ML20129J642
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. d 9 h _ psnus ./ j UNITED STATES f, gy (g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a-g C j REGION IV o., e s11 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000 ,d* ARLINGTON, TEXAS 78012 December 10, 1979 Docket No. 50-498 50-499 MEMORANDUM FOR: File THRU: W. C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch-W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section FROM: W. G. Hubacek, Reaccor Inspector, Projects Section
SUBJECT:
ALLEGED INTIMIDATION OF FTL INSPECTOR The STP Resident Reactor Inspector (RRI) called at 3:30 p.m. on November'21, 1979, to report an incident which had been reported to him'by the HL&P Site QA Supervisor. A placement supervisor became involved in an incident during a concrete place- , ment which occurred on Monday, November 19, 1979. The placement supervisor apparently became upset when a PTL inspector rejected three truck loads of concrete due to high entrained air. He told the PTL inspector that he had people waiting for concrete and suggested that water be added to the concrete in the truck to reduce the entrained air. The PTL inspector stated that water could not be added since too much concrete had already been unloaded from the truck. The placement supervisor apparently made derogatory and threatening remarks to the PTL inspector. The RRI said he would provide this information to the other investigation team members upon their return to STP next Monday. 1
- =~
r s W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector Projects Section ec: H. S. Phillips R. K. Herr -C. E. Wisner i i ~ ~ 8506100145 840620 %-393 PDR P 4 i rw--r +-,,e--,-, ,,-y ,a,--- e- ,, ---e w, r-- a we,m,, ,-,,,wew
~ ::.. ~-..:-... a O [sm [ o, UNITED STATES ] j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j y, )e 3 ..., j REGION IV 1 0, ', - -. 611 RYAN PLAZA oRIVE, SulTE 1000 . % '.\\# ,e ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76012 January 4, 1980 Decket No. 50-498 50-499 MEMORANDUM FOR: File THRU: . C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch p W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section FROM: W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section
SUBJECT:
BROWN-MINNEAPOLIS USE OF RADIOGRAPHY EQUIPMENT SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, UNITS 1 & 2, DN 50-498; 50-499 On December 18, 1979, the South Texas Project RRI reported that Messrs. Charles M. Meyer and John Haygood of the State of Texas Radiation Control Branch, Division of Occupational Health and Radiation Control visited the site to a m ina the use of radiography equipment by Brown-Minneapolis (BM). Messrs. Meyer and Haygood determined that BM had not made a required reciprocity notification, did not have survey records, and had only one pocket dosimeter available. The BM radiography equipment was impounded. Massrs. Meyer and Haygood visited the site as a result of questions regarding BM's qualifications to use the radiography identified by E. Jernigan. I Q&-!nA W.-G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector u Projects Section ec: H. S. Phillips G. D. Brown 1 I 10 fl C h 1 Innp - 0J.uytvut
e UNITED STATES Q p2Mcoq'o, NUCt. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ~^ REGloN IV OI l
- I o 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE SulTE 1000 p.,7,, 7./ 4 j ARLlNGToN. TEXAS 76012 E%%J 5-
,o November 15, 1979 Docket No. 50-498 ~ 50-499 PEMORA';DUM 70 : File I THRU: W. C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch FROM: W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section J. I. Tapia, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support Section
SUBJECT:
TELEPHONE CALL FROM DICK BRYANT OF THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE IN REGARD TO THE SOUTH TEKAS PROJECT (STP) COOLING LAKE EARTH DAM I returned Dick Bryant's (713/220-7491) telephone call in regard to the earth dam around the cooling lake at STP. He was interested in the NRC's inspection effort of this dam. He stated he had information in regard to this dam having defects. - s. He also wanted to know if this dam was built by Brown and Root and was it of the same design as the one built in Florida for Florida Power and Light by Brown and Root. We informed him that the cooling reservoir water was utilized for recirculation cooling of the turbine condenser and was not Category I. We told him it was not included in the NRC inspection program. We told him ic did not know the design details of the dam or embankment built in Florida and could not compare the two. However, we did tell him that soil cement was used for both structures. We described the details of the Ultimate Beat Sink. (UES) to him and told him this dam is a subject of our inspection effort. caswa w ad ( W. A. Crossman, Chief Projects Section f g.I.Tapia,ReactorInspector y Engineering Support Section cc: H. S. Phillips W. G. Hubacek C. E. Wisner Q t, dfm r(Ks /2 y .~odu qrry v ( g = --
J ,.h #guhq$' UNITED STATES E 'k g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION u a REGION IV gb I 4 O 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE,SulTE 1000 ,o ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76012 December 10, 1979 Docket No. 50-498 50-499 1 MEMORANDUM FOR: File / THRU: W. C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch-W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section FROM: W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section
SUBJECT:
ALLEGED INTIMIDATION OF PTL INSPECTOR The STP Resident Reactor Inspector (RRI). called at 3:30 p.m. on November 21, 1979, to report an incident which had been reported to him by the HL&P Site QA Supervisor. A placement supervisor became involved in an incident during a concrete place-ment which occurred on Monday, November 19, 1979. The placement supervisor l apparently became up' set when a PTL inspector rejected three truck loads of concrete due to high entrained air. He told the PTL inspector that he had people waiting for concrete and suggested that water be added to the concrete in the truck to reduce the entrained air. The PTL inspector stated that water could not be added since too much concrete had already been unloaded from the truck. The placement supervisor apparently made derogatory and threatening remarks to the PTL inspector. The RRI said he would provide this information to the other investigation team members upon their return to STP next Monday. 4
- =~
r s W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector Projects Section ec: H. S. Phillips R. K. Herr C. E. Wisner n. 3 J U Q(UU . ~. - r <r 'w. G. --..e w n
Y*
- ;.. d-UNITED STATES
/jaJa sag'c, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A EGIC% IV O $11 RYAN PLAZA O RIVE.5UITE 100C Pf c 1; AAUNCTCW.TEXA5 MM2 s e - 'N..V....=# Aq.:st 12,1951 MDOPJJDUM FOR: G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reacter Project Brar.ch gW. A. Crosssan, Chief Projects Sectica f3 THRU: FROM: H. S. Phillips, Resident Reacter Inspector, STF SLSJECT: RESICENT INSFECTOR'S CC M ENTARY JtME IJD JtlLY 1981 Resident Insoecticn Procram Resul*a The Resident Reactor Inspecter (RRI) was en site during regular duty heurs from June I through July 31, 1981 except as follows: . June 1 Annual Leave 8 hours . June 9-12 Region IV Meeting 32 hours . June 22-July 5 Annual Leave 72 hours . July 23-24 ~ STP Hearings at Houten 12 hours The RRI spent 142 cf 177 available inspection hcurs on the following: N dule Subject June Julv (nours) (ncurs) 30703C Meetings 2 2 92702B Follow-Up Inspection 54 0 92706B Independent Inspection 15 12 42051C Fire Prevention / Protection 0 4 47053C Contairment Concrete 0 4 48063C Structural Steel Supports 0 6 49063C Safety Related Piping 0 6 50073C Safety Related Componen+a 0 6 51053C Electrical (Components / Systems) 0 6 50053C Reactor Vessel Installations 0 6 50063C Reactor Yessel Internals 0 6 55063C Welding Structural Steel 0 6 55083C Welding Safety Related Piping 0 6 o '. / h I A851// f ~ ~ U? l0NJ-
... ~.. -.. . -.. ~ w% i Memo to Madsen 2 August 12, 1981 The preceding paragraphs show that inspection during the month of June was largely follow-up inspection while the month of July shows a return to routine inspection. Status of RIV Task Force Follow-Up Inspection During the subject inspection period, follow-up inspection of the licensee's 3. ' responses and corrective action relative to Investigation Report 79-19 unresolved items and Show Cause Order items was performed. The following is the status of these items as of July 31, 1981: Sub.iect Open Closed Coments Noncompliances 0 22 Mr/-PJ Unresolved Items -29 2 -!'r.ly M 19 14 r:r fr.: ver. 79-19 Open Allegations 0 ~7 13 Point Letter - 0 13 9 Point Letter 0 9 4 j Show Cause Items 1,3,7,8,9 2,4,5,6,10 See next paragraph for de-tails. i HL&P Correspondence (ST-HL-AE-533) dated September 18, 1980, listed all commitments relative to Show Cause Order items. After eleven months, approximately, of the 236 comitments there are approximately 18 that 3 i remain open pending NRC review of final corrective action / implementation by the licensee and/or contractor. The following is the status of all 2 open items: I Item Assigned Inspector Comitments Remaining Open 1 Phillips All Closed 2 Tapia All Closed 3a Tomlinson A43, A65, A68, A69, A74 A76; A77 3b Tapia All Closed 4 Phillips All Closed-5 Phillips All Closed 6 Phillips ~All Closed 7 Hubacek N A137 8 Hubacek A141, A142, A143, A147, A148; A149 1 .9 Phillips A161 and M4 and M42 (reopened) 10 Tapia All Closed i i Region Inspection Program Results The~ RRI commentary of June 5,1981, recomended the Region and Resident j Inspection Program start routine-inspection as of July 1,1981. The RRI performed only routine inspection during July 1981; however, Region IV ' inspectors performed only reactive inspection.. Again, it is recomended that the Region resume routine "8" inspections.
_......._._.._..-........_.n.;.n...._._....-..._.. Memo to Madsen 3 August 12, 1981 Construction Status The licensee could have resumed full p~roduction work two months a'go; however, work has not resumed because the Architect Engineering is behind schedule. It has impacted the site activity and has resulted in lay-offs and a low level of work activity. The RRI met with the HL&P Project Manager to discuss this matter. It appears that the engineering problems will not be straightened out until January 1982 or perhaps later. On May 30, 1981, the HL&P Project Manager stated that Physical Design was 75.7% complete on Unit I and 23.7% on Unit 2. The overall complete was reported as 54%. The contract between HL&P and B&R stated that the engineering would be completed by 1978. Needless to say, HL&P appears to be disenchanted with the 4 AE effort. Lay-offs over the last few months have reduced the work force from approximately 3,500 to 2,750 as of July 1,1981. The work force of 2.750 was comprised of 1,112 craftsmen (incl 0 ding foremen) and 1,605 other personnel on site. There are approximately 147 on the night shift and these workers are involved with concrete curing, cement finishing and applying coatings. Unit 1 Civil work activity is proceeding on RCB, MEAB, FHB and DGB. A second i dome pour is scheduled for August 12, 1981. The concrete work on MEAB is almost complete while the concrete on the FHB and the DGB well over 80% complete. Testing of the Service Level I Coating is in progress as well as repair of defective areas. Mechanical work activity is progressing very slowly. Some AWS welding l is being performed, however, little pipe welding is being'done in any of the areas except for ASME repair welding of ECW pipe. The only mechanical equipment set is that equipment which must be in because of access. 4 l Electrical work activity has not started except supports for cable trays that are being installed. Unit 2 Civil work in Unit 2 is limited to work inside the RCB as shell wall pours will not be made outside until January-February 1982. The concrete work on Unit 2 is probably less than 40% complete. Emphasis is being l placed on Unit 1. h The only mechanical and electrical Work on Unit 2 is that work which is j essential for the civil work to progress. 4 t = =- =.: a
- s. Memo to Madsen 4 August 12, 1981 A number of strong rumors have been going around the site. One rumor is that Brown & Root will be replaced as the Architect Engineer for STP or bring in another AE to assist B&R. It has a~1so been rumored that Bechtel is trying to come to site to take over site functions. Highlights June 1 . RR1 received letter which notified the RRI that he had been selected for assignment as Chief. Equipment Qualification Section RIV Vendor Branch. June 9-12 . RRI Meeting at RIV July 6 . RR1 received call from NRC HQ Attorney. J. Gutierrez. He needed information' relative to how the interview process was conducted during Investigation 79-19. It seems that Steve Grote, B&R VP. testified that the interviews were " colored or biased". I told him that I stand behind the report as written. That is, we reported what the inter-viewees told us. July 20-22 . Bill Hubacek on site for follow-up inspection on Show Cause. ~ July 14-15 . Dick Herr and Joe Tapia on site for investigation. July 27-31 . Dan Tomlinson and Joan Roberds on site for follow-up inspection on Show Cause. July 23-24 . RRI at Houston Hearings. It looks like the hearings will run into November, perhaps December 1981, s H. S. Phillips Resident Reactor Inspector South Texas Project a 't . ~. - -
w s&,f
- q#
. p.. 0, UNITED STATES yjye<; } NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -7. ! REGION IV 0,,p;# ( ((!
- i 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE,SulTE 1000
'"$, ' b' ARLINGTON, T E XAs 76012 January 4, 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section FROM: W. C. Seidle, Chief, RC&ES Branch
SUBJECT:
TREND ANALYSIS - 1979 Please request your project inspectors to conduct a trend analysis of the performance of ecch of their assigned facilities during calendar year 1979. The analysis should be consistant with the considerations identified in my memorandum to you dated January 4, 1977 (copy attached). Please provide me with the analyses by COB February 15, 1980. .?/./. -b W. C. Sei , Chief Reactor C truction and Engineering Support Branch ec: K. V. Seyfrit R. E. Hall W. E. Vetter AW y 6 n1 ( e. gw wg a .- - em m m.6 4 ,A .h,y g..-g._>g. g,,gm,e, g. I
, -~ - 9 UNITEo STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t ( QFFICE OF INSPECTION ANo ENFORCEMENT \\ REGION IV $11 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76012 i January 4, 1977 W. A. Crossnan, Chief, Projects Section TRIND ANAIYSIS - 1976 The start of a new year is a scod time to step back and take a look at the performance of our assigned licensees during the past year. If, in our evaluation, we detect negative trends, then we should ,s Promptly arrange through regional supervision to discuss these findings with corporate management. Please request your Facilities Inspectors to conduct a trend analysis 6f the performance of each of their assigned " active" licensees during calendar year 1976. Specific areas to be considered should include: - Number and repetitiveness of Construction Deficiency Reports. o. - Enforcement history, e.g., number and repetitiveness of non-compliance items. - Rasponsiveness of licensee to enforcement action. - Number of outstanding unresolved items - timeliness of resolution. - Corporate management involvement in regulatory matters. s - Effectiveness of QA/QC programs. - Any other trends. indicative of poor performance. Please forward your written evaluations to ma be COB January 28, 1977. /. g& W.C.SaidleTChief Basetor Construction and Engineering Support Branch cc: R. E. Wm11 W. E. Vetter l l - - ~ - - - - - ~
_.e..- ..a .s _~ s .7 ~, ' 'a. '= -,g, ~ N' e p. .g
- 4
^ e u s m.... % . mm -{ 4..,. '. .,..-L. t ...e.-.. .~ .....-.... ~. ~. -.,.. _. ...,s".n..y,j ~ o e*. -......--.-.1 ,. &.,, 3..;.,. s., l,.! d&[ ^ P.4_._ ( ~ k ~ _. _. _ _. .. m. a. .~g a.
- v.. e n.
1- ~.. ,,.,2.- .m.. w s. 6. .. ~. *,._- s.e -.
- r.
~ '. %:-lj. sgfh/ g Jh g h.^ Jg*. I ((& ' #. ___'g. hgg p v _r, &^ ff l [ E, m,,c : 7 .r. v. q., 7 " : ;.m *: s q.,.,.., ', s. .. + ....5 j* * .L.,_ 4 4 Y . - f
- s.., _
s,.... n. 'a. q '_.* .-...,,,..._...s.-......-- - _ _.- --.' .,-(- e 7 's-- ,e ;-...... %.,,,. Q. ', W e *
- g.&..Q ;,;;,ysy *;~
} y.,...,... . e., ..,. e .a. * %.. .c,. . ~. w. Ji Awe ..t.
- g...g.....r'.n.e..,.,..;.
~ o.., r p. . e.- ;,g,,... './.]. y <a 3* *f** '- Q. - 4 s ..tv. e w w r.
- s..yy.,.,..**
,a r e
- w...
- e.
. ;.",....:v. , a. .s .s.' w. .w . s, .,6 ..c... y...- .?y '.- y..,: r..w,. sr, o.. m e s- -a ..,,;;
- g;&
.a, >s ..o' '" _. \\ ; Y '< &.....
- r. e. w A,. +v%, ;l...-g.m :,..f '. N.. ** '.,n,
.-[e. ', ' " ' e
- m.
g. s,.. - e.. .*: - * ~ .,,e...e. . Q..*.f. ".'s ',..].*$_,%..r .s.y q,'d?e"..*.. p.'*
- y*^
h.e L, s u,t , %'. ^ N, ?, -. ',., 4. sw. y s. , p.. "
- y4 y
s y., ,,8. nf.,.f,. : a* 4.5 ew my r,,se,.,,y,..4, .g ,.;? A _._._ A_.. c. .c ' c,n;, + 6. t.- w. ~
- ,q.
s 3.. .r.1. J..* a* %... ~. -e s - g ...s. . ?.,c Q.9 :, - -... .^ s m r =^ , v.,: ,'. i,$ # 7 ' 8,, ,s., t. 4.a,.-.. no...s. s.. s.. a s, ,.s ,~,,..e., y. ..e.-. .... -. -.......... -...4., -...==_v..... c.- s e s w e 6 4 "A 4. .r.".,._ = _w . s ~. _. -. - q..
- r
..*,s L _- ......s. f ._.7.. 7 '.t"*; ..: g . 's.u .-J'. s . n ,. 4.j.. -, a. . ' +., s
- i..
. gag. S.. .W. / ~ s.... ..a....___.s.._._ -. ~. -........... l em +.' ' j....,. 35 j e :.c m.,",,.,,.a..p.'.a.. e
4 ~.. e = l 3 4 s,.. 3 j Y.c %Your tyorl.dN - O ?.. ? s.;.... 2 m:.ut.>n 3 m l ....,. e f. :.. g .n = A...mminumtion" x ... r r >>. r s ~ i 6 -i. asut ~ ' S.
- l
} }! Opponene of the South Teams No. enrything. appareetty. neept as. n , ~ ?....;,...g!:,..Q...] ( *. clear Project have recently spent oW pair of panty home. { ,%3 / three days resumaging thrown a 8 J.. '.. : i.. vamat af countrueues recorde at the '"'" p ' -"J'*"** t( - 3* 7 butse unclear project amar Bgy *. - ^ '*** ' apper. *' l They got accome to the deemmemas; ?.enay is a suu<anumming probleen. 2* .t V- ., /. cty. Other dettelency reports.show . >[ g j *' ecause they are parnes to a No.: .b . vads.are no.new prooies at the 5
- >; M
- = E 3,,hjegg Hagglaggry h pre.j ".. Seett Texas Project.-They were 's r'cosens on an opersuas nosase far. c. bums found as earty as tsn la thed ,r,", t.... ,c,y< m -the emmear power pannt. i rescear sad ibet hanelag wuv( m t. - P" * 'y.The oppsmeets. of course, suret.W ?But there was as maler seert ter 7 "N 4 ., /. - [ ' NRC Heaueng board that the plaat*d,.deteristne the esteet of the prob 6em d assidag - ~ to convtace as ' ~ and correctit autu the last had W c;,.. i p. '..g.
- to skedduy bout and ansmid not be 19F8.
t .aassed to operate. .I r
- . They botsve they found some. **.
- theseger aturpreetsmuseMaat f*
= '
- 'l 7 i :P Thatr big escovery. la th neue '~
thee past wete. was a wau-sised - e =ar - = = =. ~
- c..
,,i ,,, moense of bluepriate detaulag 74 WgrouPwurtMWr i 1-g .voeds or air poemets in the Magmes. amametertnesdturisurumming. g a + 3
- l!ke concrete walls of the piaat's -
^* l ~ ' ' tota roaster budeogn. 5 ._ ^~ g 1 The'.Hsumbne Lighties & Posset s : Ca. repe'ted the Anding and repair * ~ - of the vends to the NRC. HI.M said.3. '-- ---(> It is ceandent all the vents have immeswr=== twei ur neuer tier . ties.as w tahate - ', now beam found and the recurrtag $laisisamentaW9esunne g. s, <* Q; ..prehlem ts being astved. i* y But the prefect's opponents. sift **i.'# - , las through the vamit documeus,"p TEESE WERE 8080E OF the.
- t "- N...ah8@.-
.o . turned up reports 1a desses of oussr,jrname constructtee faults sueged O ~'--~'*~g=. (comenruedes geste try Brewe 4 Ras - earlier by Dan Swaram a fired quaa..*- e ?Ime the project centractor. A % ' d. Ity centret inspector. 4 r . f.3 - _g Some W them how been pubs. Swarte charged on a nattenat. l . p.~, , '.;-(d ..y i._ m_ SJ gl p., ,,.-** g. p televisena prograse tast Detaker thaa... petm.ed,bedure. Othere have ast. - a the emetear prejset was "saiseturan. M ~ n***"'."*f e i; - D I ly unsound" and should act be. ,3 e . ;
- TEERE WAS. P9E enample. that
..r ;}, *r"w..q, s .. o..s .u .ema rrumag neie. or vow, au the uce. sed. !way threech a 30. inch thictr.radia./,.. Brown & Root deseenced his?y *.. _ .u,.7->"**_ 7 J.,,...p a..*y .y jtsee 'sheeleng und launde the Ung 1 4 : charges as atuurd. and the N pf-J... p.3' =_' .4+ sad 48 had base unable to suestants. -P.-
- W ' '
c.Af hr. rencour busens. 1 f ate most of, Swayne's spectile *.- 8 w 4.: . ; 3 : g, - ~ * ' * " ' * ~ ~ ~ ' .. _............,., =..... ' T **"Ih'at after sandytes as armiend d e
- L
.,.3,Dy.,8 J,.* , w J.T.7..h,* Ice, 'g,'.:'e r t:Tiac Q,G,f.&,* ?fe*.; a W e
- reports tassa trous the dammamans ;.4
..s. ***q.4.$"a/ *. =.,,. 4 v vesit. 8menern disagreed.
- g. a, rthe documene beer out ewry.
a e /, 7 ,isse ~ c=uanded. -Indad. he ed est idee. - iu thing oma s r= *as syms." see. .;..*"^'- -. ;,.. a r i . m. peggylauchern a sender of a .p. y v. w; y..y. : w c . J.- /.d l r.' group opposes the prM cans tWy the essent d the N He ' i 0,7 ',
- p:
Jtharoes"the seeersugheacrete "' was very cesservative la his 1 r** J p asarement.* , aG." w s e C 8** h*
- J can the
^
- ]
3 yg, g ..,m. s. i.= * - me cie.n.e ta - ,... wl mww w deseve,,...... , the reports They apparently were-pw [.0 t.7 .f*3 %. m y, J. not causedered serious omsmen te ne .c - ..' ( Sti, "F**'" 4 -~b..pl.,,7, ' ,-=~ INOEED.'M ANY OP the con. ~ g4 ~ J..c ,ji l,' f* The "correettve aedom." as out-strueden museuss. taken individusi., M..h % @*gec .,; _ \\.'s% g , ' a -p., !!ned la the report, was to " taper
- ly. are minor and peraaps evea higher pours ne the well to hrtag it inevitable, la view W the she and 1
- l baca to constructica toierances.
compteutty at the nuclear project. 1 M..Q d g*S g w g But considered as a wease. the. l w - -m constriac'ine reports are not likely
- .y, pM w..(-N, 3,,q.'. ""m...
i. l L = to inspire the aversgo cit Ies'smg f .%ceaftdence la the way rae South [ 1,E ws-e='h=8"*"'s" - ^," [ [ -""d '"' "W A ' d j.Tesas Project is be as huilt. Three Mlle Island has saows i d.'. MBFF9EEfGTUUW'ts de. 2 ta butidias.or operattag nocteer l' there must be as marge for error =- ) 7.: f, ^"- - ~ _ 5 planet t n,. $. t .~. (- - uj' .,g. i a,e J ' c f'..c.. <,, 0, -,., O. c ~ *~ ?.**'.3.. t.%'** r
- *, - }.% ;.*.f -
l kr.-Q "'.'.. ,.,3 l E l t y* _. *.W'.d,"f,, :,y; y.g.. .L,. i" ,,~.. .l -._.r.. g* ', ... a...,. s. ~ yjp;$. = lr. s .~ ..s....._..... w..s....:.
- u. -
-s..._._.......-,...s.- m n.. i.
- - -. =. - =
.--....= e: ."','d b e . *f*
- ; s.
- .',j -:
- u- ^
q...t. ';,. * /.. LL i l m.M ,, v?, g '~ ~ ' - ~
- C.'>'
L... -.., .s. e -2 p g so. / . ' ~ - $ogb.b 8-W em O / .4 a ? .,, 4 e* e (_ 4 'e# d, -. - s L ^ =st44 s e s s 0 f -n, 5 ^ r,-_ g, . v. g, 'o e-r .5 "Y ee? (, 5 _r,.
- r. s,...
"I.',
- /.
- d o'
g$ *g
- g.,
t..,..
- hsI P
- A.. 's
=# '. ~, p :l *-' '.
- .< 's.
Q*. &. i b.. !?..,. 4 m 1 e.* 4 f' a:.'- g
- a. 4
.~ g38 e-y'f b i.g. = er t..'., ws $ 4s'e e 9 6 .g a. _..-. .r---.-. r, i ~., -1
7 1 .i S.i r. ' t.. .%,. mn, q, r *
- 6. '
vf4Y .; m- ~. .. -, s.1 c...... y teitr fff;u .w/s.4 -s&bcv ( afa'w '.x % df <C 4-g a M mt.4m1 4 -wwk e%'uszd 4 a l.,. ase sqc 7 /Luid ( w*-Q P
- n e
2.j t. /? %:Wo.e. l1lc. One & u<.< .aa.7EA-.:, ~$ mec.e 3 M l f "f 9"Y f f!f ? t" ~ = + 4 la k & m L- -m? ijf;f t.,, 7, ;.. 9 - 7/n aus L_ n n~ ega-- - ,~ W umcha., - O d. 3. b. t..,' %.c ~ L~. bl.. ( tJYi /7A C 4% -- =YA Y.':.'; G AS Mt v./t-yn
- , $ v k 41lC _
h.;..{ H~ 4 c.a.. Q.:. ~a. 6 y.' 1 e: .? h[l:!-;. 6:r.% >.)w
- L I*
r, a.. >.~o I!721 f,*. A}}