ML20010B123
| ML20010B123 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1981 |
| From: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ferguson R WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108140045 | |
| Download: ML20010B123 (6) | |
Text
'
.w m
m_,.
m.
AUG 41981 DISTRIBUTION:
Docket Nos.
/513 LB #4 r/f Docket Nos: 50-460 DEisenhut bec: TERA and 50-513 EAdensam NRC/PDR RHernan Local PDR MDuncan NSIC Hr. R. L. Ferguson SHanauer
. TIC 11anaging Director RTedesco ACRS (16)
Washington Public Power Supply System RVollmer P.O. Box 968 TMurley 3000 George Washington WAy RMattson Richland, Washington 99352 RHartfield, MPA 0 ELD
Dear Mr. Ferguson:
OIE (3)
Subject:
Class 9 Accident Analyses in tne WPPSS Nuclear Projects 1 and 4 Environmental Report The Connission's Statement of Interia Policy dated June 13,1980, (45 FR 40101),
. stat.es that, "Environrental Reports submitted by applicants for construction permits and operating licenses on or after July 1,1980, should include a discussion of the environmental risks associated with accidents that follow the guidance herein." Therefore, in accordance with this policy statement, we request that you consider the more severe kinds of very low probability accidents that are physically possible in environmental impact assessments required by the National Environmental Policy Act. Such accidents are commonly referred to as Class 9 accidents. A copy of this statement is enclosed.
Your analyses of these accidents should be presented in the Environmental Report regarding WPPSS Nuclear Projects 1 and 4 at the time you tender your application for an operating license.
Sincerely,
~
Originalsigned by:
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing e
Enclosure:
a Statement of Interim Policy
.M
- \\M
'l yh J45 FR 40101)
P
-8 cc w/ encl.:
AUG 0 6198* i-See next page g'c",
8108140045 810904 F-DR ADOCK 05000460 y
gg Qg c-son
.. Dug'gy/.LA.
J
.. DL:LB.
1...Dl%8. 4....
..A L......
- = = >
- ~>..dkean/1a...Rueen 1EAd'e sam........R.
sc o....
""h.?.U.l481........ZL G1........N.6at........F.j.s......
(Nac roa* 38 8 ' e;'lo' NacM *2do 5FFICIAL'. RECORD COPY
- 'eso-32u24
WNP 4
Mr. R. L. ferguson 11anaging Director Washingtor Public Potter Supply System P.O. Box 968-30'00 George Washington Way Richland, Washington 99352 cc: Mr. V. Mani United Engineers & Constructors, Inc.
30 South 17th Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Nicholas' S. Reynolds, Esq.
DeBevoise & Libenran 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Mr. E. G. Ward Senior Project Manager Babcock.& Wilcox Company P.O. Box 1260 Lynchburg, Virginia 23505 Resident Inspector /WPPSS NPS c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 69 Richland, Washington 99352 4
?
s e
4 A
e q
g
-,-e n
c
! cad te re'easu of rH e!.c n er.d for raicet:he mater.a.s.includ:nc se q.en:es tha: can resul: in in.adquete cochng cf tea: tor fueland :e rne:::ng cf the teactor core. In this trgard. at:ention sha!! be given both to the probability of o:cu rence of such re: cases and to the environmentalconsequences of such re:tases.This stat: men: efinte..m pe! icy is taken in coordina: ion with cther ongoing safety.re!ated activities that are direct!v related in accident censiderations'in the areas of plant desi;n. eperational safety. siting policy.
and emergency p!anning. The Ccmmission in: ends :o con:inue the ru'emaking on this sna :er when new si:ing reqc:rements and other safety re!ated requirements incorperating ac:.ident censideraticns are in place.
oATrs:This s:atement of interim policy is effective Jur'e 13.1950 Comment period expires Septer-ber 11.1960.
10 CFR Parts 50 and 81 accarssts:The Commission intends the intcrim policy guidance centained 4
/*
Nuclear Power Plant Accident herein to be immediately effective.
Considerations Under the National Howeser.allinterested persons who Environmental Policy Act of 1969 desire to submit written comments or actwcV:U.S ' uc' gar Regulatory sugges: ions for consideratio?. In ccnnection with this sta:eme at should Commissi9n
/
send them to the Secretary of the ACTrow: Statement of Interim Policy.
Commission. U.S. Nudest ReFulatory suuur w: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Wa shington. D.C. 23555.
Commission (NRC)is revising its policy Attention: Docleting and Set zice for censiderir:; the rnore severe kinds of Branch.
sery low pobability accidents that are ren rummen mromu ATiow cowtacT:
physically possible,in envircemental R. Wayne Houston. Chief. Accident impact assessments required by the Eva!=a' tion Eranch Off:ce of Nuclear National Envitenmental c ! icy Act Reactor Regu!ation. U.S. 'suelear o
(NEPA).Such accidents are commonly Regda:ory Commission. Washingten.
rc' erred to as Cim o arc 6n : -
D.C. :c555. Telephone:1301) 4 F2-7323.
f.. ow:ng an accicent c. ass::::ation sVPPLEWENTARY 8%FOstp ATioN:
schme prepcsed by the A:cmic Energy Co nmis sicn (predecess or to NRC)in
.;ccident Considerations in Past NEPA W1 fer purpcses ofi p!emen:ing g, y:,w, NEPA.' The '.' arch 28.1979 aecdcnt at 1*ni:: of the Three Mile 1s!and nudear The proposed Anr.ex to A;pendia D i
plant has em;hasi:ed the need for of 10 CTR rar: 50 (hereafter the char ges in NRC policies regarding the "Annec) was pubhsted for comment considerations to be gh en to serious en Dece=,:;cr 1.1971 by tr.e (ferrner) accidents from an envirenmental as well Atemic Energy Cemmission. !: proposed as a safety peint of view.
te s;ecify a set of standardized accident i
This sta:ccent ofinteri= policy assum;*;ons to be used in announces the withdrawal of the,
Envirenrnen:al Repor:s submi:ted by proposed Annex to Appendix D of10 ap;Lrants for construe: ion perm:ts or CTR Part 50 and the suspension of the eperating licenses for ni.cicar power ru!emaking proceeding that began with.' ' reactors. It a!so included a system for the publicatior. of that proposed Annex.
classifying accidents according to a ca December ).1971. It is the -
g aded scale cf seserity and probability Commission's position that its of occurrer ce. Nine classes o'f accidents EnvironmentalImpact Statements shall w ere defined. ranging from trivial to include considerations of the site.
s cry serious. !: directed that "for each specific environmentalimpacts -
class. except c! asses 1 and 9. the at:ributable to accident sequences that environmental censeque: ces shall be 4
evaluated as indicated!' Class 1 events
'FTeleted.s on Aer.es sc 10 CG Part so.
were not to be Considered because off Arrerda D. 38 F1l r02.41.The Ccm.voseen s NcPA.
M trivial C.ont eQuences. Whereas in im; e ma rtris.ed.ne,,c..:.'. so Crn r.ri si twi.,
regat3 to Class 9 events. the Annex +
res tat c s we e s ! seq.er/ 'livly is 3y y,,,,
that time 6e Co.e.nien rac ed d.t *" rte Pro; c oed stated as follows:
A%res is siell under cos... der hen * * ** as FR Oc ?S f1,
t-
- j Ne cc, eres ir. C'ess 5 irsalve within a 50 r.II:s radius cf the plant. and Locy en whien et g snt i:0att. Hee the se.r.in v, ;';. st.:sted e.eu.sne failuns scme differtt.ces bctween beihr.g water staff emphasired in fo;us on mi tu de rser,oere tur. tt r< e !.csti.!atrd far the retctors (BWR) and pressuficed wcter environrnent 'c ut did nc! fad l'.4! the des ;n tes:t for prote::n e systems and reactors (PWKl.Beyond these few Probabmt3 cf a ec e rneh nent er.;ir.eered safety ! cati.res.Their specifacs the discussions have occurring in the f:rst place w as essentia!!y any different tnan for land-cor,egsences cald Le ses ere. How es ar. the reiterated the yvidance of the Annex probaby) c! da:ir occunence is so s.ia!!
ar.d hve rdied u-n tr.e An wx*a based plant. In its Memorandum and erse in srt (.
1: i ph -
CCUCIU8IO3 th3! the Prebability of Ord;r in de Matter o! O'ishon Pcwer barners). qubt) est.rar ce for design.
occurrence of a Chss G esent is too lew Systems.* the Cc=m:ssien concurred m nan.f acture. and c;e rat:en. cont;nued to warrant consideration. a conclusion the staffs judgment.Thus, the Eeactor -
purs e;!:ance and test.ng. and conservative based upon genera!!y stated safety Safety S:ud) and NRC experience with these cJses has serses to refocus de@ are an app!;ed to provide and considerations.
attention'on the need.o reemphasize ma.* *a:n the required h!;h degree of With the publication of the Reactor that environme.talr: L entails ooth c!ses are.and mliremam safa$nts m tb.
Safety Study (WASH-1400). in draft probabilities and censquences, a point an. ante tha. poten:ial accid s
c.ently rer.ote form in August 1974 and final form in that was made in the puMication of the in prebabiht3 r;at the etaironrnental r:sk is October 1975. the accident discussionr t
Anr.o. but was not given adequate in Envlronroental Impact S:atements
[s ss su h e en s i eces a -
beFan to refer to this first detailed study emphasis.
in July 1577 the NRC commissioned a a;p;Irants En@cnmerta! Reports.
of the risks associated with nuclear Risk Assesseent Revic~ Group "to A footnote to the Annex stated:
power plant accidents.particularly Atthough th;s annen refers to applicant's events which can lead to the melting of clarify the at ucuments and h,mitations i
of the Reactor Safety Study., One of the Envuonrnent al Ectorts. the current the fuelinside a reactor.8 The references c nclusi ns d t. is studg,p.:b !shed in h
assurnp:. ens and other, provisions thereof are to this stad'v w ere in keeping with the September 1978. as NhG/CR@DO.
a;phcable.esce; as tne content may intent and spirit of NEPA "to disclose-
" Risk Assessment Keview Croup Repo-1 otherpse requ:re, to AEC draft and final rdevant informa tion, but it is obvious 10 O ' SW# I'i" *I8"
De reded S:ste:nents.
6a WASH-W did not form the basis i, rnmission. was that The Rev..ew During the pub!ic cemment period thri for the conciusien expressed in the Gr up was una e te dylumine whether followed pub!ication of the Annex a Annex in 1971 that the probability of ea ute a
s c ac ent m.mber cf criticisms of the Annex were occurrence of Class 9 events was'too sequences in WASH-1400 are high or receivec. IY.ncipal arncng these were low to warrant their (site s-cific)
Icw.but believes thit the errorbounds the fe% ewing:
consideration under NEPA.
on den es>=atu an y genuat
. 1) Theyhi?cre;hy of prescribing The Commission's staff has, towever.
8."*.:ly understated., This and other assemptions does not lead to ol'jective id mtified in certain cases unique Snomss of the Remw GrcM.aw alsn C arnstances which ii felt warranted subsequently be en refer ed to in analysis.
I:)!! fai'ed to treat the probab!?ities of more extensise.ad detailed
""*"'"*E*'b*""
accidenis la any but the rnost Eeneral consideratien of Class s eve..ts.One of with a reference to the Comm?"!n's issio t ne was the propoud Cunch Rivu.d poliev statement en the Reactor Safety No :r~--~4ng analvsh was shen ree u eacte ant p P). a hqm Studiin h;ht of the Risk Assessment -
- o shew tha'thes s accidaats are metal co led fast breecer reactor very g,y;ew Grcup Repert. published on
~'
4
,vr.-yn:ly Icw i"-- ehabiiity that their different from the rnora conventional-yf,"[,.f:,efe7,[' 3e}][$' g's of the 79 T C-t on
i H;h: watu na:'or plants for which Ge 7
ri r
et e essed safety expuicca base n,s much broa, der.
Review Group bo6 as to the Rese:or U rce was given as to hew (41 Ne a
enmental S:atement r2.r.cea! chases of I""* N.*.I.Enp he staffincluded a S. afeiy S:u y s actiesements and as to
,cr a nt fcr the Cr aP. t
',, j -.,r discuss n !Ge cens ceratie it had A w
- E.vironmental
- d f t ai e the shent Clus F es ents.
statements hss e teen pub!!shed r
cen.w r anal) sis e
In tne ear 1y e uden for the subsequent to de ThreeMi:e Island IIT'h Ncant assumptions are not h,- y ran s,ac.q:~e staff pufmne.
an acci ent.These wuc for cem entional gene:.I:~t a--P:ab!e to E.s cocied or g
i,7 r,3: or ;.lants
- e n ative jang.b,,,g j;g : w,Unt de p bm iii r.e:a5 ceo'ed rentors.
Mucncu sn Can 9 acrident it) Safety and envirunmen:s! eisks are cpr. sequences am ng the alternat,ve practice wl:h 7espect to accio,ast and ccm:nud to rs i
cnts at
-no enentia!!y different considerations.
. s:t es. (SECY-7!--137) such piants, but ncted that the Nei:Fer the Atcrnic Energv in the case of the apph,cah,on bF esperience gained from de Three Mile Cc=ndoien rir the NRC tc"ok nv OUshere Nwe S s: ems to manufactm Is:and ac-ident was not factored into furtha act'en en this rukmaking heept UC'.thng nu: car pcw u $ ants, tye, sjaH the di,eg,,jen, in 1974 wht 10 CFR Part $1 was luc;ed that the envirenmental r:sms of, Our expuience wi$ past NEPA prcme!ge tcd. Os er the intervening years scoe Class 9 eunts warranted specia.
resiews of ac:Icents and the"IMI the acciden: ccesiden:icns discussed in
- Environ =cn:a!!= pact Statements for egnsideration.The special accident clearly acads us to believe that circumstances w cre the potentially a change is needed.
propoud n:.c: ear power plants reficcted sutous consecuences enaciated w,th Accerc:n;!y.the proposed Annex to i
the ruidar.cc of the Annex with few watu [hqu,d) pathways leadmE to Appendix D of10 CTR rari 50. published i
raceptions. Typically, the discussions of radiolog,ical expcsuns if a mohen on decernber 1.1971. is hereby hCcident cente4:en:es through Class 8 nector em w ue to faH into tne wate withdrawn and sha!! not hereafter be (des:gn basis ac:idents) for each case ur ed bv apphcan's nor by the staff. The hae rcGe::ed, speci7,e site,
,,,,,,, ter. io no, o.. n, ie.v.i -ci.. 9 3%
-s 6 & adM an as
,, g, _ % %,, w,
charaeter::ti:s anociated with e ce. dent-ragow s.
metec,rcie;3 (the d:s;iers ion of releases
.iang s,. ierr... co menh u..e.. tooteh of radica:the matuial tnio the
=Wai no. co. meh.cc deas.
- ."'a m W M3"'*'" y esm04:ssmr o ss 7.
atmca rshue). the aetual populalion
/
e
- p s
4 b
/1,
e,,
~
The environn.cnial ccnst pences of iss.cd S:mmen:s.nor, at tn a
- 1. Tnt A v. x p-rscr.bes ces:due en cf de L'nds of accidents re! eases whese ptchsbih:y of occurence showinF cf si.-i ar spec al' 1as been es:imated shall a!so 1.e circumstances. as a tar:s ire e;snep.
tCiast 3; da!. e:c:rden; tc. the Ecactor
~Safet> S:;4 'drmirate C.e accident d:Scussed ia probabilistic scrms. Such r o;,ent?'F. or expan6n; an> prcne.;s or consequences shall be characterized in engoing proceeding.'
ris L,
. The defmi:icn cf Class 9 accidents terms cf potential radiological Howoer.it is also the in:en: cf the in the / nnes is r.ct st.ffie:?m:v precise exposures to individuals to popu!ation Commission that the s:aff t Le s:eps to to warrant its furSe: use in C'o: minion groups, and. where app ; cable. to biota.
identify additicnal cases dat night pobey. ru!es. and rep.!ations, nct as a Health and safety risis that inay be warrant ear!y censidera: en cf either decision cri crion in agency prar:tice, associated wi:h experures to people additional features or other actions
- 3. The Annex's prescription of shall be discussed in c manner that<
which w ould pretc.r.t or mi:?; ate the assernptions to be used in the analysis fairly ref ects the current state of consequences of serious accidents.
cf the environmen:sl consequenecs of knowledge regarding such risks.
Ceses for such censiderann are these accidents does not contribute to Socioeconomic irnpacts that might be for which a Final Envircnmen:al objectis e consideration.
associated with ernergency rnessures Statement has alreadv Lun issued at
- 4. The Annes does not give adequate during or follcwing an accident should the Constructica Pe-E.it stage but for ccrsiderat:cn tc the de:sile'd treatment a!so be discussed. The environmental which the Operating License review of measures : Len to prevent and to risk of accidents should also be stage has not yet been reached. In miti ate the consequences of accidents compared to and contrasted with carrying out this direc:ive. de staff F
in the safety review of each application.
radiological risks associated with should consider re:evant si:e fea:ures.
Tije c!assification of accidents normal and anticipated operational including pcpu!ation density a nciated prcposed in that Annex shall no longer releases.
with accident risk in comparison to such be used.1;. its pbce the followin8 In prornulgating this interim Fuidance.
features at presently operating plants.
mien = geidance S g:ven for the the Commission is aware that there are Staff should a!so consider the likelihood tren: ment of accident risk and will!ike!v remain for some time to that substantive changes in p: ant design coasidergons in NEPA revie.<s.
ccme many uncertainties in the features which rnay cc=penrate further
~
8Pplication of risk assecsment methods, for adverse site features may be rnore Acridect Considera!!ons in Future and it expects that its Environrnental easily incorpora:ed in plants w hen NEPA Reviews Ir pact Statements willidentify major construction has not yet pregressed very It is the position of the Comrn.ission uncertainties in its probabilistic far.
that its Enutentnental Impact es:imates. On the other hand the Environmental Reports submitted bv Staternems, pu,rsuant to Section 102[c)[i]
Commission believes that the state of applicants for ceertruction perinits an'd of the Natiena. Ernironmental Policy the art is sufficiently advanced that a for operating licenses on or after tuli 1.
Act of1959.shallinclude a reasoned be; inning should now be made in the 1560 should include a discussion of the consideration of the ernironmental n. ks envireninenta! r sks associated with s
use of t..ese meth d 1 gies in the k
(impacts) a::ributab.e to acciden:s at the regulatory process, and that such up accidents that fehows the guidance b.rticular facili:v or facilities within the will represent a centructwe and rational given herem.
ar analysis and 6. 'ch state. ment. In the ferward step in the oischarge ofits Related Poh.ey Matters 1'nder epe of each su scussion of see.n nsks.
reponsibi;ities.
Consideration ap,:rcsimaieh equal aticntion shall be It is the mient of the Ce=m.:ssien m f ven to the grchabi!ity of occurrence of issuing this Staternent of Interim Po! icy In addi::,en to its responsibi!; les i
reicases and to the pr5bability of dat the staff willinitiate tre.atments of. _ under NEPA. the NEC also bears occurrence cf ne environmental accident censideratiens, in accordance responsib!!ity uncer the Atemic Energy ec~rnenco cf these re: eases.
Re;eas'es refer to re6ation ard/or wnh the feregoing guidance.,in its Act for the pic:s c:: n cf et ;cbHc enpeing NEPA reviews,i.e.. tor any health an: safe y frc= :ne hacards ra6eac:isc mater.a!> cnterina envitenmentr.1 opesure pathk sys.
proceeding at a lictnsing stage where a associated witr the use of nudsar Fina! Envirenmen:at Impact S arement energy. Pursuan: to this respansibility indu6nt air. wa:er. and ground water.
has not > ct been issued.These new the Commissien nctes ina:ther.re Esto er eccident sequences : hat Im: 6. ne:tmes sha!! ir.cicdc but not be
- catment.. which will take into acrount currently a number of engcin; activtties li:ni:cd to Scic : hat can reasenably be significant site-and plant.specibe being considered by the Cc==ission features. will result in inore detailed and its staff which intima:ely relaie to expected to eccur.In plant accident
. ciscussions of accident risis than in the " Class 9 accident" questien and Sequencu that can lead to a spectrum of reicases shal:be d:Sc=55ed and shal; previous environt: ental statements, which are either the subjec: of cc rent inc!cde sequent es :ha: can resu:: in particciarly for there re:ated to rc:cmakhg c are candidate subjects for inadequate ces!!n; of reacter fuel and to conventienallight water p! ants atlandr rulemaking.
based sites.It is expected that these -
On December 19.1979 the rnc! ting of the reacrer core. The stat to resised treatments willlead to Commission iss;.ed for public comment
- which es e :ts a-isir g from causes conclusiens regarding the enviren= ental a proposed rule which would external to the'p! ant which are ri ks of accidents similar to those that significant!y revise its requirements in considert '! pessible centnbutors to the t
' risk associated with the r. articular plant would be reached by a continuation of to CFR Par: 50 for eme.gency planning shall also be discus sed. Detailed
. current practices, particularly for cases for nuc! car power plants.One.of the quant;;ctise considerations that form involving special circumstances where considerations in this rulemaking wes Class 9 risks have been censidered by the basis of probabilistic estimates of releases raed not be incerporated in the the staff. as described above. Thus. this
- co-mn.mr cwy.m! s.dford diar *e
- nW iactwen cf 6 rmeLes we a-terces-Envirenmenta! !.- P'act Statements but.
change in policy is not to be construed Bey feet 0 st the) eie aboclee!) mccr s'sient math shall be refercnced therein Such as any lack of con.wence in conclusions
,,,, g,, g,,
,,g,,g_.,,,,
ea references shallinc!ade as app!icable, regarding the environmental nsks of
,,n,,,,,, p, a, n., c,,,,, c ca.....
accidents expressed in any previously e
a u rR rner.
re;.ct:s on safety evalus tions, e
h
'+ -
- r.
. ;c:v:,! t.nse:;.ce:es c! Ciass 9
'de n s sn a p ns tse ser.ss.'
- n A;.5: Mit ;mauant to the
- .:ss:::n's repest. a Siting Policy 4 Fc::t made recommendations wl:h 4:c:t to pcss ible chan;es in NRC
-:e? siCn; po!.cy and criteria.'
- e nt;y n:ic-th tn to CFR Part100. As a4 therein. its :eccm:nendations
.'re made te acecmp!ish [among
.us;:le !c::: wing scah
' Te rate mtc r - *:derationin siting the risk.
a:iated w:th. mden's be3 cnd the design n.tCistr N t3 es ab!ishes perv'ation
- s5 3 and d:s:nbunon criteria.
Tnis rnatter is currently before the e missign.
Th:s and cther recommendations that
.e been rnade as a result of the est: rations into the Three Mile Island 3 dent are curren:!y bein; brought cee.er by the Commission's staffin Ofsm cf proposed Action Plans.'
- g other rnatiers. these incorporate
- .=endations for rulemaking related ic;raded core cooling and t. ore melt
.Ments.The Commissien expects to g;[ecisions en these Action P:ans in
. ear future. It is the Cominission's
,.:) and intent to devote NRC's major curces to rnatters which the mission belieses will snake existing e
.i future nuclear power p ants safer.
i to preven: a recurrence of the kind
. :cident : hat c: curred at Three Mile
' nd. In the interim. however. and 1:n; comp'eticn of rulcrnakir:g
..: irs in the areas of emergency
.in;. s.:ing emeria. and design and
. Lens! sa ft:y. a!! cf wh'ch ins o!s e
. deratis.s cf serices a:cident
]
.::a!. the Cc= mission f.nds it
.::a! ts impres e l'e 7:ccedures for
- Les and 3:>:! sing to the public 1
.ss.; fcr a riv.n; at cen:!usiens 3.ng :he entirenrnc.va: risks due to n:s at nu::rar p~ser p: ants On
- nn of th rufemakinF activities
. Se areas. and Lr.:d a:so upon the
.en:e ained with this statement of
.m prh{c} and ;cidance. the
~
- :ssi:n :::cnds to pursue pessible i e c a6:h* :nr to 10 CFTs Part 51 f) its p*'Pdica on the role of
. n riPis endt *.NE.PA, a
r*
M s EO.cv
- 3*:ennirr As a for the
- w er.i sf $ m, e tt 1.o:a1 Ce.or-- e nt
.. ! Le e g er.r> Fer pne T. *.s i F.r port
+ h eter !.*.e:e.t Fr.er Enris.* Nose-ler
. & rWs 05. %.*--t af the 519 st.es Task F
t A.rwet 15 s _
/
a $ %Up r,cs.,d Art,pn g.., [or
/
- er* irs kese * -e-tsbeme e'll e Fes:/.ent's
.. it e.: O *,t htees o'ste TV3
- 1 *.* ;t* ! rt 1: 15 9 4
1 t
-_m
. _. _ _ _ _