ML20093C105
| ML20093C105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Saint Vrain  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1984 |
| From: | Gahm J PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO |
| To: | Jay Collins NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| References | |
| P-84387, NUDOCS 8410100360 | |
| Download: ML20093C105 (14) | |
Text
..
public service company of (Cdlemde 16805 WCR 19 1/2, Platteville, Colorado 80651 September 27, 1984 Fort St. Vrain Unit No. 1 GG 'g[
P-84387 Mr. John T. Collins Regional Administrator, Region IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OCT - 3 M 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Arlington, TX 76011 ATTN:
Mr. E. H. Johnson
SUBJECT:
I & E Inspection Report 84-20
REFERENCE:
NRC Letter dated August 31, 1984
Dear Mr. Collins:
This letter is in response to the Notice of Violation received as a result of the special inspection conducted at Fort St.
Vrain on July 31, 1984.
The following response to the items contained in the Notice of Violation is hereby submitted:
A.
Effluent Release to Unrestricted Areas Technical Specification ELC0 8.1.2.a requires that the maximum instantaneous release rate of radioactive liquid effluent from the site shall be such that concentrations of radionuclides in the cooling tower blowdown do not exceed the values specified in Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20.
Contfary to
-the
- above, between 0200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> cn July ~19, 1984, and 1540 hours0.0178 days <br />0.428 hours <br />0.00255 weeks <br />5.8597e-4 months <br /> on July 20,1984, total concentrations of radionuclides in liquid effluents released from the reactor building sump to unrestricted areas exceeded Technical Specification limits by a factor of 2.47.
This is a Severity Level IV Violation.
(SupplementI)
(267/8420-01) 8410100360 840927 PDR ADOCK 05000267 0
[&O PDR oR.:g To
'JI Regto
c
+
L 8
s.
- (1) The. corrective ~ steps which' have been-'taken and the results-
- achieved:
- An.
aliquot of-Lthe July 20, 1984 sample was sent to EAL
-Corporation for analysis.~ A copy of the analysis results is attached.
Based on EAL's analysis, the appropriate MPC to use, from note 3.c to Appendix B,
- 10CFR20, is 3.0E-6pCi/m1, not 3.0E-8pCi/ml as utilized-previously for unidentified radionuclides. Based on the use of. 3.0E-6pCi/ml as the MPC
-value, the release concentration of-6.72E-8pC1/ml is only 2.47 percent. of the -MPC value; therefore, no Technical Specification limits contained in ELCO 8.1.2a were exceeded.
(2) Corrective- -steps which will be taken to avoid further violations:
Not' Applicable.
(3): The date when full compliance will'be achieved:
Not Applicable.-
B.
Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation
-Technical. Specification ELCO 8.1.3.d states: "All liquid effluents' released from the reactor building sump shall be continuously monitored by two activity monitors and their-associated recorder.
Equipment shall be operable to automatically terminate the release on high specific activity or low cooling water flow."
Contrary. to the above, the liquid effluent monitors did not terminate the' release on July 20, 1984, which exceeded Technical Specification' limits.
This is a Severity Level IV Violation. (Supplement I)
(267/8420-02)
~
.-. n
~ ;,;
,a sm
.3 9
(1)l'The1 corrective. steps-which have -been taken and the results achieved:
TheE monitors referred :to.i n ELC0 8.1.3d are two (2) sodium
.It has never been represented to the NRC di that PSC has on-lina beta _ monitors;.indeed.our instrumentation-and11the words contained in.ELCO 8.1.3d have not been amended 2
~
'since-1974. _Up to'this point in time, there has never been-a problem.with:the. understanding of the monitoring requirements of
?this secti.on or its; predecessor. :Mr. Blaine Murray of.your.
. staff 1 assisted 'PSC and EG&G.in developing the.new Radiological and Environmental-Technical Specifications (RETS) in 1983, and at-no Ltime; was at problem with -the existing wording or a requirement.for. on-lineL beta activ'i ty. monitors-discussed.
Nevertheless, as a result ofLthis NRC inspection finding, PSC and Mr.'Murray independently investigated the availability. of on-line beta activity monitors ~, and both parties have come to
~
the conclusion that there is no. such instrumentation on the market.
C6
(2). Corrective- ' steps which will be taken to avoid further
- violations:
A-Technical _ Specification change will be submitted to amend the wording in ELC0 8.1.3d~to more clearly indicate that. effluents will be' monitored by gammaJactivity monitors and that equipment shall:be operable to terminate the-release on high specific gamma' activity.
f (3),The'date:when fullicompliance will be achieved:
A-Technical- : Specification change will be submitted by November 30, 1984.
?
I b '.
i k.
A.m
r; ~
~
.y~
- 'C.
' Notifications-10 CFR Part 50.72 requires that each nuclear power reactor-licensee shall notify the. NRC Operations Center within
-4 hours _of any event of--liquid effluent releases that exceeds two. times the combined-maximum permissible concentrations for all radionuclides except tritium and dissolved noble gases, when averaged over a time period of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />.
Contrary to the above, certain licensee personnel were aware that technical specification limits had been exceeded for liquid effluents the afternoon of July 24, 1984, regarding a release made on July 19 and 20, 1984;
- however, the NRC was not notified until 1615 hours0.0187 days <br />0.449 hours <br />0.00267 weeks <br />6.145075e-4 months <br /> on. July 26, 1984, that concentrations-of unknown beta activity had exceeded Technical Specification l'mits by a reported factor of 2.24.
This is a Severity Level IV Violation. (Supplement I)
(267/8420-03)
(1) The corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved:
Contrary to the inspection report, no "... licensee personnel vere aware that Technical Specification limits had been exceeded
... the afternoon of July 24, 1984...". PSC personnel were aware that the. gross beta concentration exceeded the MPC for unidentified radionuclides.
It has always b completed," pen our position that until all analyses have been no conclusions regarding Technical Specification complian8e can be made. On the sample in question,
~ ll the analytical results and a
information regarding actual release and blowdown (dilution) rates were not available until July 26, 1984, at which time reporting was completed in accordance with 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B).
Nevertheless, all Radiochemistry personnel have been retrained regarding 'the importance of promptly reporting significant radiochemical results to department supervisory personnet for evaluation of reportability.
Documentation of this retraining is available at the station for NRC review.
s
,- '(2) Corrective steps which will be' taken to avoid further v'iolations:
-In the future, when 'significant radiochemical results are
-obtained that.
indicate.
the possibility that Technical Specification limits may _have been exceeded, the NRC will be
'promptly informed as a courtesy, pending completion of all required radiochemical analyses.
Final determinations as to
- whether, in fact, Technical. Specification limits have been exceeded will,'of course, be promptly reported to the NRC in accordance with 10CFR50.72.
~
(3) The date when full compliance will be achieved:
'T September 24, 1984.
Should you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Frank J. Novachek, (303) 571-7436, ext. 201.
Sincerely, t
' J. W. Gahm Manager, Nuclear Production Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station JWG/djc-Attachment i.
.-.=
- =::. = ---
1 Thermo FEsectmn EAL Corporatinn
~
co- = - =~
2030 wnght Avenue Rchmond Catione 94804 (415) 235-2633 (TWX) 910-382-8132 September 7, 1984 Ref: -.EAL 4.,0. No. 26-4300 Mr. Vern McGaffic Supervisor of Radiochemistry Public Service Company of Colorado 16805 Road 19 1/2 Platterville, Colorado 80651
Subject:
Report on the Radiological Analysis of Water
Dear Mr. McGaffic:
The attached report summarizes the radiological analysis results on the
_two water samples receivdd on July 30, 1984. One sample had no additives,.
and the other sample of the same water, had additives.
Phone conferences were held between yourself and EAL personnel at various times. The latter were either Rodney Melgard, Jim Floyd or myself.
Jim Floyd and co-workers performed the analyses and much of the initial evaluations.
y The final results are summarized in the attached data tables. Comments on the analysis and instrumentation are attached.
L.
The information transmitted with the samples, that low energy beta i
emitters were present and that ass was identified, aided in directing our analyses. Sulfur-35 has a maximum beta energy of only 0.167 MeV. We performed analyses for 355 and beta a2says against 355, isotopic standards, as well as the higher energy 137Cs. The results in Table 1 show that
- 69. i 16.% (2 (f ) of the beta activity is accounted for. This leaves an apparent 31. i 16.% of unaccounted activity. However, the gross assay of such low energy beta-emitters is influenced greatly by small changes of the assay parameters.
It is known that the analysis errors quoted above should be increased for that reason, but it is difficult to determine how much. We 3
could make further refinements in our low beta energy assay procedure for
- this particular sample and reduce analytical errors, etc.
It is likely that future samples would be different, with different solids content and isotope mixtures. Therefore, more refinement of this methodology is not justified for this one sample. This is the reason gross beta assay results
=
-e ~ - ~ ~. ** ~-
~:-
~+ -
< wqy *y p e_.~-=
-ys*~;e m-reyg-Q
,,,,,7
--
- y ~ 3 ~ ~
. t
w.
s..
EAL Corpor lion
~ 2-Mr. Vern McGaffic-9-7-84 on unknovas should be interpreted liberally. This problem is mentioned in a recent manuscript of a review of the Radiological Sampling and Analytical Methods for National Primary Drinking Regulations by Blanchard (EPA) and other authorities.
It is.known that the accuracy of the assay of gross beta activity is very dependent on matching the beta energy of the unknown with a known isotopic standard. ASTM D1890 states that "the, accuracy of any beta measure-ment is also dependent upon the number of nuclides present, combined with
. the various types of nuclides present,' combined with the various types of energies of radiation, with the accuracy decreasing as the number of combina-tions increases."
We found that the beta assay' of the sample by the techniques for
" general measureaents," as in ASTM D1890, using at'37Cs standard, produces much lower results, see Table 2, than when using the 353 standard. We have taken the later result as our best value.
Irregardless of tue problems of beta assay, discussed above, analyses were performed to detect gamma emitters by Ge(Li) analysis, as well as by gross gamma assay using a NaI(T1) gasuna well spectrometer. X-ray spec-trometry was performed to search for-possible X-ray emitters, such as 55Fe, etc. -Gross alpha measurements were also performed. Specific analyses were performed for the low energy beta emitter 13'I, for 12s1 and for combined seSr
'OSr activity. All of-the above analyses produced results at or below detection limits, except for a trace of 137Cs, which comprised much less than one percent of the beta activity. The values are reported in Tables tso and three.
It is concluded that the prime radioactive contaminants are low energy beta emitters and that all of the activity is accounted for as 355, within analytical limits of error and methodology limitations.
Please call me if there are any questions or further information is needed.
Sincerely yours,
_ c ')
pka.t ( 2 b.. ~......
Robert A. Wessman, Manager Nuclear Projects Nuclear Science Department RAW /sc Enclosures Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4, and notes i
Figure 1 4
e g
. y c.. p
,7y,,
.,p
...,s f*f,
4* ',
- )
- ' *- *** e ey e s=, w w-me y e-g a._e., y A
-____,..---,,__-._...._-,,.....,._,.,,.-._.-,,,_.,-m._._,-,.
EAL Corporttion
- TABLE 1 ACTIVIIT BALANCE AS ass All analyses are on the water sample with no additive, unless stated.
' Item Analysis EAL Sample No.
Results (Series 3044) pCi/mL (1 % error, 2 (T)
Comment (a) or as stated A.
Gross bett as ass 103 1.44 E-04 B.
Gross beta as ass 104 1.49 E-04 C.
Average Average 1.47 E-04 (5.)(a)
See Table 2-C for report as 137Cs D.
ass 11 A 1,08 E-04 E.
ssS 12 A-2 0.94 E-04
' F..
Average Average 1.01 E-04 (20.)(b)
Item f x 100 G.
ass as I beta
- 69. i 16.%
H.
Apparent unaccounted beta 0.46 E-04 (47.)
Item C-F Item f x 100 I..
% unaccounted beta 31.
16% (c)
J.
Absorption counting of 103 and 104 half thickness See Figsre 1 evaporated sample 3.35 mg/cm2 Al K.
Absorption counting of 903 and 904 half thickness See Figure 1 ass standard 3.35 mg/cm2 Al L.
Review of Absorption azul.
-- (d)
The sample beta counting activity closely matches ssg 9
e e
e b
- +p o+ N r e+ e;?m
- N f *y"" 88=' e * '*
- ' 8 "f "<^ P "
.r"-
~
+e
+
-w+*<-e
- ew e>
,e
EAL Corpor; tion 4
- TABLE 2 ACTIVITY BALANCE'AS 37Cs All analyses are on the water sangle with no additive, unless stated.
Item Analysis EAL Sangle No.
Results Comment f
(Series 3044) pCi/mL (1% error, 2 0')
A.
Cross beta as 137Cs 103 3.80 E-05 (5.)
Ash Weight 40.9 mg B.
Cross beta as savCs 104 3.68 E-05 (5.)
Ash weight 45.3 mg C.
Average beta, low weight Average 3.74 E-05 (5.)(c)
See Table l-C for report as sss D.
Gross beta as 187Cs 1
1.79 E-05 (5.)
Ash weight (General Method) 216. mg
-E.
Gross: beta.'as 137Cs 2
2.02 E-05 (5.)
Ash weight (General Method) 191. ga water with additive F.
Average beta, standard weight Average 1.91 E-05 (17.)(e)
G.
187Cs by gasma analysis 110 3.41 E-08 (70.)(f)
See Table 4 0.2 2 0.1%
The activity H.
137Cs as % Item F beta has very little 137Cs present 1.907 E-05 (17.)
Item F-C I.
Apparent unaccounted beta I
Ith.x100 99.8224.%
J..
% unaccounted beta 1a is not the proper reference standard C
K.
Ratio of beta assays at 1.96 2 0.35, Ites y different weights The use of 137Cs is not valid since the result varies with sagle ash weight in a different manner than 137Cg hgggg i
i 1
S geur ws-a - **- e== *
=
- we--
e ~
7 e 9Ast e. s-gree e s
..W y m,9
- ef -
- e,- +
yh p 7 -
- =,=e, g* g=en **.spee e
t J<
EAL Corpor: lion ANALYSIS FOR OTHER POSSIBLE ISOTOPES TABLE 3 All analyses are on the water sample with no additive, unless stated.
I' tem Analysis -
EAL Sample No.
Results Comments (Series 3044) pei/mL 1 % error, 2 0 A
Gaussa Emitters 110
'37Cs 3.41 E-08 (70.)(f) 2380 minutes on No other emitters detected Ge(Li), see Table 3 for detection limits B
Gross gamma,
111 (g)
No peaks observed C
Gross x-ray 120,121
<2. E-06 (h)
No peaks observed D
80Sr 21
<1.7 ib09 Immediate count minimum 80Y growth Det. Lim. <1.7 E-09 E
80Sr 21
<5. E-10 Counted after growth period, none observe.
Det. Lim. <7. E-10 F
seSr 21
<1.9 E-09 At 7/20/84, 0244 Det. Lim. <1.9 E-09 G
1 81 22
<4. E-08 Det. Lim. <4. E-08 H
1251 22
<6. E-08 (i)
Det. Lim. <6. E-08 I
Gross alpha 103
<1. E-07 Det. Lim. <7. E-08 J
Gross alpha 104
<2. E-07 Det. Lim. <7. E-08 Preserved water Det. Lim. <1.3 E-07 K
Gross alpha 1
<5. E-08 Det. Lim. <7. E-08 L
Gross alpha 2
<5, E-08 O
e m
.-e,
,,, +,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,q
TABLE 4 EAL CORP. GE(LI) ANALYSIS REPOPT PAGE 1
~
=
NUCLIDE DPM/ML UCI /ML EFROR WET WET PERCENT
=
202.333 1984 3044 110 TZERO
=
3044 110 100.000 MLS K
40
<4.843E-01
<2.181E-07 DET LIM CR - 51
. <5.912E-01
<2.663E-07 DET LIM MN 54-
<4.705E-02
<2.119E-08 EET LIM
-CO 57
<2.581E-02
<1.162E-08 DET LIM CO 58'
<5.158E-02
<1.656E-01 (7.459E-08 DET LIM CO 60
<3.371E-02
<1.518E-08 DET LIM 2N 65
<9.049E-02
<4.591E-02
<2.06SE-08 DET LIM
- NB 94
<3.717E-02
^<1.674E-08 DET LIM
.ZR 95
<1.239E-01
<5.582E-08 DET LIM TO 95
<5.344E <2.407E-08 DET LIM RU 106
<2.9??E-01
<1.351E-07 DET LIM AG 110M
< 4. 434E-02 (1.997E-08 DET LIM S2 124
<1.313E-01
<5.914E-08 DET LIM SB 125 (9.96"E-02
<4.489E-08 DET LIM
-1.
131
<4.088E-01
<4.300E-02
<1.937E-08 DET LIM CS 137 7.571E-02 3.410E-08 35.3 BA 140
<6.759E-01
<8.301E-02
<2.028E-01
<9.135E-08 DET LIM
- IR 192
<3.919E-02
<1.765E-08 DET LIM NP 239
<1.829E-01
<8.239E-08 EET LIM A
c-S F
(
6
.t
-e e-F ise ee w s-e gr as, er e g 4.sp**w ** v e y. -
- Jt*,"
' - a m e w * $ = *,
- o-yg ? pfe
- ww pp y-
-w y-
- ('
.g 4
,***rp' r
j
<y NOTES TO TABLES 1, 2 AND 3
~
'This value assumes all activity is from 35S and uses that efficiency.
a.
The error noted-does not include any deviation due to that assumption.
The efficiency was obtained by. running daplicate 355 spikes (Samples
-903 and 904). The precision of the value is 3% (10'),.In the case of 355 beta, the results are affected by the reproducibility the low energy Such of the sample thickness, the distribution of the residue, etc.
variations contribute to the analysis error, which is difficult to estimate, but greater than stated.
ThiswasdonebyradiochemistryanakysisusintLSC.
b.
The "apparently unaccounted for beta activity" may be ass, within the c.
limits of error plus uncertainties in the methodology. Further work was not justified, as discussed in the letter report.
The absorption counting was done on the second shelf of a Methane End d.
Calibrated Window Counter (MEW) which has a nominal background of 15 cym.
Al absorbers were used.
The gross beta counting results are calculated using a counting efficiency e.
versus ash weight curve prepared from 137Cs standards. This is the general method of gross beta analyses. The difference between line item C (low ash weight samples) and iten F (high ash weight samples) is interpreted as due to the use of a 137Cs standard,whereas a low energy standard should be used, as in Table 1.
The use of the usual 137Cs standard produces much lower beta activity concentration result.
Gamma analysis by Ge(L1) - A 100-mL aliquot of sample was counted 2380
~f.
. minutes.
Additional results are reported in Table 4.
Gross asema - An aliquot was counted 2500 minutes in a samma well vial 3
The on a Ms1 (T1) gamma well detector with a multichannel analyzer.
activity above the combined background of the detector plus the vial was observed in any of the regions between 13 and 1200 kev.
h.
Gross X-ray - Two evaporated aliquots were counted for 2600 minutes on different thin Na1 (T1) X-ray spectrometers. No peaks above background The were observed in any range between 2 to 22 kev on either sample.
8'
-*R%*P y
men _,.,,,
1 EAL Corpor; tion l
Notes to Tables 1, 2 and 3 (cont'd)'
55Fe (Mn) X-ray region was integrated and a less than value calculated.
It was felt that the 35S content of the sample perturbed the table in the spectrum,in this case,since the table was slightly elevated above normal instrument background.
- i. A chemically purified iodine fraction was counted on a gamma well NaI(T1) spectrometer. No peaks were detected for 1851 nor 1311 or 1 sal. The detection limits are about the same for these isotopes.
e e
e e
e 9
e G
~
up e
-e e p
---xe
. w ee e
- e y vs_ ner _
en sy=
e-~~~
+9. m
- J O
q; s
t
'. :' '6
- l W '3 T'~h T,
- e'r
(
~
~
~
hP{ "*
TTT 'I t 1' l 'I
- c, -,
i-nir du hi* tete
!i it l
t -
"l1 tjh}
i t' o t"
f i. P*'
'i ' l ',
.t,
. t v.,
i t
e i.
Q
.,4 ol} l t
",i F.l t.,j i M
. t.. n. oh..
4t
't' it
' ' "t:
0 '
it?l jJ,y.Il l.I Mtl it' I e L
't.
j'[
))ti q
i rt; je l p{
- +g
-,t:
t+1~
it
't N
a.
9
...I g.
g..
..e
.i,.
I.-
t;?t ii.1 a"
J 7; -
- l
..t
- l t -l v.
.n.
- n..i
- i. t..:,
A i
ttt t ;t i!
't
-1 it i
5
-t p
.iee
}.
l t" t;-
.9 r
n g,
7p".'t rt "h ]i y "l
- t
{ r~jt
. 't? '!T ill' 1"l IT
{[
~}7 **
-' i. '
r at: it!T
~ tN w-
. Tt 'it t t
.T" *Tr' lt*:
"g i Qt
'[p :!;' !.;i i
-l y- 'tjj iH-l' I'
Fl!
t t ii*
c 7"
- l 4{
't
.t':
il ll
' I
!,u.pp. p ;t yy g e--
3,Pdl
't t
t
?
4
! ft' I
Q:
t t
?*
t'
- t "t* 1, Uti d
i tr+-
l" ito i
t
+
M.
lpt
'tt r t'
' l *j e
.y I
- I; 1
1k t
t ih 11-1 i i*
{
'tt' I
l
}
' 4;
.r i
i e
]!.
1.1 he, W
b(-
tl i'
t,
.t i
i
'0
i Q{-
't'
'i ' 't:I f'
litt til' It I!
- ' I g
1 t
t u
t l% l lI h
%-;teil
%jff
'! t
~
1
.II l
r-nr !lil lit !i II I
.l
{
l
~ ! 'III i
[
il [
lI i
H h i
~
(3
\\
t' I
il I
y
.. a !
- M I
I rl 1
It
~
{: !!'g-[
P 't t
i i":
gt i
- - ['
f
't-(
! I
.G"l.
! tt"
[
tltj g-
- r f t-l l C
+ o
,p t+p
.i 14, t
.. tpt t.i h.
l t
ti
';t
-t t4 4
7 e
. j
,,e,,
y,,
p.j,m,, t,9 tll,g t
. ',;Jt,,
.),t, 7.
j
{
l t
g 1t r i
,, n. ",
,I, l
- h;-
i i,
i t 6.te ne # ol-
- tt
,r q:
t Mr
,'l rl. -
.t i m,
tr b-
- 'r 'i tr h '.n I
'.i'.n
.{
r..
fS'
,t.
l f
,o L
.r
,g,.t i
ir
'YI 6
1T
r,
- ft -t-'
i 1
. N.~q!
N..H d
'l I
.l.
i S
M.
i l
l
@g
- 4. !.-p} [
k lj" O
i
,e li t
f rs
- r i
y
- a t-s u
.-]
,3 t
,t.
ql.
y
-...i q r. <
r
,gG.
- v. r.
4
~
tn v
t.
,,t l
.-d
,q,_
f n
n,i-4 t.
l i
i c i i
v...ie,t. t i
i gh r-j Q
7q!
7
..j y
l j
k}
l 9,{
t A
n i i
.t i
4
. 1
.,..t j 1,:.
i,,
.:,n t.
r v
i n,i
,. lA i
s,.
, r...
i t.
tp, Lp -{.
I p
f il
-{
t<t
, i- { -
\\.
-.h,.
'h.
.. q i
i,
%).A,...1 I
j i j
l il j
i.
g t
..r,:p
,ji d
dl'.ijl
-l
- p.p.
i
[
~
~
i l g{Ilrp'
[
9-g K
,{ -
g
[ni h
-,-y, jj q;,ll g
.h 1
.,l.
F}
r
' 1 t 1-
- l +t- ~
i
(,t e '
j R
x 1
1-l pl i,
gl :i i
l i
{
i t-
- :v-ed en
.dl't l
i n,
Jh :,;.
lJ
,yt
- \\
mN r* I'i-
'l I
t i
j-e, i
.4
- p
.t e
1
'I' 1*
Q.r..
j t
t "i
~
tq 1 It A-r s
i
- t +
r-
[ *PlI
.*'t y
l 'l tp+ g' r il r
- rp I
v t.tl b
F i
}tr
.;i.
iv.
4 t' Ot 'i t t
7 '4 -
' O;f
- b r n
qt: it
.I j ti
-,j
-j l no n,,,i'
']i e' ft. -
-T-v~d' "
hr -o id.
t i
t.
6y v:
- r..,?. t.
t r,.p i
t-g
~; + r
- ipth, of.g.
l'n;
,t I i i
l n
t r
t
. tt te t
e
'ti /,
' f, -t }
-*tw t
s-i.
q
.t.
- ,r j
q..
f-
-r-A i
"' 'n.
t i,'
c M,1 6
1 t.1 p.i i
~, m.
y-,-
-A-t:
ti i
t-,, :i I,
o
, 1,.
3 p. jl 3,i q-1 s
1 n
r
!."st7 3-g w
1
,g
- r m
pi
- t. 1. n. p I
ti
- +.
liy
-4i i
p-j!
~
,: 1r,yF t
i-s l i.,i F
nI i
r.
it 'I
, i i
- f'
- p" tit' le
. i,{l
'l 1t
-l r+
w.t
.r. ne c
3 4
n it tl J't oi e
t oQ I
l l's i
th A t?
t t*
3 Ft
-j
- tt 4:
t g".
l-
- b
- 1.
tt 1
q
.s t
- e..,i h,,,.,,,
o l n, i
t tr -t 'l r
!r
' tit t
1" li r rii ti o' o
- n et io'i it ~3l~#- "r n
t W"-i' *. 't+r*"
rpl s
...,i m.
i o h' '"r '
- r'{tt}{
t eig~
tm r c...
i
'l j l "ly';
- (
r ~r --'- m d"t:
7 r
..i-
. + "
p 77-l-
~t-i-t o;
lit
' 'M I ? l *'
'[I
' t
'r' j' t Fi-pt $pEd4 D
-, l i ?
p p
1; o
t
- 1 t-t "
881tH d-t-O pt:
g
?
y'i $ ilI r
t
-t-r %ri n- !!
9..
t' T+--
e
{MM ^d@
I M M
+
p 7 Fi 4 i l f ;M L' l i[01
=
l i tN [ t
'Ri; :ll t
1 Q
i t
w t
U
.> i ip,
... di, y H.
gh.
3,. p.ig i, g.,l"I
- ii.c;
.m g e.1,q d}.. 4" iii
.:7j j ;
. L p.tkhl; R.j i.p 1.L{. J' -.
.. 4 4
ll A
4
- l..
yI.
p'uI g
- t-
~
p..,
ttb..
tit $n4
u -1
'8 'l e'
-.e t
d, y
n p.
s-
.r.r. c.: j.,. -il
.l }i.-w y.
.. -.i. c j,i
- :l l n[i
-l ~
- y,ag-i
- e
,' 't
"' }--
i r
tI-t'it T-r~
F P
l r
4.
,,l.-
r ei i t
't 't -
i t~ n1 3..,.
'i r
.. y'.,
- .. p, i
i.it en
- 7
- m..t.
d,. ~I
'1 riti tt T+
t,r,nre r +
t
' l. T"
- n.., j..., m,,
t, r, i,
n
,q..
g
.,) M;..
p.
'*t; epi ist ttt t* j'-
l'i
-" t~ t
-I ~
1'-
p ;,0
.h.
n r
,,[
' t t
tDN lt*
10
??? t t.1
- ?!
U
'F-
! 'I t' g,.' '1 M. f,.g
.l
'I t
-i
~ f*
ct ',j' l,,
t**
e
'6 j,
'l 4, i
'If I
C
'tt-
'lt "':
t t-P:
,: 94 t
':!- 't t
~
- l1-. ' '
.i t
i
, g t:
i!
4
'{'g
,e{
8 e b; I" " t 'I "4 f t ', !.-$,? t
- 11. }
1t' t'
~
In I
}-
A.
3,p-t' i
-n
[nt.
-r j
1 -
y tr7 +i {t-w '
y ;9
,1 og et D-y to i
,l
,t j..l-l
+
i I.
f t-gl l,
l
.p,
. " i"o,: Q,,
- il i
- y1 lo, op.iq {-(
y;i - p en t
r i
t.-
,i i
k t}
( ', ep it.
t t i ~
I i +, ?
t
"+i m
ipt ut y:
- r t'
.t @p ' s.. g....
t, t,l -
o".t
.,l 3.
.t
- h, i.I
. 3:
t i1 t
t:
l' p
y l
t t-l t
t
.o ri?t,t p..
.c 7
..-.-, j { t g !. {-.v.
" U.
t c p; l
9
.[
-g,-
.{.
3
..p
,+
p.
4 i.
.p
- p p
9., _,
r--
'n. q' i
a
.,4,.
. p.,.
..o,,,
. t 4T{
y,..,7
,. p.,9 7 -m7 t
M r*t Ii
- I
.h !-
i i
- c f, j. t 9..-
.,;..p ai.
-l
. l -..c, 7.
l qe
!n e r.p'
.,"1 +
t t
.v. j.
1 ea
- ?;. p{i.}4
..p l
l eit
}
i e
"tl i.o.
i-
.'.t i
a en.:, r e
. [,. j f
- t y itt
- h uj,l ::tt t 3
-,.i
.g..q 4
- j l 4
L {.
{t!
-ji, ii g
- l t
i e.
.o:
!.ei.
t
+.
4 7
ba e - e a 1
e n
,o e
t-e m' _ s a
n a e e-e~m g
a n
~
.f.
Q tact.)
- z
~;-
k H3Ns mLs SNossimo us a s313A3 c 4
- 3. -,u
.m>>,- 3.
/* * "
N QlAv es Das ts O 3 N 3 0 213 60 shsyd HaaV513 N 20213 tG U S ChasQtPC *0N g.
O
.