ML20198J523
| ML20198J523 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 10/13/1997 |
| From: | Mcintyre B WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Quay T NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20046D898 | List: |
| References | |
| AW-97-1171, NUDOCS 9710210098 | |
| Download: ML20198J523 (25) | |
Text
..-
g g,
a Westinghouse Energy Systems-Sn 355 -
Electric Corporation :
. Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 15230 0355 AW 97-1171 October 13,1997 E
Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION:
MR. T. R. QUAY APPLICATION FOR WITill10LDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON AP600 NOTRUMP VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION (RAI 440.721c)
Dear Mr. Quay:
The application for withholding is submitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse")
pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(1) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, it contains commercial strategic information proprietary to Westinghouse and customarily held in -
confidence.
The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is identified in the proprietary version of the subject report. In conformance with 10CFR Section 2.790, Affidavit AW-97-1171 accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary -
information may be withheld from public disclosure.
Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.
Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying atTidavit should reference AW-97-1171 and should be addressed to the undersigned.
3 Very truly yours,
>\\,
N Brian A. McIntyre, Manager
. Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing-jml cc:
Kevin Bohrer NRC OWFN - MS 12E20 9710210098 971013 PER. ADOCK 05200003
~5.c PDR
- g
I COPYRIGHT NOTICE The reports transmitted herewith each bear a Westinghouse copyright notice. The NRC is permitted to -
make the number of copies of the information contained in these reports which are necessary for its internal use in connection with generic and plant specific reviews and approvals as well as the issuauce, denial, amendment, transfer, renewal, modification, suspension, revocation, or violation of a license, permit, order, or regulation subject to the requirements of 10 CFR 2.790 regarding restrictions on public disclosure to the extent such information has been identified as proprietary by Westinghouse, copyright protection notwithstanding. With respect to the non proprietary versions of these reports, the
- NRC is permitted to make the number of copies beyond those necessary for its internal use which are necessary in order to have one copy available Ibr public viewing in the appropriate docket files in the public document room in Washington, D.C. and in local public document rooms as may be required by NRC regulations if the number of copies submitted is insuflicient for this purpose, Copies made
' by the NRC must include the copyright notice in all instances and the proprietary notice if the original was identified as proprietary.
sm.nr
l'HOPRIETARY INFORMATION NOTICE Transmitted herewith are proprietary and/or non-proprietary versions of documents furnished to the NRC in connection with requests for generic anWor plant specific review and approval.
In order to conform to the requirements of 10 CFR 2.790 of the Com nission's regulations concerning the protection of propnetary information so submitted to the NRC, the infonnation will be resubmitted at a later date along with a non-proprietary copy of the material. The infonnation which is proprietary in the proprietary versions will be contained within brackets, and where the proprietary infonnation has been deleted in the non-proprietary versions, only the brackets will remain (the infonnation that was contained within the brackets in the proprietary versions having been deleted). The justification for claiming the information so designated as proprietary will be indicated in both versions by means of lower case letters (a) through (f) contained within parentheses located as a superscript immediately following the brackets enclosing each item of information being identified as proprietary or in the margin opposite such infonnation. These lower case letters refer to the types of infonnation Westinghouse customarily holds in confidence identified in Section (i 'ii)(a) through (4)(ii)(f) of the affidavit accompanying this transmittal pursuant to 10 CFR2.790(b)(1).
M21e opf
9 AW-971171 AFFIDAV11 COMMONWEALTil OF PENNSYLVANIA:
ss COUNTY OF ALLEGilENY:
= Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Brian A. McIntyre, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, deposu and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation '" Westinghouse") and that the averments of fact set forth in this
. Affidavit are true and correct to the be st of his knowledge, information, and belief:
[k A
Brian A, McIntyre, Manager.
Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing Sworn to and subscribed
- before me this
// '
day of
,1997 a-M e.
,# $ik Jariet A Schwat: N. Ley PuNd Monroevnte Ryc, /doyany QWs M__
M/ Communa;r) Ecrm May pg afa Notary Public hw, wwwu (mmm o, %,,,,
e
._a s
b 1
M11a wpf
AW.97.I 171 (1)
- I am Manager, Advanced Plant Safety And Licensing, in the New Plant Projects Division, of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, I have been specifically delegated the function of reviewing the proprietary information sought to be withheld from public disclosure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing and rulemaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit.
(2)
I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the Westinghouse application for withholding accompanying this Affidavit.
(3)
I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by the Westinghouse Energy Syst< ms Business Unit in designating information as a trade secret, privileged or as confidential commercial or financial information.
(4)
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2,790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld.
(i)
The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.
(ii)
The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining the types of information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The application of that system and the substance of that system constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.
Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:
4 34Da opf
AW 97-1171 (a)
The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.) where prevention of its use by any of Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies.
(b)
It consists of supporting dats, including test data, relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability, (c)
Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product, (d)
It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers, (e)
It reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westinghouse or customer funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to Westinghouse, (f)
It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.
There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the following:
(a)
The use of such information by Westinghouse gives Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors, it is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.
(b)
It is information which is marketable in many ways. The extent to which such information is available to competitors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information.
142la wpf
AW 97 Il71 4
(c)
Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.
(d)
Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive I
advantage, if competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.
(e)
Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition of those countries.
(f)
The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.
(iii)
The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
(iv)
The information sought to be protected is not available in public sources or available information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method to the best of our knowledge and belief.
J l
(v)
Enclosed is Letter DCP/NRC.J73 (NSD-NRC-97 5369), October 13,1997, being l
l transmitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (W) letter and Application for l
Withholding Proprietary information from Public Disclosure, Brian A. McIntyre @,
to Mr. T. R. Quay, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for use by Westinghouse Electric Corporation is in response to questions concerning the AP600 plant and the associated design certification application and is expected to be applicable in other licensee submittals in response to certain NRC requirements for uu..pt
AW-971171 justification of licensing advanced nuclear power plant designs.
This information is part of that which will enable Westinghouse to:
(a)
Demonstrate the design and safety of the AP600 Passive Safety Systems.
(b)
Establish applicable verification testing methods.
(c)
Design Advanced Nuclear Power Plants that meet NRC requirements.
(d)
Establish technical and licensing approaches for the AP600 that will ultimately result in a certified design.
(e)
Assist customers in obtaining NRC approval for future plants.
Further this information has substantial commercial value as follows:
(a)
Westinghouse plans to sell the use of similar information to its cust >mers for purposes of meeting NRC requirements for advanced plant licenses.
(b)
Westinghouse can sell support and defense of the technology to its cusomers in the licensing process.
Public disclosure of this proprietary information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Westinghouse because it would enhance the ability of competitors to provide similar advanced nuclear power designs and licensing defense services for commercial power reactors without commensurate expenses. Also, public disclosure of the information would enable others to use the information to meet NRC requirements for licensing documentation without purchasing the right to use the information.
m) nt
AW.971171 The development of the technology described in part by the information is the result of applying the results of many years of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort and the expenditure of a considerable sum of money, in order for competitors of Westinahouse to duplicate this information, similar technical programs would have to be performed and a significant manpower effort, having the requisite talent and experience, would have to be expended for developing analytical methods and receiving NRC approval for those methods.
Further the deponent sayeth not, i
H21e wpf k
_.___o
l 4
ENCLOSURE 2 TO DCP/NRC1073 RAI 440.721(c)
NON PROPRIETARY O
L4214 apf
i IlBC BE40EST Fet AttlTl0NAL INfttMATl011 k
Question 440,721(c)
Provide a thorough explanation regarding NOTRUMP's misprediction of mass flow out of the ADS stage 1,2, and 3 valves in the OSU experiments (and related pressurizer refill). Improve the justification as to why this deficiency is acceptable.
Response
An evaluation is first presented of the processes occurring in the pressurizer during the early stages of ADS l-3 blowdown. The subsequent draining period is evaluated in the response to RA1.440.721(f).
Review of test data:
Just prior to ADS 13, the system has partially drained by mass loss through the break. The pressurizer is empty of water. The CMT has been draining, filling the downcomer, lower plenum, and part of the core with coole water.
Above this cool water is a warmer layer of saturated liquid and two phase mixture, consisting mostly of she original primary side inventory, Figure 440.721(c) l shows the pressurizer collapsed liquid level in the OSU 2 inch cold leg break, expressed as a fraction of the overall pressurizer height (this graph therefore alsa indicates liquid fraction in the pressurizer). The ADS 13 valves begin to open at [
] seconds.
When the ADI l-3 valves open, the pressurizer refills, then drains in three distinct phases. These are denoted phase ~ (partial refill /two phase ADS), Phase II (complete refill /nearly all liquid ADS), A4 (after ADS 4, pressuns r draining). Figure 440.721(c)-l indicates the time periods during which these phases occur.
Phase I:
When the ADS 1-3 valves open, the system depressurizes. The warm two phase mixture and any liquid which is near saturation temperature flashes and generates steam. The mixture swells and enters the pres:.m zer. This mixture then flows out through the ADS valves. Figure 440.721(c)-2 shows the measured vapor and liquid flow out the ADS l 3 Separator.
As the warm layer moves into the pressunzer, it is replaced by colder liquid from the downcomer, and additional cold liquid from the CMT. The vapor generation rate in the core is completely suppressed as cold liquid fills the core. Figure 440.721(c)-3 compares the measured vapor flow out ADS 1-3 (ADSl3VR) with the vapor generation rate in the core calculated by an energy balance (RPVRXV). It can be seen that nearly all the measured ADS vapor flow is from the flashing two phase mixture. At about [
l'* seconds, the cold liquid has filled the vessel and can be seen entering the pressurizer surge line, as mdicated by fluid temperature (Figure 440.721(c)-4), and by surge line void fraction (Figure 440.721(c)-5, from [
l'* seconds). At this time, the measured mass flow out ADS 1-3 increases, T westinghouse
IIRC RE49EST Fet AttiTittlAL INftRMATitu and consists primarily of liquid. There is some question about the ability of the measurement system to measure low vapor now (to be discussed later), but the nearly all-liquid nature of the flow at this time can be confirmed by the fact that ISe pressurizer is almost completely full of water (Figure 440.721(c)-1).
Phase II:
As system depressurization proceeds, the depressurization rate decreases so the driving force for now through the core, surge line, and pressurizer and out the ADS 13 valves also decreases. However, the lower pressure and core flow causes the initially subcooled liquid there to begin to boil (Figure 440.721(c)-3 at [
]" seconds). De vapor reaches the pressurizer surge line at about [
]" seconds (Figure 440.721(c)-5, high void fraction in surge line), and causes the mixture in the pressurizer to swell again.
A4:
De mass in the pressurizer remains fairly constant until ADS 4 opens at about [
1" seconds. The pressurizer begins to drain, but at a lower rate than what would be expected if the pressurizer were i
allowed to drain freely. This draining phase will be discussed in additional detail in the response to
)
RAI.440.721(i).
Review of NOTRUMP predictions of oressurizer level:
A review of the NOTRUMP predictions of SPES and OSU in Reference 440.721(c)-1 indicates that the pressurizer refill prediction is generally poor (the level is underpredicted ) in the SPES predictions and better in the OSU predictions, when the delay in ADS 1-3 actuation is accounted for. Figure 440.721(c)-6 compares the predicted and measured water levels for the OSU 2 inch cold leg break measured from the time that the ADS l 3 is actuated. Figure 440.721(c) 7 compares the ADS l 3 flowrate on the same time-shift bc. sis. The flow prediction is low early in the transient, but is then good (similar integral slopes) during the remainder of the transient (Figure 440.721(c) 7A). Figure 440.721(c)-7A was obtained by offsetting the integrated ADS 13 Flow curves by their value at the < tart of Phase II. The prediction shows de same two phases of blowdown: an initial two phase period when the warm water layer swells and flashes, and a second period when colder water is pushed into the pressurizer as the core begins to generate significant vapor again.
De predictions can be explained in terms of the mass and average subcooling in the system at the time that ADS 1-3 is actuated. The reason for the poorer prediction in the SPES test is explained by the modeling of the pressurizer. In both test facilities, the onset of ADS 13 was predicted to occur later than in the test. Because of this, the mass in the system was depleted to a lower level just prior to ADS l 3.
In several of the tests, the temperature of the liquid entering the vessel from the DVI line was higher because of the lack of a thermal stratification model in the CMT. As a result, the degree of level swell 444.721(cl-2 W Westinghouse I
IIRC RtGOEST FtR Atem8HM INf9AMAT10N b
in the layer of warm water and two phase mixture which occupies part of the core, and the upper plenum, is smaller, and the vapor content of the mixture entering the presarizer is higher. The calculated Oow through ADS 1-3 is therefore of higher quality, and the total predicted flow is lower.
==
Conclusions:==
He difference between the SPES and OSU predictions was discussed in the response to RAl.440.610.
In that response, it was demonstrated that the large metal heat release from the pressurizer walls resulted in a significant void fraction distribution :n the pressurizer, which codd not be modelled by the single node used in NOTRUMP. Since this level of heat release in SPES will not occur in AP600, this discrepancy is not considered serious.
An altemate explanation could be that the ADS 13 flow is underpredicted because the break flow is overpredicted. In fact, in all of the tests with the exception of the DVI line breaks (discussed in the response to RAl.440.721(d)), the break flow prediction is generally good. He misprediction is therefore attnbuted to the delay in ADS 13 actuation and lower system inventory when ADS l-3 opens, rather than errors in the break flow model. Since the important quantity which must be predicted is the pressurizer mass during the refill process (this will lead to a delay in the IRWST flow as described in the response to RAI.440.721(f)), and this is predicted well in the more correctly scaled OSU tests, the discrepancies in predicted ADS 1-3 flow are considered to be acceptable.
The NOTRUMP calculations below confirm that the misprediction of ADS 1-3 is due to boundary conditions in the pressurizer rather than errors in the break flow model:
NOTRUMP Stand alone Model Results:
In order to quantify the effects of boundary conditions on the predicted ADS 1-3 perforniance, a stand-alone NOTRUMP model of the OSU ADS Stage 1-3 system was developed. Two separate models were developed for this effort. One model representing the detailed OSU ADS Stage 13 system from the Pressurizer to the IRWST Tank as described in Reference RAI.440.721(c)-1, and a simplified model representing the conditions on either side of the ADS Stage 1-3 valves via boundary conditions. The detailed model (Figure RAl.440.721(c)-8) is identical to that used in OSU simulations in Reference RAI.440.721(c)-1 with the exception that the pressurizer conditions are provided as boundary conditions derived from Reference RAl.440.721(c)-2 test data. The sin plified modelis a subset of the detailed model in that it removes the fluid nodes associated with the IRWST tank (Fluid Nodes 67 and 77) with the downstream conditions for the ADS Stage 1-3 valves now being provided directly via a boundary node representing either the IRWST or the ADS Stage 1-3 separator tank (Figure 440.721(c)-9). The conditions utilized for the boundary nodes were derived from the available information from Reference 440.721(c)-2 for the pressunzer, IRWST and ADS l 3 Separator respectively.
IIRC ret 9EST F95 A8tlTitNAL INF9818AT10W y 3
=
The available infermation for the pressurizer, udiized for the stand alone models, were pressure, temperature, collapsed mixture level and void fraction respectively. In order to drive the NOTRUMP model, a pressure /enthalpy boundary condition must be provided and was derived from the available information. It should be noted that although collapsed mixture level and void fraction information are available from the OSU Test Analysis Report, the number of taps and locations does not provide an exact indication of the conditions at the top of the pressurizer near the ADS Stage 13 piping connection point.
The available pressurizer level indication taps (one near the top of the Pressutizer and one near the bottom) only provide an indication of the entire span as opposed to Gner indications near the top of the pressurizer / ADS piping connection point. As such, it is expected that the stand-alone NOTRUMP model will tend to over-predict the ADS Stage 1-3 flow behavior due to the void fraction indication for the entire span as opposed to the conditions at the ADS Stage 1-3 piping connection point.
For the simplified model, the ADS Stage 1-3 downstream conditions were modeled two different ways, First, the ADS Stage 13 downstream pressure condition was modeled with a constant pressure which represents the IRWST conditions (neglecting the static head of water above the ADS Stage 13 sparger).
Second, the ADS Stage 13 doivnstream pressure conditions were modeled from the known ADS Stage 1-3 separator conditions near which the ADS flow measurements are obtained.
Figure 440.721(c)-10 presents the results of the NOTRUMP stand-alone models. When these models are driven by the pressurizer conditions, they exhibit higher flow than either the test data or the original NOTRUMP simulation results. The detailed model predicts the occurrence of a flow reversal in the calculated ADS 1-3 flow. This occurred as a result of not modeling the vacuum breaker which exists on the ADS l-3 piping downstream of the ADS 1-3 valves. Modeling of this feature,in this detailed stand-alone model, would have prevented the calculation of reverse ADS l-3 flow conditions. Note that the results of the simplified model, which utilizes the ADS l-3 Separator as the boundary and inherently includes the vacuum breaker effects, does not exhibit the flow reversal period but indicates a continuation of flow through the ADS Stage 1-3 valves.
As discussed previously, the results obtained with the stand-alone models were not unexpected due to the uncertainty associated with the actual conditions which may exist at the Pressurizer ADS l-3 piping connection point. The results indicate that the conditions in the pressurizer dominate the break flow response. Improved predictions of the conditions upstream of the ADS Stage 1-3 valves would yield a more accurate prediction of the calculated ADS 13 flows and result in an improved simulation response.
440.721(cl-4 T westinghouse
NBC Bi4OEST FOR A88m0NAL INF081AATied
~
References:
440.721(c)-1 WCAP-14807, Revision 2. "NOTRUMP final Validation Report For AP600," June 1997.
440.721(c) 2 WCAP 14292, Revision 1, "AP600 Low Pressure Integral Systems Test At Oregon State University, Test Analysis Report," September,1995.
SSAR Revision: NONE 4
i E
i 448.721(cl-5 W Westinghouse
NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OSU 2 INCH COLD LEO BREAK: PRESSURIZER LEVEL (NORMALIZED TO PRZ HEIGHT)
(9 A '"\\
~
i j
4 J
e Figure 440.721(c) l Collapsed liquid level in pressuriur (relative to pressuriar height).
440.721(c) 6 g
-r
--.4.. - -. --
y
,--,~
e NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OSU 2 INCH COLD LEG BREAK LlQUID AND VAPOR FLOWS THROUGH ADS 1-3, MEASURED BY SEPARATORS AND FLOWMETERS.
(,
c3 1
Figure 440.721(c) 2 Measured vapor and liquid flow out ADS 13 440.721(c) 7 Westinghouse t
o l
NRC REQUEST FOR ADDIT 10NAL INFORMATION hiF Es!
OSU 2 INCH COLD LEG BREAK CORE VAPOR GENERATION RATE CALCULATED BY ENERGY BALANCE.
(,g,c s
Figure 440.721(c) 3 Measured ADS l 3 vapor flow compared with calculated core steam generation rate
~
440.721(c)-8 yp
'o 1
NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION i
OSU 2 lNCH COLD LEG BREAK FLUID ENTHALPY (FROM TEMPERATURE)IN HOT LEO NEAR SURGE LINE.
( A b C-\\
ii t
Figure 440.721(c}4 Fluid temperanite in the surge line (compared with Tsat) 440.721(c) 9
. _, - _ -. _. -,... ~..
NRC REQUEST FOR ADDmONAL INFORMATION i
OSU 2 INCH COLD LEO BREAK VolD FRACTION INFERRED FROM dP MEASUREMENTS ACROSS SURGE LINE (SL) AND HOT LEG (HL).
g g,
4 a
Figure 440.721(c) 5 Void fraction inferred from dP measurements in surge line and hot les
~"
440.721(c) 10 IN
'.e NRC RE2 VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION M
i I
lI l
L l
Figure 440.721(c)-6 Comparison of measured and predicted liquid level for test Sbl8, after adjusting for ADS 13 actuation time.
440.721(c) 11
O 1
NRC REOUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
(
)
i I
q i{
I Figure 440.7219 (c) 7 Comparison of measured and predicted ADS l 3 flows after adjusting for ADS l 3 actuation time.
440.721(c) 12 IN 4
9
.. - ~. _ -.. - - - - - _ -.
... - - -.... - ~ _ - ~. -.
1 e
o, WINTDfCHOUSE PROPh!ETARY CIA 30 8 e
I (a.h.e) l 1
+
4 (m) w gasse 5
i E
h 9
t i
9 I
I -
1 a
f 3
4 M
N i
0 vi---.--+,-,-
c.cw,,w-ew.~.
.,.mw.y,-.-4.>
w m-e,i.
,v_,-__,,-_._
y
.,em,-5..,_y,v,
- - -,,u.,
-. - -.,. r id r
-e--
e-
---r-,t'-
- - - ^- - - - "^ ~ ^ ~~~ -^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^
^ ~ ~ ~ ~
J.
O o
Q,6,d h
Figure R AL440.721(c) 8 NOTRUMP Stand alone Dehined ADS 13 Modd I
i i
Figure RAI 440.721(c) 9 NOTRUMP Stand alone Simpiined ADS 13 Modd e
-~.-.c..
n.
r
u-
. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _... - -..... - ~ _ -
b,o WESTDiGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CIASS 3 I
(e )
4 0
. O
- =
1 m
fed w
wel N
i I
O mes 9
4
..