ML20214A281
| ML20214A281 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1986 |
| From: | Dougherty M, Gieseker J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Shamblin D AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| OL-I-ROREM-128, NUDOCS 8705190366 | |
| Download: ML20214A281 (20) | |
Text
O 0 '6(/YI14)-
1~$ 0 nap : ~/%9 N05% Q ) 2f f
,o MEMORANDUM 2:CfETEr N
t.
7 A i 22 P7 :19 TO:
D.L. Shamblin FROM:
M.R.
Dougherty, J.W.
Gieseker Cre!:
Of.,q -
SUBJ:
L.K. Comstock Q.C.
Inspector, G. Archambeault*'L DATE:
August 27, 1986
Purpose:
On August 16, 1986 CECO PCD was' informed by GE-MCIS that an employee of GE-MCIS had requested to discuss several concerns with the GE-MCIS Project Manager.
This memo describes that event and the several meetings that subsequently occurred.
Backcround:
General Electric-Multi Craft Inspection Services (GE-MCIS) is the Braidwood site contractor that employs quality control inspectors for L.K.
Comstock and G.K. Newberg.
These QC inspectors belong to the Local Union 306.
GE-MCIS took over the responsibility of this labor contract 6/30/86 (the former employer was BESTCO). I The following people attended one or more of the meetings described below:
D.L.
Shamblin - CECO PCD Superintendent.
G.E. Groth - CECO PCD Assistant Superintendent.
J.W.
Gieseker - Group Leader, CECO PCD electrical department.
M.R.
Dougherty Consultant working for CECO PCD, responsible for the admir.:.stration of the GE-MCIS contract.
T.
Cartelli - GE-MCIS site Project Manager.
G. Archambeault - Quality Control Inspector for LKC, Cable Pulling.
S l* mummesumme
^'
8705190366 860910 DR ADOCK 0500 6
IEXHl'BJi35Mi%fAs w e: a2 C 8"'!'88.% stM3Hasaj
G. Nemeth - Quality Control Inspector for LKC - second shift steward for Local 306.
R. Seltmann - LKC Quality Assurance Manager.
T. Simile - LKC QC General Supervisor.
H. Revels - LKC QC Second Shift Supervisor.
R. Westberg - RIII NRC Inspector.
Meetings I. On Saturday, August 16, 1986, Gieseker was informed by Dougherty that Cartelli had told him that a quality control inspector had asked to discuss some concerns with Cartelli.
Gieseker asked Dougherty to make sure that Cartelli ask the inspector whether or not the con-versation was to be held in confidence.
Dougherty informed Cartelli of this request and Cartelli agreed to do it.
II. On Monday, August 18, 1986 at approximately 4:00 p.m.
Dougherty was contacted by Cartelli.
Cartelli indicated that he had had two conversations (Saturday and Monday) with the QC inspector and wanted to discuss what he should do with CECO.
We met with Cartelli at approximately 4:30 p.m.
Dougherty asked if the inspector had requested anonymity.
Cartelli stated that he had asked that question and the inspector had stated that it was too late for that because LKC management already knew that he.had gone to the NRC.
6 Cartelli said that the inspector wanted Cartelli's advice on how to file a complaint with the Department of Labor.
The inspector had indicated that, based on information from the NRC, he was under a "30 day time clock" to make the complaint and that the time period ended later that week.
Cartelli told the inspector that he was not familiar with a 30 day time period but that the inspector should submit a Union Grievance simultaneous with or before he filed anything with the Department of Labor.
Cartelli stated that the inspector had informed the NRC about concerns he had with cable installations in the Upper Cable Spreading Room and around the Remote Shutdown Panel.
The inspector told Cartelli that he was upset because recent shoptalk indicated to him that LKC management knew he had gone to the NRC and that a Region III NRC inspector had asked other quality control in-spectors about him.
Cartelli said that the inspector was upset about this shoptalk and had told Cartelli that it may have affected some of his inspections.
We asked Cartelli to first clarify with the inspector whether or not the inspector wanted to remain anonymous and to have the inspector fully explain his concerns about his ability to perform inspections.
Cartelli was to discuss the matter further with the inspector.
6 i -
III. We then talked with Shamblin at about 6:00 p.m. on Monday, August 18, 1986, and briefly discussed our meeting with Cartelli.
Shamblin requested that the inspector's concerns about his ability to perform on-going in-spections be resolved that evening.
Dougherty called Cartelli about this and Cartelli indicated that the.
inspector would like to discuss his concerns with CECO.
IV. At approximately 6:30 p.m. on August 18, 1986 a second meeting was held in the GE office.
Those present were Dougherty, Gieseker, Cartelli, Archambeault and Nemeth.
We learned of Archambeault's identity at this time.
The following items were discussed:
A.
Archambeault expressed a concern about how he was asked to write a nonconformance report (NCR) by T. Simile in March 1986.
The nonconforming condition consisted of cables being improperly supported on risers in the Unit 2 Upper Cable Spreading Room.
This resulted in nonconforming conditions with respect to cable minimum bending radius, cable damage, incorrect training of cable and inadequate cable separation.
Simile told Archambeault to list the problems on the NCR but describe the location of the nonconforming conditions by area rather than list each cable number individually.
Archambeault thought the NCR should list the cable numbers specifically, especially for any damaged cable.
Archambeault stated that when he talked to his supervisor (H. Revels) j about this, he was told that it was "not in LKC's I
e n
i cost and schedule" to list the cables individually.
Archambeault felt this was.a violation of'10CFR50 -
cost and schedule overriding quality.
Archambeault said i
that LKC management, i.e. Revels, did not resolve his concern and that he did not want to file a complaint with, l
Quality First (<QF ) because he heard from other inspectors
)
that QF was not responsive.
Archambeault therefore-informed the NRC about this matter.
B.
Archambeault had identified what he thought was a cable separation violation above the Unit 1 Remote Shutdown Panel.
While he was writing up the Cable Separation Con-flict Reports (CSCR's) he was asked'to inspect a " hot" cable pull.
Archambeault said that this was an example of production concerns taking precedence over quality, because he had not been allowed to. finish the CSCR's at-that time.
He also stated that he had felt rushed during the pre pull walkdown for the " hot" pull, but that the pull was not started until he~was ready.
Archambeault was asked if he completed the CSCR's, and he said he was given time to do this after the " hot" pull was-completed.
C.
Archambeault stated that on various occasions he had requested to be transferred to the first shift.
He-stated that some time previously he had been told that three people might be transferred to the first shift.
Only two people e
e f
-n
,Q
4 n '9.
were transferred, and Archambeault was not one of them.
Later, he was offered a.first shift position but he stated that he declined it because he felt that it would then be easier for LKC management to lay him off.
Archambeault had heard "recent" shop talk that he was first on the LKC
" lay-off list" because they knew he had gone to the NRC.
Archambeault also stated that Revels told him that Com-stock Management was reluctant to transfer him to first J
shift because the NRC might interpret such action as discrimination.
Archambeault seemed to be upset by Revels' advice.
D.
Archambeault said that in addition to the shop talk indicated in item C above, he was told by a friend who worked on first shift that a Region III NRC inspector had asked about him.
Archambeault stated that he was upset after hearing this and that it had affected his work'.
He stated that he had allowed craft to pre-cut 300' of the wrong size cable for a cable pull.
He immediately realized that it was the wrong size cable and had the craft cut the correct size.
The wrong size pre-cut cable was scrapped.
Archambeault stated that he then slowed his inspections down to make sure no other mistakes were made.
Dougherty asked him if he had any concerns about any other inspections he had performed and Archambeault replied that he did not.
I a
e a
i
~ E.
Archambeault related an incident where he had received incorrect direction from QC Supervisor, R. Tuite.
The incident occurred last spring when R. Tuite was the QC Supervisor on second shift.
Archambeault and a trainee had identified a duplication of approximately ten feet of footage marker on a cable.
The numbers self-corrected after approximately thirty feet but the Cable Engineer had not been informed of this anomaly as required by the cable installation procedure.
Archambeault told us that when he mentioned this to Tuite he was told that that requirement was not a part of the cable inspection procedure.
Archambeault said, however, that he no longer had a concern because LKC management had later stated that the QC inspectors were responsible for the installation procedure requirements.
In addition, Archambeault said that prior to Tuite's assignment to the second shift, typically more than one OC inspector was assigned on a cable pull.
However, after Tuite was transferred to the second shift typically only one QC inspector has been assigned per cable pull.
- Nemeth, Local 306 Second Shift Steward, asked Gieseker and Dougherty their opinion of who should decide how many inspectors were required for a cable pull.
We indicated that in our opinion it was QC supervision who should make that decision but that the inspector should request additional help if he felt the geometry of a given cable pull warranted additional in-spectors. Dougherty stated that certainly. production Management should not make the final decision.
.9.
F.
Archambeault stated that he did not want this to become part of the Licensing Hearing.
He only wanted to meet with LKC management to discuss and resolve his concerns.
Gieseker said that a meeting would be arranged with LKC management for the next day, August 19, 1986, at 4:30 p.m.
This meeting ended around 8:00 p.m.
V.
The next day, Tuesday, August 19, 1986, Gieseker, Dougherty and Groth discussed the previous night's meeting with Simile and Seltmann.
Seltmann indicated that he was aware of the-situation.
He said that Revels had left a memo stating that Archambeault was missing from the field the previous evening and that Production was looking for Archambeault so that they could pull a safety related cable.
Seltmann indicated that he had spoken with Cartelli about this matter.
Cartelli had informed Seltmann of the previous night's meeting and said that Archambeault had left word that he would like a representative from the NRC at the afternoon meeting if possible.
Groth contacted R. Westberg, who was onsite, and informed him of the previous night's meeting and of Archambeault's request.
VI.
A brief meeting was then held with the second shift QC supervisor H.
Revels (Dougherty, Gieseker, Groth, Simile, Seltmann and Westberg).
Revels was asked whether or not he told Archambeault that "LKC's cost or schedule" did not permit
the listing of cables individually.
Revels said that Archambeault had misunderstood the reason for not listing each cable on the NCR for the Cable Spreading Room.
Revels stated that he had not used the words
" cost and schedule" during this discussion, but had told Archambeault that listing each cable was unnecessarily time consuming because all of the cables would have to be reinspected anyway.
Revels indicated that he often.
talked with Archambeault and that Archambeault sometimes misinterpreted what he'said.
The subject of NCRs for the Unit 2 Cable Spreading Room had been discussed on several occasions between Revels and Archambeault.
Revels said that during one of these discussions Archambeault asked him to read a letter that Archambeault was going to send to the NRC.
Revels re-sponded that if Archambeault had informed him of all of his concerns, then he did not need to read the letter.
Revels stated that Archambeault then passed out a copy of the letter to all of the QC inspectors in the area.
A copy of the letter is attached.
Revels was asked if Archambeault was first on the "LKC lay-off list."
Revels replied that he knew of no such list.
Revels also stated that he had talked to Simile about i
.~.
Archambeault's request for a transfer to the first shift.
Simile had told Revels that this transfer was a concern to him.
He said he was concerned that, because of the ongoing NRC Investigation, any change in Archambeault's inspection responsibilities could be misunderstood as removing him from the area about which he had expressed concerns.
Revels indicated that he had conveyed this information to Archambeault.
Revels expressed some concern that he had broken Simile's confidence in doing this, but stated that he had done so to set Archambeault's mind at rest about why he had not been transferred.
Revels also appeared irritated that Archambeault had conveyed to CECO and the NRC inaccurate versions of Revels' conversa-tions with him.
VII. The personnel who attended the 4:30 p.m. meeting on August 19, 1986 were Dougherty, Gieseker, Seltmann, Simile, Cartelli, Westberg, Archambeault and Nemeth.
Gieseker opened the meeting by indicating that its purpose was to followup on concerns expressed at the previous evening's meeting.
Most of the same subjects were discussed that are set forth in Section IV above.
The additional comments made on these subjects are described below.
A.
The Cable Spreading Room NCR was discussed.
Dougherty and Simile stated that they felt that the NCR as written
_11_
4 was acceptable because it now requires the reinspection of all cables in the area listed, which is a more conservative approach.
Listing only those cables identified as damaged at the time of the original inspections might run the risk of failing to reinspect cables that may have been damaged but that were not visible when the NCR was written because of the con-gested condition of the risers.
Additionally, the participants discussed at length Archambeault's decision to contact the NRC, rather than LKC or CECO Quality First, about the writing of the Cable Spreading Room NCR.
Simile stressed to Archambeault that he had had a long-standing "open door policy" with inspectors.
He stated that Archambeault himself must have seen other inspectors come to him with questions or concerns.
Simile requested that if Archambeault had a concern in the future he come directly to him.
He added that if Archambeault was not satisfied with his answer he should go to DeWald or Seltmann.
Seltmann then stated that he supported what Simile said and that he also had an open door policy.
He added that if an inspector was not satisfied with the response of Comstock Management he should go to Quality First.
Westberg then stated that he supported this approach to problem resolution, but that the NRC was always willing to listen to an inspector's unresolved con-cerns.
" j-Dougherty added that if the inspector chose to he could give the question to his Union Steward who could then 1:
j contact the proper people who could answer the question.
[
B.
Archambeault's concerns about the cable separation i
problem at the Unit l' Remote Shutdown Panel were dis-I cussed.
Westberg stated that his investigation indicated l
- that Archambeault.had completed the writing of the CSCR's i
the day after the hot pull, with the assistance of two
~
additional personnel.
Archambeault then raised a con-cern that had not been discussed in the previous evening's L
meeting.
He stated that.he could not understand how the i
)
inspectors who had been in the area previously during i
j cable pulling had missed the separation violations.
Because these observations seemed obvious to Archambeault, i
he concluded that the inspectors did not write them up because "they did not want to get involved." Archambeault j
went on to say that he thought that inspectors also had l
other concerns that they were reluctant to express to i
anyone.
Westberg responded that he had interviewed 8 or~9 other inspectors and that they "did not support what you
)
(Archambeault] are saying." ~ Westberg then requested that t
)
Archambeault give him the names of the other inspectors t
i who had concerns but Archambeault said that he did not' i
i want to do so.
Archambeault indicated that he did not i
{
believe the relationship between the inspectors and i
Comstock Management would change because of this meeting.
1 I
,,,..-_,_-..-,...~1,_
o
,o.
C.
Archambeault's request to be transferred to the first shift was discussed.
Simile and Seltmann acknowledged that they were aware of this request.
They stated however, that for the foreseeable future the majority of cable pulling would be performed on second shift, and that because Archambeault's only certification was in Cable Pulling a transfer would not be possible.
In response, Archambeault raised a concern that had not been discussed at the previous meeting.
He said that when he was hired (in January 1986], Mr. Bossong, the Local Union 306 Steward, in-dicated that he would be trained and certified in
, Cable Pulling on second shift and then transferred to first shift for training and certification in Cable Terminations.
In response to Archambeault's concern that he was on a
" lay-off list," Simile and Seltmann stated emphatically that Comstock has no lay-off list.
In fact, they ex-plained, approximately two weeks previously they had requested MCIS to supply 9 additional inspectors.
They also explained that all but one of these inspectors would be assigned to the second and third shifts.
)
)
o e
.O.
D.
Archambeault's concern about his error in allowing craft to mistakenly cut 300' of the wrong cable size was not discussed at this meeting.
E.
Archambeault's concern about QC's responsibilities as they relate to installation procedures was not dis-cussed at this meeting.
However, Archambeault' stated that he had heard additional shop talk about Tuite and Lechner, an LKC lead inspector..He heard they had said that he was spending too much time drawing pictures on company time.
Archambeault said that he wished that he could meet Lechner off-site so that Lechner could say it to his face.
He stated that he would then " kick his ass."
l I
R-Recommendations We recommend that further action be taken by PCD to resolve the two technical issues raised by Archambeault, that is, the cable support problems in the Unit 2 Upper Cable Spreading Room.and the identification _of cable separation violations in the Unit 1 Remote Shutdown Room.
We also recommend that per-sonnel'in addition to those assigned to PCD participate in i
the investigation into the matters of Archambeault's i
j dealings with LKC Management (Tuite, Revels and others as appropriate) and the matter of suggested reluctance of other inspectors to come forward with complaints.
//I 0. Di l M M.
R.
Doughetty- '
& iu l &J.
$l (l?t s
<3.J. Gieseker JWG/MRD/rmg cc:
M. Wallace T. Maiman Attendees of All Meetings i
e Q h f ?!f
- f'., *'*
S
t.
1.
.g.
r k e. s e ra
,eg D
,A "s
- _Y'"
I A E
- 4 Y MIOu, ae.. a n, a wt
_1 awec~t -
-wnpewts,.,
beq & cA Qs7; sad dazL-sa.(a'pf ALv. TJ % haLad-.As-osa a
J,,aJoa 4 A -r v, Ja. asm, a W a - G, is, ele.,
.JA i
i ii
$X } _&@../
Ll W
1"b $
WMW
$ O*f Y
O l*r hb="Ch..
i i i i
i i
ry lsed (Cks.sedsam&uQrq-H em & Aq OoM
~1 vJ m pf b _3c g ac_ e.d a J J Jai-re qJe.et h opm_3e{aga m a J g.7 cpqn r
J.
e.,o a -pp_ya,x argn%r o "" (A E" i"
_m h
.c, L -r,
&:u3 Jed e 'iM..M 4-r. aLv, M,
-r,e. s, 1..,I
- G, - _hhi._
4 C., f5d pof@ wfn(Pi/ - Cc,q 7 i=, ooc-Jico A zah o<1) 1 md y z_
J mble. _ _espao47 cJ pbl.sq i
. gai.s
-d p-pu +y_sse piasL b q (7 a J !gaJ p_ w,4c._.
pw c y. nA s+ :..m E gnJ _4aa.cT1 **W 'f
?*'o"P*d d" --
4 i
.{he xhn T-r 9 %gnrrr= (q mis _. car (_a(&J ?Gs LeaJ& ppea.
.J=a cpsJ
-f a q 7ev3cas._gvu.A..Taa aJ-lsaJ r' % oc 4-c m p t.z T e-2~ "Me494 c>L OLy - 4TER paus4_7o. 7as..l_xc-5 ersa.4ece (duay.EsveL6).act gu.i4.A_f.,,6U.,[,Le.....uogk,.7 l o m y _- p a # e 4 -im7,a. am w ea o-oc_aa Jdi-rs. - o n of -r-J e de
-sa oace-noJ_.
A :1
<-r4 0-er= J
- m. v.
l i
i 1
i i
i 0 v'f=N.QGC'.4 8 C_
- & 'S.
de-d.'A sosb A n.
f.
--it_n E
W
-nd,Jof aJJ --m+re) ad.
L1.a 4 c
%-rA-rk,J Ja e
I L
8 I
I
-T#M _
,, Fv "f. ' qsa3<fGM L19E'6, ~,T' d
"I,'
1'-G~~
A OfE.
NN. 9__ ___
Ah nO A rm
$0.
OO l
UfA
}..
naxe %_WaAuck.uvarkuAcabea.
z.
Oa.5i.no wJits pa -<o ;7H ds7y a e y__.7-J rr gg_..ry.za..
ed qda 42 sal _uleRc...dcd _codsse.n7 ire..... T4.-:5747cm_Id_7eocrdv.5 k
- 4. >. s gilAT i.1.My dis 4CEP4>1cd6+.dcTed-- W1d-MAy- ^f[cc T.abLs.
Aacoa7Akhlbiq/__{f,q,_dcd.<M6Maff[
6 _tqAEgs:@S, (2EcoRM-q'imiq. no in4q. algpLE7m, F470ic+ qu4rd Nmd ene[1.irg.y g4 pcmr2J,,n74.) -KJg i vc nh_c KiqiJacol.sig eaggieg a Regat7.,1rsQ_is__7e_bE_ cod AcTEcl 'I1'-152kT51>/*J "oM [*ord - 'i "
7 d
ufec-Ted 2%51-edsfer dvd... vaqik__qds AL engsacq.is_.c.ccR5qh5_..
a 7 s.2g7;Je u ;-Ivi p, Rea. 3.$J. I p44 c._.9,{_is._.
Aq 7,J;- pse J
4J._LVc o c_
4oove m % ta A s id q rr
'T g y J r,le:_cu y 4, J
2erw cet_.7,J e om:L J
AlImJ
.di, g osse p 2 6/ di, A o7 -p3r_
dc_. 7cLd. M rs. 4ds._2o.dcL7deat-T -T 5 -.das.? pecedes
. rdL.
d
. ~J c.)
TcL:Lets._.ga_ coa-tblus..__.<ayJ4 [c q 7Je e l-(I w roe p-#.:ce Scb yoi s) 7 Dio;J4_q,lis ggg:
-r was -rzi,4fd. 2 Jru./__%3fsc- -2 4
godq _(4a.L..Shey) -r Jin7 y W mg_ p
.J c_AJs 2-eu q'. \\ A.__ ded
-[Jqw.cT**
TV^id'**< - hu T I-- 'c r14 &d---TTz^ M i
's LL 4.s,e.
qDe. #1-La ___a.._ bee.J._ pil ed el d
- 0TJ ia.ita.A 74Sder#M)_its__do7 Avv4er5..f.-pls _.dc.d,. eoJ sseugids___%744r=
J quJcs a
-7 s oh
.__..._'1~
isk eA 41=to Ah1
[Mme-
'D,kir ele _d s rk e
s i
4-I t-u rJn7 JJs JJeas___goL) 7Go61. set. 'T_q das
&8 3 udf L JE _ v/;LL h om_ d53 f3 h
ideome7 od 3 ALw JIJi <
i 4__A _
fgJ51cAfuli do^$:d__h_._IJ60Fz od<wagJ pg g q u e e sj d 4 d'; dJA7._ 6_ dCOM4._Abb_W byb @Id4 p dded n_
JdAT in T
f Jc"Tr d
- T T ^ 9 1-rE '1d nl M 4 ""J e>=ve Q.ao,
,mpec p<
-m
- 9. 7 _Asrs:, _.M,s53.__%oate. cnt_ Jn:J ogrobb:;, _
b ei q 7 0 L d.._. 4:
o d e+
JeLada.uj'-rJ c.,3 9. mlso ws we % '1,Mr wocu
e 3.
, 6 3..,.,
y,..;. ;, 1
. Y5
.,e 4'
e_-
w-o H
^
'-A
.me
_wa,~
A.s a
,ym
% 4 yy - t. # r
.e u
J mg/dqig,7Jm 44 h,mcq yh TJ *{fiele, g d
Tr co7 pes _puli di bl.JJ rJiw is 'a e c _.
b
-pye p 2im/
a ace.. sa:3a cowhee.
A s.EL_ a d k.J e n % M 4.s5 cua u ::
i kejc.-_. k o.I lA k A __
---I'#
4-6 T/_,
A IM
I' A6 Je_F
_. _ _. _ ~3' ula A CO-r ad A b
n!
i i
g M
i f* Ed-f-
'f"[M r8
""Th COF b M A O@M 4 JCdE-Cl_)I !
M bM._ d f ME,d.
I 5
I J
i 4
I f
3
,t 4"2LJA.ld id e, adca) a[7m, col l 7e <J cA _
d
__ I ddM p
/f*#
w,_.a,aaae..aua aumwn pa_
ru eusJe -rde --pull _sJdx.d..sdcollbe M be{cas
-rJ equu.
J~Ie__a(_.7 a;_=._g % < J w J~IM(azq;-3
-: y e-p A la M y J
' asgupps _h T4-x q u a_ 6 eJ _c7 se._ W p a a +
Jsas A
i
_-erJ 52osded. _1depsc.7ce.__.. Q4 L J,I poiI _17 m %.3 7 wac Aop4e_r2 __%r PULL" co4+.'5 P4 ef'4 "R*+
- -r _
ach ca pla. pull _,- _ A cer1 u/e gill _.AkiJ4 AJ pJs. ML:
-caTe_(
-mul WJ b _ -r.-Js a B.g_sd4+ bride.
wlcd.
M Jr _
i s
ll Mo-L
,ebtcy. ex. -rA7 cJ~ t>
Ja A -
-Gis._pi
,oon-puu._ AAdd_i-f._-plc_ idqqna_ m (UEd au4a p mi e
cf%sJ7 p'~ c- --p_ps% J p..dstw q;J uk w%" Sodiry
.aa.hw oezv Auss u.iJ.
r p
C bceJ -p L_q. a_:w;aaes. _iTr- ' *1 " "' " A
'TE"
^" SAT 7 h,
-r,4J _rJis be <w Ls)
M 4-/4-L (N Re /) -
de--
'h
,I-s N.
!g 1
- N
$,tl' I
(
O Y-B*
3 aesacw_m.~.ptr m.ua
~
ru.
a r
a MQ i.p snacy AGcct.hL) 4Af defic.edoiss-.
bc
- PT"J
'T^ *Id ^iJ in q q ei g _. d d s._p te a-r T
4
'!I F#d O ff "f-ddfd--.I M ff youwke_sdAdS/S fod 7&7 Q e. M1-Azaa ;,)y Aik_~faae-->\\a A aer !ja'T --
li T
9 q To~>blz._fis; 7o p A M < ea d7 7 escq*
Ltc_ mul 7, 07 e digd,=o op.
W pJ,*q es C qAblL4_M. -
J J
is_4a
- J#c,e-me-A Anec J, s w., b
-n, A L. aJ a t.
i
. AGE._ct-f edd.. 2Msted.. Q_ulQ T be...ccs.
b LUJ4 ry A p_Jc...:
JJ. Ae,J -r 7saa 7 agem m:pa p4 q o.skr
-r.at+
- rot, A~ai AJJ o w LJe,e_
Jrc,, As
-t L,tia s
\\
i
- a-Ah C
dad q'a" NC AN..
0 IO C@ A &
cardyOf M A.-p.is.,J, vle._ v&oe.
Lesd.40_clo w$ $ -rde._pa:2agic.
J
-ro o*475zi d>J5_d:.c.eds pd..ed-Jp._
M, q..uarscpg4
".c 7
f gee <.cdm j UL7 4.A. A-ppdc.c4-M JhT A N - foe-- W J " d J
T "I '
.usc
_o_ J r seus, d.pu-,tu a mqcep. s
, u_.. _L R mes. M Jz.
rc..co__,2 LL J v._%s.
5 i
_.I. _.M4J-.Acidra.esced wwrt.o.1 -rle e gJzercIe i
s i
N-Kj AN. -
N I
"f Au
<*Ca GX}
fd
,=
s
.stoJ _ isJ t-J4.h,J
-r.a Li+rsI.'
N,/m i &Jr l'-n-La...
q9.cy ic-d d e-sW_
C L}
L s Xk.1P t !r y-f s' J i.,-
va 3e Jc,-r 1maoJ_r.
r s
n
(
n
,L
.*p 6Wnd <=
klO bMb A W l**Y. U FG.
S 1'1' bA OL Gd/Q$6 i
f
[.EC
'd a
M d_ NILA J5 }JJ._a p p 4 d.W ner W. s. M
- y. -
..m.f.s p-s,
- 7 t
e Y-e
+e-.
-, - = * -
- g
,,e k
g t%4 e 1 m.J & m..hv3 1... Q 4 s q q q
, y Iz a s.. 1.. s e t. s b
3 T Ey c5E dod._[4a.
p.lsy M __qawJ -rJe qmbyy pec,4s:t d
~J A. Ny o=~rJp_. Ac.. T dl bp Ty ac7_.Ases.
l dres-p 1 mv jab, gda gi4 T J
p.--- p a p u h _f_ 1 q._ g.
T or9sq 4n pa swpccish cFus L u e l _ s q.___
.Ay.
of *L"5 d qht-h bupe__edd ro--Phy k/ *J5-- *T 4
J uJ quaLig gz W9 d ut W f q _.p 4 s 7.,q w e ee e,es emen we
= wee
=wwen h@W eW B
N-**
=e4W4@-
e-wwee N
6
. Bum 6"
W We egh
=meh ami mewwe m
-m GMe6
- MGph64 6
usup
- N*
Meh emus O@S B
w
-M-6 W@@4 mmem g@
a 69 ep 6 M mie 4m m
gem-e up4 w
e e go e m m. g
.e e m9 h6MNg e
metie em W 6
$6 ww.
O*
O enum -== w 988' M
mm Mem M
_,-