ML17187A847

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 970130 Meeting W/Comed Re Up Coming TS Change to Use Containment Overpressure to Compensate for Deficiency in Net Positive Suction Head for Emergency Core Cooling Pumps.List of Attendees & Presentation Encl
ML17187A847
Person / Time
Site: Dresden  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 03/06/1997
From: Stang J
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9703130013
Download: ML17187A847 (46)
v • d • e


Text

LICENSEE:

FACILITY:

SUBJECT:

March 6, 1997 Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd)

Dresden, Units 2 and.3

SUMMARY

OF MEETING CONCERNING AN UP-COMING TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE TO USE CONTAINMENT OVERPRESSURE TO COMPENSATE FOR A DEFICIENCY IN NET POSITIVE SUCTION HEAD FOR THE EMERGENCY CORE COOLING PUMPS On January 30, 1997, the staff met with.comEd to discuss the licensee's proposed Technical Specification (TS) change concerning-th*e use of containment overpressure to compinsate for a deficiency in net positive suction head (NPSH) for the Emergency Core Cooling-Pumps~ A list of attendees *is provided as Enclosure I.

The objectives of the meeting w'ere 'to. discuss the schedule' wh~n the. proposed amendment would be submitted and :..a.detailed discussi.on of alr analysis to be used in the amendment.

During the meeting; the licensee discussed the containment codes which would be used to jus.tify the amount of overpressure which wJuld be present in the containment following a design basis accident.

The staff indicated that adequate bench marking would have to be provided to justify the use of any code not previously reviewed and approved by the staff.

The licensee also provided the details of the NPSH calculations performed to justify operability of the Emergency Core Coo 1-i ng* pumps.

In addition to the presentation on the proposed license amendment, the licensee also provided a short discussion on Dresden's compliance with NRC Bu 11 et in 96-03, "Potential Pl ugg i n*g of Emergency Core Cool i ng Suet ion Strainers by Debris in Boiling Water Reactors."

A copy of the licensee's presentation is included as En~losure 2.

Docket Nos. 50-237,50-24i

Enclosures:

I. List of Attendees

2.

Licensee's ~resentation cc w/encls:

see next page ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

John F. Stang, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 111-2 Division of Reactor Projects - Ill/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation To receive a copy of

  • document, indicate in the box:
  • c* = Copy without e c osures "E" = Copy

'th enclosures "N" = No copy OFFICE NAME RCAPRA DATE

/97 03/b /97 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

January 30, 1997. Meeting Summary Distribution:

HARO.COPY W/el'.'lcl.:9s~res-.Ll _2

  • .D.ocke.t:-F..fl:e,,..*so.:..:23,1,,~-so~249

-'POBl:It' PDII 1-2 r/f J. Stang P. Hiland, Riii w/enclosure 1 OGC, 015818 ACRS, T2E26 E-MAIL w/enclosure 1 S. Collins, SJCl F. Miraglia, FJM J. Roe, JWR E. Adensam, EGAl R. Capr.a, RACl C. Moore, ACM J. Stang, JFS2 D. Ross, e~mail SAM J. Lyon*s, JEL C. Berlinger, CHB D. Wessman, RHW R. Lobel, RML D. Lynch, MDL R-. Pulsifer, RMP3 J. Dawson, HFD J. Kudrick, JAKl K. Kavanagh, KAK B. McCabe, BCM

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D:C. 20555-0001 March 6, 1997 LICENSEE:

Connonwealth Edison Company (ComEd)

FACILITY:

Dresden, Units 2 and 3

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF MEETING CONCERNING AN UP~COMING *TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE TO USE CONTAINMENT OVERPRESSURE TO COMPENSATE FOR A DEFICIENCY IN NET POSITIVE SUCTION HEAD FOR THE EMERGENCY CORE COOLING PUMPS

  • On January 30, 1997, the staff met with ComEd to discuss the licensee's proposed Technical Specification (TS) change concerning the use of containment*

overpressure to compensate for a deficiency in net positive suctionhead (NPSH) for the Emergency*core Cooling Pumps. A list of attendees is provided as Enclosure 1.

The objectives of the meeting were to discuss the schedule when the proposed

    • amendment would be submitted and a detailed discussion of all analysis to be used in the amendment.

During the meeting, the licensee discussed the containment codes which would be used to justify the amount of overpressure which would be present in the containment following a design basis accident.

The staff indicated that adequate bench marking would have.to.be provided to justify the use of any code not previously reviewed and approved.by the staff.

The licensee also provided the details of the NPSH calculations, performed to justify operability*of the Emergency Core Cooling pumps.

In addition to the presentation on the proposed license amendment, the licensee also provided a short discussion on Dresden's compliance with NRC Bulletin 96-03,* "~otential Plugging of Emergency Core Cooling Suction

-. Strainers by Oebri s in Boiling Water -Reactors.

11

  • A copy of-the licensee's* presentation is included as Enclosure 2.

Docket Nos. 50-237, 50-249

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees
2.

Licensee'~ Presentation cc w/encls: see next page

~

~~enior Project Manager Project Directorate 111.:.2 Division of Reactor Projects - Ill/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation*

cc:

Ms. I. Johnson Acting *Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Services

  • Connonwealth Edison Company Executive*Towers West III

. 1400 Opus Place, Suite 500 Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 Michael I. Miller, Esquire Sidley and Austin One First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60603 Site Vice President Dresden Nuciear Power Station 6500 North Dresden Road Morris, Illinois 60450-9765

. Station Manager

. Dresden Nuclear Power Station 6500 North Dresden Road Motris, Illinoi~ 60450-9765.

. U.S. Nucle*ar Regulatory Commission

  • Resident Inspectors Office Dresden Station
  • 6500 North Dresden Road Morris, Illinois 60450-9766 Regional Administrator U.S. NRC, Region III 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Illinois *Department o_f Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear.Facility Safety 1035 Outer Park.Drive Springfield, IllinQis 62704 Chairman Grundy County Board Administration Building 1320 Union Str~et Morris, Illinois. 60450 Document Control Desk-Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company 1400 Opus Place, Suit~ 400 Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit Nos. 2 and 3

,/'

d.-*

LIST OF MEETING ATTENDEES JANUARY 30, 1997 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert Capra, NRR Jim Lyons, NRA Carl Berlinger, NRR Dick Wessm~n, NRR Rich Lobel, NRA Dave Lynch, NRR Bob Pulsifer, NRR Jack Dawson,* NRA Jack Kudrick, NRR Kerri.Kavanagh, NRR

  • John Stang, NRR Commonwealth Edison Company

. Bob Rybak Ru'ss Freeman Linda Weir Frank Sparigenburg Kevin Ramsden Duke Power Greg Ashley

COMED MEETING WITH NRC

~..

DRESDEN UNITS 2*& 3 LiCENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST *

. CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM

.. REQUIREMENTS JANUARY 30, 1997.

    • ;-: :*.* **"*'*. '<(.

~-

~...

PURPOSE OF*MEETING

      • !'.,,_ **. ~
  • j,I'.

DISCUSSION OF LICENSE AMENDMENT TO BE SUBMIITED IN FEBRUARY 1997

  • DISCUSSION OF NEW ECCS SUCTION

_STRAINER INSTALLATION

ISSUES REQUiRING LICENSE

    • AMENDMENT

, ~. '......, ~.....,,

,..... -.. *~.... *.

~* *.:.., '
  • CONTAINMENT MODEL

>i

  • CREDIT FOR CONTAINMENT OVER PRESSURE
  • CCSW FLOW REDUCTION
  • LPCI HEAT EXCHANGER PERFORMANCE
  • UHS AND TORUS TEMPERATURE.LIMITS

.e

HISTORY

  • DRESDEN DESIGNED FOR OVERPRESSURE
  • LICENSING BASIS ON USE OF OVERPRESSURE WAS NOT RESOLVED
  • - RECENT LICENSE AMENDMENT FOR 2 PSIG OVERPRESSURE REQUIRES SEVERE LIMITATIONS ON TORUS AND ULTIMATE HEAT SINK TEMPERATURES

ECCS PUMPS. (TYP.)

CORE SPRAY AND LPCI

n. 41a*-1*
  • I I

I I

DOWNCOMER I I LEG J I..

/

)

/

/

/

/

TORUS-

/

. -,,,,,,.. //

/

/

ctv"'

FIGURE 3.4 ADS VALVE DISCHARGE LINE ORYWELL

2A TORUS OR'l'WELL TORUS SPRAY SPRAY COOLING R(CIRC SYSTUAS CRIBHOUSE '

CCSW PUMP VAULT

~

m 10 OTHER LPc*.

t----~

SUBSYSTEMS LPCI **

PUMPS 28 FIGURE 3.0 HX ccsw

CCSWFLOW CCSW DESIGN R;EQUIREMENTS

  • CONTROL TORUS WATER TEMPERA TURES
  • PREVENT RELEASE OFPOTENTIALL Y CONT AMINA TED WATER BY.

MAINTAINING CCSW AT A HIGHER PRESSURE THAN LPCI WHILE PROVIDING SUFFICIENT FLOW TO MAINTAIN TORUS TEMPERA TURES

  • AMENDMENT CLARIFIES DESIGN REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ABOVE FUNCTIONS
  • MINIMUM ccsw ~ow REQUIRED TO MEET DESIGN OBJECTIVES IS 5000 GPM
  • PEAK POST-ACCIDENT TORUS TEMPERATURE WILL INCREASE FROM 170 F TO ABOUT 176 F.

LPCI HEAT EXCHANGER PERFORMANCE.

LOWER HEAT EXCHANGER DUTY FROM 105 MBTU/HR TO 98.5 MBUIHR CHANGE DISCOVERED DURING RECONSTITUTION OF HEAT EXCHANGER DUTY C_ALCULA TIONS, IT IS NOT DUE 'fO HEAT EXCHANGER DEGRADATION

ULTIMATE HEAT SINK AND TORUS TEMPERA TURES ORIGINAL DESIGN BASIS 95 F PEAK TORUS TEMPERATURE DURING NORMAL OPERA TIO NS

. 95 F MAXIMUM ULTIMATE HEAT SINK

. TEMPERATURE.

RECENT LICENSE AMENDMENT LIMITED TORUS.

AND UHS TEMPERATURES TO 75 F DUE TO ECCS PJ]MP NPSH REQUIREMENTS

CONTAINMENT MODEL

  • BASIS AND RESULTS OF ORIGINAL CONTAINMENT. MODEL
  • NEW MODELUSES GE SHEX-04 TO GENERATE CONTAINMENT

RESPONSE

  • ANS 5~ 1-1979 USED FOR DECA y. HEAT
  • SENSITIVITY ANALYSES PERFORMED TO IDENTIFY LIMmNG CASES
  • PUMP COMBINATIONS
  • FLOWS
  • MIXING VALUES *,
  • INITIAL CONDITIONS

CONTAINMENT MODEL (CONTINUED)

  • BENCHMARKING.OF MODEL.
  • SHEX *BENCHMARKED IN 1993 FOR DRESDEN AND QUAD 1/1 COMPARISONS
  • CONSERVATISMS

.

  • INITIAL CONDffiONS ~INIMIZE NON-CONDENSIBLES

~ CONT AiNMENT OVERPRESSURE CALCULATED PER METHODOLOGY IN I.N. 96-55 TO MINIMIZE CALCULATED OVERPRESSURE AVAILABLE

Minimum Containment PNuure (91 DEO F lriltlal Torus Temperature, 95 DEG F_ UHS Temperature)

~r-~~~-=:=;;;;;;;;;~~~~-:---'---r-~r--~~~~~~-,-~~~~~~,

~ **"'

35~~--------"---1~-----t---ir------------t-----------~

30

\\

I

\\

I '"~_...,:__~~\\-----+---+------------t-----t 20+--.:.._-------1--------,,~""'--r--+---l----------+-------------1

~---"""

10 +----------1---------t---lr------------t----------i s+----------1----------t---1r----:----------t------------i 0+--------_..;.-1------------t---1r----...,.....;_,...--------'-'---+---------~

10 100 1000 10000 100000

. 10mlnutes nne (A.cot*)

10

. DBA-LOCA Suppi'esslo11 POol Temperature Response (Based Upon 91 DEG F Initial SUP.praulon Pool Temperatuni) 100 1000

  • 1 O mlriutes

.e 10000 100000

ECCS PUMP NPSH.

  • NPSH CALCULATED USING MINIMUM AVAILABLE OVERPRESSURE*
  • RUNOUT FLOWS. ON CS AND LPCI PUMPS FOR FIRST 10 MINUTES
  • NO CS CAVITATION AT TIME OF PCT
  • .
  • CS FLOW AT PCT OF 5800 GPM.(5276 GPM REQUIRED)
  • CAVITATION OF CORE SPRAY PUMPS AT APPROXIMATELY 5 MINUTES
  • DEGRADED FLOW DURING CAVITATION CALCULATED USING SAME

. METHODOLOQYAS IN ~ECENT LICENSE AMENDMENT

    • CS FLOW (AT IO.MINUTES) OF ?300 GPM.(4500 GPM REQUIRED)
  • PCT< 2030F.

~

Minimum Required Containment PntSsure For No cavitation of ECCS Pumps (After 10 minutes: CS @nominal flow, LPCI throttled to SOOO gpm/HX)

<<>--------------------------.-----------------------r-------------------------""T"------------------------

35+-1e--------------------+-_...~f---+-------+-----+--------------------------+--------------------------4 30+-------------------------+------Wf---+-------+-----+--------------------------+--------------------------4 I :I

  • I ~

I ****'************** -****........

15 10+--------------------------+------t-----1---------+-----+-------------------------+-------------------------t 5+----------------,..-------+------4~-+-------+-----+--------------------------+------------------------1 0+-----------------------+------4f---+-------+-----+---,----------------------+------------------------1 10 100 P81kPCT (200sec}

1000

.. 10mlnutes Rellood (240-360 sec)

~0000 100000 Time (18C011ds)

  • * * * * *LPCI

--Cont Spray

---Contillnmmd Pnlssunt e

e

. ;ECCS PUMP NPSH - IMPACT OF NEW STRAINER

. INSTALLATION

. NEW STRAINERS TO BE INSTALLED IN UNIT 3 DURING THE REFUELING e OUTAGE SCHEDULED TO START IN MARCH 97

. A.NALYSES PERFORMED FOR THIS AMENDMENT BOUNDS INSTALLATION OF NEW STRAINERS

  • STRAINERS TO BE INSTALLED VIA 50.59 USING CURRENT DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS ON STRAINER PLUGGING (1 STRAINER

. CO~PLETED PLUGGED, 3 UNPLUGG~D) *.

COMPARISON.OF EXISTING VERSUS NEW.STRAINERS

TECHNICAL COMPARISON OF DRESDEN ECCS SUCTION STRAINERS

... ""j r.

~ **

CIRCUMSCRIBED AREA (SQ FT)

TOTAL SURFACE AREA (SQ FT)

APPROACH VELOCITY (FT/SEC-*

.@ 10,000 GPM)

  • CL~AN HEAD LOSS (Ff OF WATER

@ 10,000 GPM)

~

EXISTING TRUNCATED CORE 4.5 4.5 4.94 5.8 NEW STACKED DISK 57 134 0.39 4.2

. ECCS SUCTION STRAINER - HISTORY COMED:

  • HAS BEEN INVOLVED SINCE* 1993 WITH THE BWROG
  • . IS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF ALL THE COMMIITEES
  • BELIEVES THE URG APPROACH IS THE BEST*RESOLUTION PATH

.e

~..

DkESDEN REPLACEMENT STRAINER

  • INST ALL LARGER STRAINERS NOW
  • LIMITED BY STRUCTURAL DESIGN
  • . NEED FOR CONTAINMENT OVERPRESSURE IS NOT DRIVEN BY NEW STRAINER INSTALLATION
  • PROVIDE 60 DAY RESPONSE AFTER URG RESOLUTION
  • BASIS FOR APPROACH...

INTERIM COMPENSATORY ACTION BASIS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH IEB 96-03 NOT YET ESTABLISHED.BY URG AND NRC

  • Containment Anal.yses
  • NRC/ComE*d* Meetin*g l/30/97..

K. Ramsden 1

.e

  • e
  • Analysis Basis Existing Analytical Basis
  • :fyfaximum Pressure_ Analysis
  • Lon.g Term NPSH Analysis.
  • - Mk I Dynamic _Loads* Analysis
  • Mk I Condensation Stability Analysis e**

1.A. -;-

  • *. Proposed Amendment New Analysis
  • Detailed SIL 151 Case Modification Remove Condensation Stability Requirements

Long Term NPSH Analysis Key Features..

  • Based on SHEX-04 computer code*
  • Model Benchmarks performed for D/QC
  • Based on limiting LPCl/CCSW configurati~n ANS 5.1-1979 Decay Heat Model Reconstituted HX perfo~anc*e i:nodel Incorporates CCSW flow reductions necessary to assure adequate CCSW /LPCI DP
  • ~

Conservative treatment of D/W mixing Conservative treatment. of non~condensible loading 4

  • Key Features, continued.

All Heat Source~ in~luded (FW M/E, Pump Ht, etc.)

  • Effects of Heat Transfer to D/W I in er Extensive Sensitivity Calculations performed 5*

Results -of Calculations Short term results show *significant pressures exist

. through refloo_d period, even with highly conservative

  • inputs

-Primary-effect o*fheat sink.models is.on short term behavior Long. term results indicate that overpressures of approximately 3 psi will exist at the time of peak pool temperature 6

  • 1/2 pump combinations provide highest temperatures and lowest pressures..

The "new" temperatures predicted are of comparable

  • magnitude to origi.nal

The use of less restrictive decay heat models is balanced by more conservative rec.onstructed LPCI HX model anll inclusion ofFW and pump.heat.

e*

Valida-tion Efforts *

  • ComE*d has performed the following:...

Independent evaluation of He.at Exchanger ~erfonnance

  • Independent *evaluation of _limiting cases based on ideal gas formulation In-house QA audit of GE *containt,nent. analysis in late 1994
  • Check of long tenn *P/T behavior 8

Conclusions ComEd seeks the.follo~ing review and acceptance of the following:

  • Use of the coupled analysis (pressure/temperature)-

to *_support ECCS NPSH evaluations

- * -Application of time dependent pressure/temperature respons~ _ -

Accept~bility of overall methodology

9i

ECCS Suction* Strainer -History

  • 11 ComEd has been involved since 1*993 e

with the BWROG, *

-..* ComEd believes the URG approach the best resolution path

. Dresden Strainer Mods

  • Install larger strainers now*

.

  • Limited *by structural *design
  • . Need* containment.. overpressure credit anyway
  • Provide*60 dayresponse after URG
  • resolution
  • . e.*
  • Basis for Approach
  • _
  • Interim Compensatory.Action
  • Can not show compliance with /EB 96-03

Replacement Strainer Design

  • ..** Objectives
  • Maint~in 8.dequate NPSH margin
  • Assure that design* is structurally robust
  • A void new license amendment (USQs)
  • Assure that design can be Installed in Spring 1997.*
  • Background Leading to Design
  • .... Options.*

Iii Drywell Insulation is nearly all RMI

.

  • Fiber Insulation is used* at a limited.

number of locations *

  • ECCS flow is filtered by four strainers (see Figure)
  • ECCS systems take flow from a

. common ring header *

. ~

lroR INFORllATION oNLYI UNIT*3 TORUS TOI' Vl!V DRtsDl:N NUCLEAR POWER STATION SITE ENGINEERING CAD

Background Leading to Design.

Options(cont 'd)

  • Access to the suppression pool is through torus hatches with nominal 34 inch diameter
  • Current plant design provides small

..

  • Structural design.margins are small*

.**.. Selected Design Option

  • Several designs were evaluated Ill Dresden will install four replacement Radial Stacked Disk Strainers.
  • Alternate design could not be installed to replace all four existing strainers
  • Selected Design Option (cont'd)
  • Alternate strainers design would be adversely *

. affected by SRV DisCharge and T"'.Quenchers at * *. *

  • two of four.locations *.
  • Without change to licensed load generation *..
  • methodology, this alternate design can only be.

. installed at two locations.*.*.

  • *Increased surface area(comparedtoradial design).

. requires use of pipe. fittings resulting in higher clean

  • strainer losses. -. * *..
  • Although alternate design* offered greater surface area, there* was no significant NPSH advantage

New Strainer Performance 11 New strainers were_ evaluated conservatively for a variety of temperature and flow

. conditions.

. Ill Conservatively predicted losses across postulated d~bris beds* were added to clean*

strainer-losses and compa*red to NPSH

. margin evaluated in. the time domain.

  • j

~-...

  • .New Strainer Peiformance (cont'd)

Iii For example, predicted head loss across e

postulated-debris bed for 8000 _gpm at 140°F is approximately 2 feet_(<1 psi).

-Ill Predicted head loss assuming 100 percent fiber in the torus at 8000 gpm. at 140°F is approximately 15 -feet..

11 _ Head loss prediction ass*umes that debris is transported instantane*ously to the strainers.

Detailed evaluation of the time dependency of this phenomena_ demonstrates some of the

.* conservatisms a(Jd, hence, additional margin in this design (blockage plot).

New Strainer Performance.

  • (cont'd)

II For example, predicted head loss across

. e.

postulateddebris bed for 8000 gpm at 140°F is ap/Jroximate/y2 feet (<1 psi).*

  • 11 Predicted head loss assuming 100 percent
  • fiberin the torus at 8000 gpm at 140°F is *
  • approximately.* 15 teet.
  • Head loss prediction assumes that debris is transported instantaneously to the strainers.

.. Detailed evaluatio.n of the time dependency of this phenomena demonstrates* some of the

  • conservatisms and,* hen_ce, additional margin.

in this design.

Technical Comparison of

  • Dresden Strainers

- _ * 'Existing New Truncated Core Stacked Disk

(/

~

. Cii-rn;;;cnbedXr~-;;-wri-*-----~.s-----------

57

.f~iqi~'!:dq£~.&~~-(ffI __ :~- -=--~=_+/-_$~===- ~!}£_==~

Approach Velocity (ft/sec_.. *

~----~-Q~ __ Q_QQ_.. 8.P_T:l ____ ~-~-~*----------------------------- --------*------~-----4. ?4: _______ -_. 3_9 ________ _

-Clean head loss (ft of _

water@ 10,000 gpm): _

5.8. -- _

4.2

-e

.... *-***** -*** ******-.... *---*-*---.. -****-*-***"'*******--***********-*****.. *-**-**-***-**-******-*--**-.. *-*-** ;******.. -****-*-*-:*.-*---*--***-.. -----*----** ***-*-------------------:-------r------------------------*****

18.3 *(base)/14.5 Size (0(in) x L (in))

(top) x 10.625 32.5 x 54

---.,;..,,...,......... _,,........ _. ___.. ______,, __________ ~ __,, _______ *----*--*-------------------------------

  • Strainer Design* Options

. Design Option

.. *--*-*----.. *--------**--*"-~*--------

p~s!g~.f a.~ll:f!l:eter_****.................................. Ra.g!q!........................ :...... :

...... -~~!~_':!l.<!_!~_!2~~~8~.

Surface Area* per -

-'1 Strainer

..................................... ;......................... -.................... ____..,..,....................................... -....... *--*--.. ----*-**----------1-----------

Hydrodynamic

~

.. f!!_f:!:!!_§fi_l}C!._S _

Installation

  • -'1
  • ~ii~pia~~All--F~~~*----~--------------'1-----+--------

Strainers

....... "j'"""""......................................................... -..... _,,_.................................................... --.. --................................................... -......... ~~----*-**-**-*----- ""*----------*--*-*---*--***-*--.. ---**-**--""'-""'

C ean Strainer

~-

.Losses*.

    • -***.................. *************........................... ****-*....... -.................. ---**-*-***-~-*------------- --*-*--------**-**--*--*-*--*-***

1 Total Cost

  • -'1

........,"I........................... *:...... ***-***----************-*****-***--*--**- -----**-----*----------*-*---------**-**-****

'1 This design_ option was evaluated superior when.

.

  • considering this ~esign paramet~r.

.. '

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17187A847&oldid=5131748"