ML20236B988

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Draft Adequacy of Structural Criteria for Diablo Canyon Site Nuclear Plant
ML20236B988
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date: 09/07/1967
From: Hall W, Newmark N
NATHAN M. NEWMARK CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES
To:
Shared Package
ML20236A877 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-87-214 NUDOCS 8707290306
Download: ML20236B988 (13)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_ kNhk 'dd P_ ~ ~g on .%e,. w T H.AM _M - N E WJtt.AAK__ I 'q. CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVK:ES 1114 civil. ENGINEERING BUILDING A r-- uneANA, ILUNOIS 61901 ' ngy.s ,tw > 1VW c ig e:q : s (g,, kwf4.y41- $$s yga h s DRAFT {4 'of . REPORT TO AEC REGULATORY STAFF d%. W. c p ;- Y ADEQUACY OF THE STRUCTURAL CRITERIA FOR 4 .L e v ; qW s?4 THE DIABLO CANYON SITE NUCLEAR PLANT fg b l' %'p u.' .'*hy! Pacif.ic Gas and Electric Company W& 3 r -- k,. 4 (Docket 50-275)

  1. ic

~,e. r s. m Vpm.N:. m e, V J + d<%y -, t by kfhfj5@i - %.y N. M. Newmark 1 o,Jf fd i 2JL and .ww - I9;yytiP W. J. Hall g f$q: W.l;4' ~ p%.L,fyp. N/Mb nc - 463 (leg ff.Q 7 September 1967 p-w o $,. <yjfl% m' W:.,'i., l / q s SE B707290306 870721 fg: '- PDR FOIA CONNOR97-214 PDR .3-g . ar S i & r;: r.U f M tM % # iIi9 0 h,,^ < (IV ' th ' 4- a:g g.,,ht...,. + , im > ' si v ~ n~ r..h .e y,h$WY

1 I i i Sgj;, i W ADEQUACY OF THE STRUCTURAL CRITERIA FOR ( i , g pgr j hj THE DIABLO CANYON SITE NUCLEAR PLANT j xy Ix by y hh[' N. H. Newma rk and W. J. Hall i hh INTRODUCTION ) m.. .4 jkdj$p This report concerns the adequacy of the containment structures and dm $$y!p_ components, reactor piping and reactor Internals, for the Diablo Canyon $lte j me.Y Nuclear Plant, for which applicat ion for a const ruction permit and operating q h.I license has been made to the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (Docket No. 50-275) p _We l by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. The facility is to be located in T b. San Luis Obispo County, California, 12 miles west southwest of the city of San w hh Luis Obispo, and adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and Diablo Canyon Creek. The

?

site is about 190 miles south of San Francisco and 150 miles northwest of Ep ?C Los Angeles. ag b~ E Specifically this report is concerned with the evaluation of the u. g.> 1 hkh design criterla that determine the ability of the containment system, piping a p" d and reactor internels to withstand a design earthquake acting simultaneously W with other applicable loads forming the basis of the design. The facility also I .s p n, fR/' Is to be designed to withstand a maximum earthquake simultaneously with other M.* applicable loads to the extent of insuring safe shutdown and containment. This $mb,, h1 repo rt Is based on information and criteria set forth in the preliminary Q !M safety analysis report (PSAR) and supplements thereto as listed at the end of .a. lMF this report. We have participated in discussions with the AEC Regulatory Staff, . ~. and the applicant end.Its consultants, in which many of the design criteria

a.m

'pi :( hl $h were discussed in detal.l. T j.hfn 4 v. s ?" g,y,,. ( W ' y ::,;.; & Q. w lO G T '< YV .E o - , t av, n

[ A g 'L' Q'7:: 3 g p M Mi W y,;- y tg,,, - his&- M DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITY k p M ;*.. The Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant is described in the PSAR as a pressurized f y% water reactor nuclear steam supply system furnished by the Westinghouse Electric n;gy y4 Corporation and designed for an initial power output of 3250 Nt (1060 We net), bNi FN-The reactor cooling system consists of four closed reactor coolant loops 1 g;g"n - connected in parallel to the reactor vessel, each provided with a reactor coolant t'L, . p; id ? pump and a steam generator. TFc reactor vessel will have an inside diameter L% 1[, of about 14.5 f t., a height of 42.3 ft., will operate with a des ign pressure l ' y%s.~ O of 2485 ps Ig, a des ign temperature of 650 F, and is made of SA-302 grade B Nf5 v.f low alloy steel internal,1y clad with type 304 austenitic stainless steel. s Ti c reactor containment structure which encloscs the reactor and steam m @h. generators, consists of a steer lined concrete shell in the form of a reinforced concrete vert Ical cylinder with a flat base and hemispherical dome. The cylindrical st ructure of 140 f t. inside diameter has side walls rising 142 f t. f rom the liner at the base to the spring line of the dome. The concrete e side walls of the cylinder and the dome will be approximat ely 3 ft. 6 and 2 f t. 6 l n: 9 l in. In thic h ers, respectively. The concrete reinforcing steel pattern is described conceptually in Supplement 1 and consists of bars oriented at 30 from

c.
  • the vertical in such a manner that the pattern does not require termination of k'

any bars in the dome. These 6icgonal bars are des tened to carry both the lateral ,MS shear as well as vcrtical tensile forces. In addition there is hoop reinforcing W lF[C In the cylindrical port Ion of the structure. For radici shear reinforcing g,p[ the applicant proposes to use a system of vertical wide flange beams spaced four feet on centers. The beams are attached by hinge connect Ion to the base f$.kp i E slab at the lower end and are terminated about 20 f t. above the top of the y j.gb base slab. The function of the beams is to provide resistance to the moments g- .a jf MD-W <2 l. ai

g.,

s$+ 4 #> o 'k $t[ tk' //[/ M$() t l' IMAGE EVALUATION //o/ /6 TEST TARGET (MT-3) s ( + s I.0 &M M ll g; I!Il!al l.I L* lllllB l.8 1.25 " 1.4 1.6 4 150mm 6" I 'W k f _Q / yp l_ a

,w,, 'd>g, (g 4 //// ... f; D IMAGE EVALUATION ,$ch //o/ ' $I TEST TARGET (MT-3) g + s s [i,; M a 1.0 I,l lm L2g ! I.8 t== IM l.6 ,= l8 150mm 4 6" Ar % A+1 gar 4 sA A. 4//f eg wg, e u D ^ /:. 4 Q;? V y ___-_______--__--_-_-_---___a

L 1 l

& 4*

to 0 Y@, *$ A9g,// ////g / l IMAGE EVALUATION ///77Y g7/ TEST TARGET (MT-3) pp p + k

  • [hI, 4

ffff + s 1.0 l N ni a m p" l: m l,l {2 E@A l.8 l.25 1.4 1.6 4 150mm 4 6" b% +A Mfff36 i;34 4 !y // %,,/ ? _.m1_ _ __ _______________________2___.._____._w

NNAM % s. .? y ; ~ mpft a. ~ w e w3 ' e and shears created by the discontinuity at the base and to provide a gradual g;, a[ transition of load carrying elements between the base and the cylinder wall. t-A w. $2 w, ft ' These trarr.s do not participate in resisting either uplift due to pressure or i Aw hidi shear nd tension due to earthquake loading; these forces are to be resisted t s Mt' g '- by the diagonal steel reinforcing just described. The concrete wall in this hfA lower zons is divided into three zones. The inner zone, about I f t thick, .e [ consists of reinforced concrete and is the element to which the liner is j @0 attached. The middle zone contains the vertical steel 1-beams which in turn u ' 4) ~ JjnT"f"g act as supports for the 16 in, thick reinforced concrete slab spanning the space s. .~ between the beams. The outer zone consists of about 14 in, of concrete in which 6% x the diagonal and hoop reinforcement are embedded. The three zones are provided gf. -with bond-breaking material to insure that the elements will act separately. Ephs The reinforcing steel for the dome, cylindrical walls and base mat will be d@ high st rength reinforcing conforming to the ASTM A432 specification. The pA; A432 reinforcing bars of size larger than tjo. 11 are to be spliced with 2 4Q Cadweld splices except in cases where accessibility makes welding mandatory. The liner, as described in Supplement 2, will be a minimum of 3/8 in. ,O. h@)Ms: thick for the dome and cylindrical walls end 1/4 in. thick for tha base slab. 'M /'O The anchor stubs are to be L shaped and will be fusion welded to the liner ja b plate. The studs will be spaced at 20 in. on centers, and the design is made ? to preclude major af fects arising f rom buckling of the liner, i:%. "l Personnel and equipment access hatches are provided for access to the fo 4g._ containment vessel. In addition there are other penetrations for piping and 3C ' q$%; elect rical conduits. ,M Db The facility includes a sea water intake structure located at sea level 2; 96 .at the base of th'e cliff with circulating water conduits andhauxiliary salt water" b M e' conduits lea ing m a cup to hhe nuclear plant. EJ

  1. NNN M

ew~ ,. m

%yyymy 4pupppgy

.,, _. -.,.. am.. 4 h }Q 'W x

  • m

\\ f a The Information on the geology at the site is described in the PSAR Uh.,N r% fi The bedrock at the site area is of tertiary age y and the several supplements. y and comprises marine shales, sandstone and fine-grained tuffaceous sediments, All ug along with a considerable variety of tuffs of submarine volcanic origin. 5-these rocks are firm and compact, and are exposed in the seaward edge of the I terrace on which the plant is to be built, which ranges In elevation f rom 60 ) ) The bedrock l 3 to 100 f t. above sea level, and is approximately 1,000 f t. wide. Jg c Is overlain by marine and non-marine deposits of Pleistocene age. The major g- ' lj,c components of the power plant are to be founded in bedrock in all cases. %F The site has been well explored and there is no evidence of any fault of fsets j Y of recent origin of significance. The report by the consulting geologist on N 3 g6 '4 the project, Dr. Richard H.. Jahns, presented as Appendix A of the third v% supplement, concludes that the possibility of fault-indu.ed permanent ground N fW displacement within the plant area dering the useful life of the power plant h . 7:( !M 1s suf ficiently remote to be safely disregarded. l I y j i4{' SOURCES OF STRESSES IN CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE AND TYPE I COMPONENTS 1 i i g- '[] The containment structure Is to be designed for the following loadings: yL dead load of the structures; live loads (including construction loads and g j .m 1 fG equipment loads); Internal pressure due to a loss-of-coolant accident of about j ,p ' Qp 47 psig; test pressure of 54 psig; negative Internal pressure of 3.5 psig, stresses y arising f rom thermal expanston; wind loading corresponding to the Uniform ',R; QWW Building Code - 1964 edition and corresponding to 87 to 100 mph winds; and .d Yef earthquake loading as described next. ~ M Ml The, earthquake loading will' be based on two earthquakes, which for,- s V? the design earthquake condition correspond to maximum horizontal ground wv - ,nn 4gh Mc.., ),- p ~ acceleretionsiof 0.20g and.0.15g. _The containment' design also wlll be, reviewed 4 - Kl. dydThyhhfgfgf((, s' j i w ,y g 3 D/ .r gf. 50 e, Mi.s M.6 h hg g, [ r Ill '. %pfMy k wa

hb& \\ = Mar w - S.- ypy - 6 for no loss of f unction using response spectra corresponding to earthquakes of twice the maximum acceleration noted above, namely 0.40g and 0.30g, ,e but with the latter earthquake having a maximum ground velocity corresponding roughly to a value of 0.409 ground acceleration. The U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey report (Ref. 3) concurs in 0.209 and $ffh 0.40g values of maximue. ground acceleration for des ign and maximum a n conditions. 9:; Class I piping and equipment, as discussed In answer to Question l~ a h II.G of Supplement 2 will be designed to the USA S. I.831.1 Code for pressure ~ W w piping which includes consideration of Internal pressure, dead load, and g" o$her appropriate loads such as thermal expansion. It does not contain p provision for earthquake loading. However, the applicant Indicates that they will combine earthquake loadings with the loadings just noted and further elaboration on this point Is given in Appendix A of Supplement 1. The reactor internals are to be designed for combined earthquake, blow down loadings and other aphlicable loadings. COMMENTS ON ADEQUACY OF DESIGel ?,'i ' M Scismic Design For this facility the containment des ign Is to be made for e.,i two earthquakes corresponding to maximum horizontal ground accelerations 7w, ?fs of.0 20g (Earthqu'ake 0) and 0 lSg'(Earthquake B). For the maximum; vu $ldi.. g;3nwor p 4 4 + 4 g Pd l.. 'W' x l .ig,,*' @O " ~ j jgf ty; Q9, y)r- 'i'< .pg &

j.

l 4 t "4 9rL4 j (

f~ ?ZiWW hSN hn ~ r Wu.u , J@Mv $ )ff }g$ps ?46+ r- + . $i:9f. 't q 3. Q$n MA. $i1 n%- earthquake loading the two earthquakes are charactertred by horizontal l &ppi i g ld7 ground accelerations of twice the values just cited, namely 0.40g and LN g 0.30. Spectra corresponding to these earthquakes are presented as 9 b F!gs. 2-11 through 2-14 of the PSAR and agal, in Supplement No. 3 g beginning on page 22, along with an envelope of the spectra for the i f% no-loss-of function condition (Fig,. III.A.12-5, Supplement 3). We concur l { l l b with the respon,se spect ra for the earthquakes when they are used in (M@ yb, the following manner. rr , pl ;p' k..*v Since the response spectrum values for Earthquake D give values F' that cont rol for high f requencies, and for Earthquake B, values that control for intermediate and low f requencies, both earthquakes must be used and l,9 6 l In the maximum response in either must be considered to apply to the design h. {9l9 or safe shut-down of single degree of f reedom elements. This Is permissible Y In view of the f act that Earthquake B gives rcsponse values for low and Q. Intermediate frequencies that lie above the response spect rum values f rom TIO 7024 when normalized to an acceleration of 0.40. Hence this 9 earthquake may be considered to correspond to a 0.40g earthquake for low (i{; and intermediate f requencies. I However, for safe shut-down of mult i-degree-of-f reedom systems, b, L we take the position that the con 61ned.or envelope spect rum for the two u. s p ry earthquakes must be used in order to avoid a possible deficiency in the W provis ion for saf e shut-down. This envelope spectrem is consistent with k, ,4 an El Centro type response spect rum for a maximum ground acceleration of 0.40g. ys-gf&d Vertical acceleration values in all cases will be taken as two-tNirds o,. %pu,, W m7 the corresponding maximum horizontal ground acceleration',' aad the effects of, $ %g tr. 7h% 44- .c. i

y ~ j, -/., a y +

(wg 1
N; mg MW
  • 7 j%f horizontal and vertical earthquake loadings will be con 61ned, and considered h

to act simultaneously. In addition in the clastic analysis, the usual p J f ractional increase in st ress for short term loading will not be used. We p(.;t concur in these criteria. h-N<. y The damping values to be used in the design are given on page 2-29 w 4 (revised 7-31-67) of the PSAR and we concur with the values given therein. Ib Vith regard to the method of analysis of the containment structure, g h N;U It is noted on page 2-29 of the PSAR that all modes having a period greater gjf than 0.08 secs, will be included in the analysis and that in addition for \\vj pg components or st ructures having multiple degrees of f reedom, all significant redes, and in no case less than 3 modes, will be considered. It is further i h stated that for single degree of f reedom systems, the fundamental mode of vibration will be used in the analysis. Our Interpretation of these statements 1 l Q is that, for a single degree of f reedom system, no matter wlat the period, whether it i i' is above or below 0.08 secs, the appropriate period and spectral acceleration will be employed in the design, and further that for multiple degree of f reedom i systems all modes will be considered. On the besis of this interpretat ion, as l !nterpreted in the second paragraph of this sectlon, we concur with the approach. W D The method of dynamic analysis is described in Sections 2 and 5 of l n the PSAR and again in answer' to Quest ton III. A.15 of Supplement 1. It is noted that the dynamic analysis to be fol'..,ed for the Class I components and ( 6' l l' st ructures is the modal part icipat ion f actor method. It is our understanding I,.. I I, ' y further that the modal analysis may be carried out either through the use j .hr directly of the smoothed spectra, or employing a time history of ground motion, lh employing earthquake records with amplitude values scaled which, lead to l h'Q' y A essent ially the. same smoothed spectra., Discussion of this poirit is presented' nf. '!g ' y ,i ^ pf .e .c h t ~ y,

(' f P % by the applicant in answer to question III. A.13 In Supplement 3. We concur I-7 u%, 4 in the use of the modal participation method in the analysis and design, ? w I T-as well cs the use of either the smoothed spectra or the time history input Lhh method provided that the time history input yields the same response spectra N$9 as given in the report without any major deviations below thosc smoothed 9 response spect rum values presented in the PSAR.

g..m

{@ As_ a further point on the dynamic analysis, it is our understanding 04 that for the safe shutdown conditions particularly, for Class I components Wn - l D@ T and structures, the design will be made for the envelope of the combined h~ spectra of the two earthquakes for the appropriate damping level.r On the l 1 l [K 'b assumption that this approach is the one being followed we concur in the design l 1 lhf approach adopted. ) 'k: ' I*- General DesIqn Provisions _ [' Uc ht.vc reviewed the design st ress criteria presented on pace 5-0 of the FSAR and the load factor expressions to be employed in the design and I iN find these reasonable. Further, we note on page 5-12 of the PSAR that no steel l reinforcement will experience average stress beyond the yield point at the factored load, and a statement on page 5-13 that the liner will be designed L to assure that stresses will not exceed the yicld point at the factored loads. Further amplification on these points is given in answer to ?uestion III.A.5 of ri M. Supplement 2. We interpret these statements to mean that the average st ress ! s' I% in the reinforcement and liners will not exceed yield and that the deformations %[ will be limited to that of general yleiding under the maximum earthquak'c loading 2N ' conditions. On the assumption that this interpretation is correct we concur - 1& ph in the approach. Nky i %;o The detall for. carrying the radial shear, namely through the use of

59p -

h( a vertical I-beam,. as described in the PSAR,,and in nore particular , 30Te .m i )

kYE' 'Y ^ %F @um i @V beginning on page 30 of Supplement 1 is' novel and appears acceptable to us, j 4 ;.. '.. k -{ ~ We recommend that careful attention be given to the detail at the base of the I l hh section whtre it is keyed into the foundat ion, to insure that no distress can j og occur ln either the liner or the diagonal reinforcing bars through any rotation l f# that might occur at this point under earthquake loadings or other types of llX ^ accident loadings. ' @.7 ipp. It is noted in answer to Question III. A.9 of Supplement I that the 1 $jg diagonal reinforr.ing will be carried over the top of the cy.lindrical shell I ew (( and form a core or less completely tied unit through the containment st ructure t.. h with tie-down into and through the foundation as described in answer to q Quest ion III. A.10. It is further noted that the splices for the ASTM A-432 bars, W.r. which comprise the diagonal reinforcing in the side walls and carry the lateral i shears and vertical loadings in the containment structure, will be spliced by 7 the Cadweld process and that less than 1 percent of them will be welded by j j virtue of inaccessibility for Cadweld splice units. The proposed approach i N appears acceptable to us. j l The design of the intake structure located at sea level is described in detail in the PSAR and the various supplements. This will be designed as a Class I st ructure, with due regard for expected tsunami water heights. i Although it appears thet some protection has been provided against the 9 p possibility of rock masses f rom the clif f falling onto, or into, the pump l ( house, we reconmend that careful attention be given to any impossible impairment f(c of the controls or the pumping system through any possible rock falls or slides. f;, MN! Cranes l h$ h The' containment crane is listed on page 2-27 (revised 7-31-67) of the hdp. Ft.s, PSAR as a Class I structure. We wish to call attention to the design of tho i "d., i i i 2 8 s fi MM!!aBMiEMN

'l . m,? n,- ? p 0-g + g}' cranes to insure that these cranes cannot be displaced from the rails during 'Ib WI the design or maximum earthquake, or otherwise to have damage result from l W NP the movement of items supported by them which could cause Impairment of the +, b containment or the ability for safe shutdown. Penet rat lons g*:. A discussion of the design of the penetrations is given in answer fthp,c to question III.A.2 of Supplement 1. It Is noted there that for the l ,,k large penetrations the diagonal rebars will be welded directly to a heQy g! R structural steel ring through use of Cadweld sleeves. This approach appears @g

7g satisfactory to us.

f,,- The applicant further notes in the same section that the stress p. concentration in the vicinity of the opening will be considered in the analys!s. l Although this approach may well be satisfactory, we believe that the penet ration k design should take account of any secondary ef fects arising f rom local bending, c thermal ef fects, and so on, to insure that the penetration-door detail behaves j f r bF satisfactorily, and secondly that there is no distress In the containment. i st ructure in the transit ton zone f rom the penet rat ton into the remainder l / (:e of the shell structure. Partial proof of the Integrity of the penetration Wl, will be provided by the measurement program to be made concurrently with the proof testing of the containment vessel. Ve reconenend that penetration deformation hh@W calculations be made prior to the proof testing to provide demonstrated evidence Q" "W that the design does Indeed meet the criteria set forth for botti the large j u6 and small penet rations. te d'. /:. Piping, Valves, and Reactor Internals .?fV The design of the piping is described in Section 2 of the PSAR, 'and in +.,,,. cg$b-y .m y,, further detall 'In Supplements 1 and 2. On page 1-22 of thePSAR'a statement

  • h' y,u y s

g: 3p ...w., < mg ' ' i.gtpb.- ' })NapN@ N E @@N N : %.m '314,~ L~y; 33p 3

2nw.ma

  • MF 9M h

,,e $,, [ _p is made that all piping will be designed to withstand any seismic %~ disturbance predictable for the site. On page 2-30 of the PSAR lt it, ws hp Indicated that there are regions of local bending where the stresses will be 7 f h% equivalent to 120 percent of the yield stress based on elastic analysis for gf J/ Further elaboration en the piping design is the no-loss-of function criteria. be I and again

hjhg, given in answer to Question II.F and Appendix A of Supplement The discussion presented In klf in answer to Question II.G of Supplement 2.

n i Ib Supplements 1 and 2 indicates that the earthquake loadings will be combined tjp bk directly with the other applicable loadings for the piping and that the design limits will be established in terms of code allowable stresses, which in my cases can be as large as 1.2 to 1.8 times. the code allowable stresses, VV (d. v A' ' $'. The matter of concern to us is tr at of the possible impairment of the a serviceability 'of the ' piping through rupture or buckling if excessive deformations O%W As the result of discussions with the applicant we believe that for occur. the specific materials used, and under the conditions cited, the deformations Do However, we urge that this Mk generally will be limited to acceptable values. l l natter receive further consideration by the applicant during the design process. l The isolation valve design is discussed in several places but bm The approach outline l particularly in answer to Question II. A.14 of Supplement 1. l U there appears acceptable to u's. r4 The design of the. reactor Internals has been reviewed in some detall 6 The Internals are to be designed to withstand the combined ,Y with the applicant. tW k!fh maximum earthquake spectrum concurrent with blow down in such a manner that It ls our

.' h $,..,

nederate yleiding would not impair the capability of' safe' shutdown. ~ g< y to understanding that this matter is under detailed study and further ,y tJ b documentation and revlew of the design criterla for..th_ ' Inte'rnaliIs1 required., e a: ' e pg .x i'YU

q q h

j ;g,

$f Y, s v 12-g:; " - R A"T-CONCLUS 10NS ""~ hhk .i, In line with the design goal of providing serviceable structures and $WO components with a reserve in strength and ductllity, and on the basis of the information presented, we believe the design criteria outlined for the primary containment, secondary containment and Type I pf ptng can provide an gp u,..... pf, adequate margin of safety for seismic resistance. Still remaining for .a l p$.m(k,. 3 review Is a detalled evaluation of the criteria to be employed in the design ~ 1 {pr ;, w l of the reactor Internals. 1 ; e : ;., b h'r %^ REFERENCES r gg 1. "Prel iminary Safety Analysis Report, Volumes 1 and 2," Nuclear, Plant, y Diablo Canyon Site, Pacific Cas and Electric Company, 1967. (h 2. " Preliminary Safety Analys ts Report, Supplements 1, 2 and 2," Nuclear j h(h Plant, Diablo Canyon Site, Pacific Gas and Elect ric Company, 1967. l e ' Q'! 3. " Report on the Selsmicity of the Diablo Canyon Site," U. S. Coast and ' Geodet ic Survey, RockvIlle, Maryland, b (p s 1 dQ (h I fp e4 }'f: >y NYk; ? k j i ggy 4 %#e ? M NhsNbNYbMdNb}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20236B988&oldid=3942359"