E it it r 1
n a s t
I a w e t t t
o e n nh h n n e
i i
r me e uo n it e m nto c p w m it t e d a n r o pe o m e d o c u a, dan c
o d v W
S I I
II C
I d
c e t o n io pd c na n
o i
KI I
I e
( C T s ro I A t n t t i
t n n r i
T C t a a p c f r ul c c ai o e o I e p c i t t
t F
I f fi ed a i f
g t i n ce cr aR t e t l l
t a i n i
, s E s n e l t it s o s
(. .
EW D
F o n p o u ed q r e 5 u e e e q t d b l
O e n i 7 o a 0
r , w e r ef l9 w eC c 0 8 u . i ul -
1 e r i iv suV Pl p 1
4 s v s e 4 t
1 n e. e n u 4 e n& p e E i R e q3 R e 8 a e
h S
)
E :
G A
n n o o EP N ,
ii t t a a E T R N ic t n N E E F
E I I
N rf e o i m d t n u t
t R C O e s u c o i D
(
V c D l
k c
e h t C n e
m
?
t ip ne u v q e s e r e t n yf oic s e
i r m T m
r ed s e l
t feie e g
t e
i f x l s : e D ul e n t k a e u o s o t o J
a i e e s t d gi t a f t e g n x l c n f
n a n e l i i c r i o m e t e i i
t o t e t a t s t s D s t a e E
t o r t a h n s d t T W m ep y i o n s E g r a o l I
oo n t o dy r a V s i t R
t e
dy n E
R up i rJ it r e M to p u o s
. ba l e pud t
S r i
r l
e k
c c
s e
E n on r e p h a T
U e o p s B i
D t
p W F B
t i t
o g n
I R
t e r a e i 1 2 3 4 T
1 e v t T
1 t p
l s 1 1 1 1 e e A 2 iv o V T 3 3 3 3 0 1 3 3 l
vf e e t e a g s r oti e d
e s e ic r o t j t. ud r e p d git c h _
t a s e n _
n se on t c sf o _i iil e s i im ism Se t % h s t e a t
l r r c s s .
e ap f s i g oif i
f o n
s i
r y s t i
c w oi ai c n o e t t a o u S
T iv ce atd ae e n nt ic r i q u t W r e e e f cc a c E
O t n ut l
a uc sm i
s s ul t G
C i x c o h i o v ta T ed e q el i h a e T c s
/
T A
S A MN t /
/ C
. T N v A S
e R
) s g e e n o n b.
o t
nht ri s oh t t nd t
n i
t o
a i
o ci o e o r o
v i
t d d i n .
t r t o e N
w a e t g me a imM t r t
e t d c t l e
n o r t
n e n e m o m e f n n e3 e te 3 me u rm a c
m i
ud c r e. n ud > uo t e s o t p o e o s e c f u t
p i d o d i b b r ep c r y nd it t
N O
n o s n n c n y so n pi s o s a i o
(
N O T I
A id t r i a t w t f s
t i t
t e
n y t
o wi i a e sds is a a t TI C c d a c p en y a e c e f y f
o P
I I
F i n f a i
m v t ic r en l e s i i l t
e R I t f
a e ef f o uq f s pn C R it s i
t g
c a i l y m e S E o t t e l l a E V u E o ei s o s r e n c D qE uh m s u ef u n ei F E q t i de qt q e n t a
0 l iewv rseuseeqiru eI w rea o
. r uh e r w re r imt e s N s t ive s u u i u e ni t v s t r t
e E w e nh e R e t r R e n n a e n e o R e d f e
h S
)
E : :
G n o o n n o on A
r E P C it e a t
i it it e N , a a E T c t c t t r 8f n n i
R N e E E4 e u F ol n r if o m N E R C U dl r e uc dt suc r
t s O e u o e u o i D V oD V oD l
(
k c
e h <
C g y l o n c a t n i
i r e t u n
l a hc q e
e r r it y f f
e V it t t
if n n l
e D e o ib r n i a u n
g ip t a
r e
t a
J c p ? n is g i o d e
e E f ig D l r i e r l o r v r e e t f a e h u e e h D dr t c n d b E O o e o E
1 a
t o r
t o t e dr n tt e
o u ? t I
V e o o dy n u
E M m t
l e n m o R lf r it o e S e o a t r d
l F
t wi t h
e h
s E
T s
o er o e M p o o ei e C M v d e v U l O l n v l B C u a o t o ?
I R
/ s n s 5 e v
6 7 v c v e v z N
T e e p r 1 l 1 1 s E s T e e S s e 3 A O P 3 V 3 3 WS I W 3 2 3 4 3 3 3
(
S T
9 E
O D
C
/
T A
S A N N U /
/ C
. T N v A S
e R
)
o s t o e t i x
i t r e d n
a e y g n su e e e
- e. E ; l n o s w o h t
. l S y t s i w t t o t i S t e u i e t t N a e o m t r s t n t t ,
i v r a p e nf nte f
o a w n o t t e o ig a t
e r e f nd r m f t r t f u m m e g o e e e n y e h 2 v p . m a t v c e m
e c s i f n t
u n u ii a d h o a t o o e f o c o re i gs e n a l t lp d w a i oi d ut p
u N i r e t
n r
e t
c ls t bi e in s o r
S O o i e e e e c n a . r e nf N r t l n evgio o r t
( O I
T tt e s
e n r r br fu i e s pt 3 o
n A e u t p e o e I
et r c id s p a m t
e t T C p f
o P I ici r e ; t s
e a y c t c g e vf ci o e t I
R I F f c r s e in r e i t n f i h s C R S E E V is R t
i A
S g on ini n g g n
p i
ty s f i a s
if t
o t d
e ir ta iwsondir cire t t d
rk o D
F 0
r c F w e e r d a e r o le t i d
e o
id e
o s d e e t
e vd e r e
w u
q ra d e ed ht de a i t
t l y nn er onc a t
e t t t di l vi e r iv su e f ol f
N re re cce iz it s
c p g i ut p if t e n ) c ) ) ) p e v J. r r e a ) e p o e e
e R e b c d a e r ' ea v p e h v h
S
)
E :
G A
n n o o r EP N ,
i i t t a a e
b E T R N ic tn m E E r e e if m Ih F M1 n s cu E d t R C t
- O e u o 1 D
(
V oD 1
k c
e h
t r r e e e h h p k a c t y a h
t S e in e ( n t
v t i g 0
e s g v e 0 2 t
e y 3 d n
h t b e a d
n f o e o e n t
a it o n
o r oi r t
. i t
s e c t
n t e c ? e r D e de n e c i t c d E
W f e n n d e a t I e o t e V y n t E
d fr t e n .
R e ep i t o d t .
l e z e S t i
vi s E e e ba ts r o tu q R t y s r r 7 c h e
o ce t
8 t
t p )
e I a c o el e wi R u v t t T
T s r e b l r e t n a A W s e f e U T V o v 5 6 7 3 3 3
,1iL
d' M
4- ,
i O ,
E I !
Ie- :
i n" i Y
.1 I !
y s! -
- A
~. E
% EQ
- . . s N C, I 8
I f i li1 -
1 -
1 i
i O i a
E U
-.