ML20246C773

1988 Computer Mathematical Study of Thermal Plume in Monticello Reservoir Generated by VC Summer Station

ML20246C773
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	05/02/1989
From:	NUS CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20246C614	List: ML20246C613 ML20246C773
References
NUDOCS 8907110136
Download: ML20246C773 (12)

Text

_ _ _ - - . - _ _ - - - _ - - - - _ _ _ _

i ln:. q ,.

1 i

i 1988 Computer Mathematical Study of the Thermal Plume in Monticello Reservoir Generated by the V. C. Summer Station Prepared for South Carolina Electric & Gas Company i

by NUS Corporation Gaithersburg, Maryland May 2, 1989 l

890711o136 890630 ADOCK0500g'gg5 PDR P

In March 1985 two reports were issued (1,2) describing a computer mathematical model study which defined the long-term characteristics of the thermal regime in Monticello Reservoir with V. C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) operating at

'various power levels between 40 and 100%. The model simulated the dominant physical processes affecting the dynamic thermal response of the reservoir.

The heat transfer between the water surface and atmosphere was driven by the L internal thermohydraulics of the reservoir coupled with the external meteorology. The latter was simulated using a 20 year record of Columbia, SC National Weather Service (NWS) hourly meteorological data transformed to the VCSNS site via a correlation of one year of data at the two locations. The introductionofheatfromghenuclearpowerplantwassimulatedassuminga discharge flow of 2.9 x 10 m 3/ day with a temperature rise of 13.9 C at full power. Power levels less that 100% were simulated by multiplying the full power temperature rise by the operative power level. The exchange of heat between Monticello and Parr Reservoirs, via the Fairfield Pumped Storage Facility (FPSF), was simulated based on inspection of hand recorded station j records for 1983 and 1984. The generating cycle was characterized as taking place from 1200 until 2000 hours0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> and the pumping cycle from 2200 hours0.0255 days <br />0.611 hours <br />0.00364 weeks <br />8.371e-4 months <br /> until 0600 hours0.00694 days <br />0.167 hours <br />9.920635e-4 weeks <br />2.283e-4 months <br />.

Since the time of the previous reports, there are 3+ additional years of VCSNS  !

operating data (21 months of data were available for the previous reports) I together with concurrent (hourly) measured Monticello Reservoir temperatures.

The latter data, which were available in the form of computer files, also included an indication. for each hour of each day, of the status of FpSF (generating, pumping back, or standby). This study incorporates this new information a19 ng with the additional considerations described below. A previous studyt 31 , which was performed for the purpose of implementing a site specific atmospheric diffusion and transport system, describes the effects of <

Monticello Reservoir on the meteorological parameters measured at VCSNS. The report concludes that local wind speed, air temperature, and dew point are affected by the presence of the reservoir. These effects were included in the  ;

analysis of Monticello Reservoir by modifying the VCSNS meteorological data to '

account for the presence of the reservoir and rep orming the correlations between the data and the NWS meteorological data. The dew-point e approximately 1 tu 4 F greater than temperatures those observed ydownwind ind of theofreservoir.(

the reservoir wg/ Accordingly

, the VCSNS data previouslyusedtpiforthecorrelationofonsiteandNWSdataweremodifiedby subtracting 1 to 4*F from those readings which were on the downwind side of tne reservoir. The correlation coefficients for 1,2,3, and 4'F differences were equivalent: they were all marginally greater than that for no effect of the reservoir on dew point temperatures (.992 versus .991).

Theeffectofthereservoirtemperatureontheairtemperaturg)wasnotedtobe l dependent on both the magnituda and sign of this difference.( The downwind I air temperature change was given as 0.07, 0.37, and 0.79 F for air-water temperature differences of 55, 5-10, and > 10 F, respectively; colder (than the air) water temperatures resulted in a decrease in air temperature and warmer water temperatures an increase. Since reservoir temperatures were not measured concurrently with the onsite air temperatures used in the previous study,(A) lake temperatures simulated for 1979 by the model were used. Highway 99 temperatures at the lowest power level studied were taken to approximate the reservoir temperatures in 1979 (prior to VCSNS operation). Again, the regression of the onsite air temperatures to the NWS data showed a marginal I

i

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ NH ..f A F r' O C r"' C A * ~ *

- - - ~ = = . - - - - - - - - - - -

- ==: ---------------------_ _ = - ; _; --- ;;-

increase'in correlation coefficient (.983 to .984) for a modification of those onsite temperatures which were on the downwind side of the reservoir.

In contrast to the marginal effect of the ambient _ air and dew point temperature modifications on the accuracy of.the correlations, the effect of the reservoir i on the onsite measured wind speeds was noticeable. The wind L downwind of the reservoir were modified by dividing oy 1.33.(ggeeds 31 measured As might be

[

expected, a difference of 33% on the downwind versus upwind speeds has a major influence on the accuracy and form of the VCSNS and NWS data. Due to this significant difference, the most recent complete year of data (1987) was used for th egression. The correlation coefficient found in the previous

-study, 1 0.80, was seen to increase to 0.87. This verifies the significant effect of the reservoir on the wind speeds.

The linear regression of the NWS and modified VCSNS meteorological data resulted in the following new relationships:

i W = .66We + 1.54 Ta=Ta C+

.05 T d = Tdc .24 Where W = onsite wind speed (mph), Ta = onsite air temperature ( F), and Td onsite dew point temperature ( F), aT1 measured upwind of the reservoir. The superscript c signifies Columbia, SC NWS data.

With the availability of computer files containing FpSF operating data, each of the years 1984-1987 were analyzed to determine the time distribution of the.

facility's operation. Table 1 indicates the distribution of 1987, which was typical of each of the years analyzed. Based on this distribution, FPSF operation was represented in the present study by generation during the hours 0900-2100 and pumpback during the hours 2300-0700. The total volume of water 9 with half withdrawn that amount (andpumpedback)eachdayremainedat29,000 moved on Sundays. In any case, the previous studyt acre-fgc,oncludedthat the effect of FpSF operation on Monticello Reservoir temperatures is small.

The hydrological parameters found to be appropriate previously(l)were, with the exception of C (multiplicative factor used to modify the calculated evaporative heat flux), taken to be unchanged. With the previously described significant change in the wind speed correlation, a significant change in the calculation of the forced convection evaporative heat flux can be expected. The parameter which is used to define this flux, C, was therefore modified using a non-linear iterative least-squares analysis. Since the 21 months of lake temperature data beginning on January 1, 1983 had previously been used to help define model parameters, this same period was used to redefine C. The least squares analysis indicated a value of 0.70 was more appropriate than the previously determined value (with the unmodified onsite wind speed correlation) of 0.65.

It is of note that the new value is closer than the old to value found for this parameter in another, similar, study.(g)78, which was the With this value of C, the least squares analysis indicates a standard deviation of model calculated (with actual operating conditions simulated) temperatures from those measured during the aforementioned 21 month period of 1.22 C at Highway 99 and 0.88 C at th9 VCSNS intake. These values are essentially the same as found previously.ll> The comparison for the 21 month period indicates

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ - - _ _ _ - - M te -ce^ r N

. .- .- = = = . = . - . = = - - - . :. m y .

k excellent agreement. The lake temperature data measured subsequent to the 21 month period, October 1984 and on, was used to verify the model. That is, the calibrated parameter values are based on the 21 month data set. The chosen parameters are, however, independent of the data set for the following 39 months (for which operating, lake temperature, and meteorological parameters were availabic). Good agreement during this period would prove that the agreement found during the 21 month period is not an artifact of the statistics but is, instead, indicative of the correct simulation of the extant physical processes. -The standard deviation of the difference between the simulated.and measured temperatures for this 39 month verification period is 1.35'C at Highway 99 and 0.81 C at the VCSNS intake. These values compare very well with those found during the period used to calibrate the model, especially when j considering the independence of the model from these data. Again, the  ;

inescapable conclusion is that the mathematical model's simulation of the thermal response of Monticello Reservoir is excellent.

Model Results {

ThelongjermthermalresponseofMonticelloReservoirwassimulated,as before,tl using a 20 year continuous meteorological data base. The most recent ,

complete 20 year record was used in both the previous and present study. {

Accordingly, the present study uses 1968-1987 data; the previous study used 1964-1983 data. This study actually simulated'1967-1987, but the results of' ]

i the first year were discarded to eliminate model startup transients.

ThedynamictemperaturedistributionwithinMonticelloReservoirasgjyen)by the present study is virtually the same as that indicated previously.t ,2 This is illustrated by Tables 2 through 6, which give the isotherm areas corresponding to an excess temperature of 1 C for each month of the 20 year simulation; areas are also given for the 20 year mean monthly temperatures.

The five tables are given for continuous VCSNS operating levels of 100, 90, 80, 60, and 40 percent of full power, respectively. A comparison of these tables with the corresponding tables of the 1985 study (2)show isotherm area differences of generally less than 2% for years common.to both studies. A review of the actual temperature distributions indicated similar comparisons a between the two studies. Note that those isotherm areas that show greater area changes always correspond to lesser areas (e.g., the area for April 1981 at ]

100% power changed from 1012 to 956 acres, a change of 5.5%). This is indicative not of significant changes in water temperature but instead of the sensitivity of the isotherms to small peak water temperature changes near the -

temperature nf interest. That is, a change in peak water temperature from 5.0 to 5.1 C will have a small impact on the percent change of the l'C isotherm area; a change from 1.1 to 1,2 C will have a much larger impact.

l This comparability is not surprising in that the only significant change in the l

simulation correlations between the 1985 and present studies was the previously described change in wind speed correlations between NWS and VCSNS meteorological stations. As explained previously, this change (decrease) in wind speed would result in a change (decrease) in the calculated evaporative heat flux leaving the reservoir surface and entering the atmosphere. However, this was compensated for by changing (increasing) the parameter, C, which helps describe this flux. That is, althoup,h the input wind speeds in the two studies were different, the use of actual lake temperatures to calibrate the model resulted in almost identical reservoir thermal responses.

1 a,, n ___

The difference in 20 year mean monthly isotherm areas between the two studies is less than approximately 2%; this mirrors both.the comparability of model results discussed above and the two data bases. Meteorological data for the years 1964 through 1967 were replaced with that of 1984 through 1987 in the present study; this allows use of the most recent available data. As indicated by a comparison of the monthly isotherm areas (at 100% power) of the two studies, the replacement 4 year data set .is similar to that used in the first study. In fact, the new data set resulted in an average of 39 acres less than that of the previous data set.

Although this experience of relatively constant long term meteorology is expected to continue, it is instructive to consider the effects of the various

, input parameters. Solar radiation and cloud cover are essentially independent of the presence of the lake. The former varies with latitude and time of year, but can be considered to be constant from year to year. Cloud cover will reduceincidentsolarradiationwhileattyt)same these radiation. As seen in the previous study, time increasing compensating atmosphere effects are both defined by terms which are 2nd order in cloud cover; changes in cloud cover are expected to have a small effect on reservoir temperatures. The main effects on the temperature should come from changes in air temperature and wind speed. Air. temperature is a 4th order effect through the atmospheric radiation term (6th order when the atmospheric emissivity is considered); reservoir temperatures will be most sensitive to changes in air temperature. Wind speed is linearly related to the evaporation term. However, unlike the air temperature, changes in which would be damped because the temperatures are small compared to the entire term (Ta + 273 = absolute temperature), wind speed is a direct factor of the forced convective flux. Dew point temperatures affect the convection terms linearly through the vapor pressure gradient. This gradient, e s-ea , is essentially proportional (for small changes in dew point temperature) to the difference between the water and dew point temperatures.

Accordingly, reservoir temperatures should be some what less sensitive to changes in dew point temperatures than to changes in wind speed (depending on the relative magnitude of the changes); the former is functionally damped by the water surface temperature.

If, in the future, a quantitative analysis of the effects of meteorologic parameter changes on reservoir temperatures is desired, it is recommended that a simplified steady state sensitivity analysis be performed. The internal dynamics of the reservoir are well understood and accurately modeled; effects of meteorologic parameter changes on water temperatures can be investigated using a model which accurately reflects the average surface heat fluxes while simplifying the dynamics of the reservoir. Such a study would allow conclusions be drawn without the necessity of preparing input data for and ,

exercising the transient model used for the present study.

]

Discharge Limitations (Conclusions)

The previous study (l) contains a detailed discussion of the three quantitative thermal limitations imposed on the temperature distribution within Monticello Reservoir and shows how they are met. Two of these limitations address the monthly temperature (or temperature difference) at the FPSF intake. The temperature must not exceed 32.2"C (90 F) and the temperature rise, above the south side of Highway 99 in the northern portion of the reservoir (taken as ambient temperature), must not exceed 1.66 C (3 F). As concluded in the

previous analysis, given the extremely conservative assumptions regarding plume trajectory and the margin of safety for even the most extreme months. 0.8 C (temperature limit) and 0.66'C (temperature rise limit), the regulatory limits will not be exceeded. Temperatures indicated in the present study for the extreme months are within 0.1 C of those calculated previously; therefore, it can again be concluded that these temperature limits at FpSF intake will not be exceeded.

The other temperature limit states that the instantaneous maximum plume surface area {ggcesstemperatureof1.66*C)willnotexceed6700 acres. The previous study showed that the maximum 1 C isotherm covered 3198 ar.res. An essentially equivalent value, 3176 acres, was found in the present study. It is, therefore, conclusively shown that the plume surface areas would never exceed 6700 acres.

References

1. Toblin, A. L., Final Report-Computer Mathematical Model Study-V. C. Summer Station Environmental program, prepared for SC E & G Company by NUS Corporation, NUS Report 4687, March 21,1985.

2. Toblin, A. L., Computer Mathematical Model Study - Additional Analysis -

V. C. Summer Station Environmental program, prepared for SC E & G Company By NUS Corporation, March 25, 1985.

3. Development of Meteorological Relationships for Site-Specific Diffusion and Transport System - Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, prepared for SC E & G l Company by Dames & Moore, Report 5182-096-09, September 1983.

4. National Climatic Data Center ( Asheville, NC), local Climatological Data, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1984 and 1988.

5. Firstenberg, H. and G. Fisher, An Investigation of Cooling Lakes for the Closed Cycle Operation of Electric Generating Stations, Volume 1, NUS l Corporation, 1976.

l

)

)

i i

t - amm

....:- w.

.z L

TABLE 1 - 1987 FPSF OPERATION PERCENT OF TIME GENERATING OR PUMPING (BACK) FOR EACH HOUR-a' HR: 0~  : GEN: 1 PUMP: 66 STNDBY: 32 HR= 1 GEN = O PUMP:~77 STNDBY: 22 L HR: 2 GEN: O PUMP: 82 STNDBY= 17 HR: 3' GEN =- 0 PUMP = 83 STHDBY= .16

~HR 4 GEN = O PUMP: 83 STNDBY:,l'6

'HR: 5 GEN =- 0 PUMP = 82 STNDBY: 17 HR: 6 GEN: 4 PUMP = 72 STNDBY: 23 HR= 7 GEN: 28 PUMP =-'46 STNDBY= 25-HR=. 8 GEN: 37 PUMP = 28 STNDBY= 33-HR: 9 GEN: 45 PUMP = 15 STNDBY: 38 HR: 10 GEN: 54 PUMP = 8 STNDBY= 37 H HR: 11 GEN: 57 PUMP: 4 STNDBY: 38 HR='12 GEN: 54' PUMP: 2 STNDBY: 43 HR: 13 GEN: 51 PUMP: .1 STNDBY: 47

'HR: 14 GEN = 51 PUMP = 1 STNDBY: 46 HR 15 GEN: 51 PUMP: O STNDBY=~47 HR= 16 GEN: 48 PUMP: 0 STNDBY='50 HR: 17 GEN: 49 PUMP = 0 STNDBY: 49 HR: 18 GEN: 60 PUMP: 0 STNDBY: 39 HR: 19 GEN: 64 PUMP = 0 STNDBY: 34-i HR= 20 GEN: 62 PUMP = 0 STNDBY: 36 HR: 21 LGEN= 53 PUMP: 2 STNDBY: 43 HR= 22 GEN: 23 PUMP = 22 STNDBY: 54 HR: 23 GEN: 6 PUMP: 49 STNDBY= 43 TOTAL DAYS-HRS = 365 0 i

i

)

I

V 31965456772641327790 - 2 O 14064364364988285697 7 N 109883010431 9151 6834 1 221 11222222212221222 2 T 34434676372800757184 9 C 11 4951 90437296582472 5 O 22049015901290106508 1 22221222122212222221 2 P 32772468112399822489 7 S E 85469637486058555701 2 E S 35554533553444300274 4 R 22222222222222222222 2 U

T A

R E G 28013827213659028166 3 P U 00597467291265505901 3 M A 35676776578546756656 6 E 22222222222222222222 2 T

C

) R -

SI G EO E L 64513539006952028658 5 RV D U 23103521093229632871 7 CR J 76796670746654927756 6 AE R0 22222223222222222222 2 S E .

NE W1 IR O 2 ( P:

O E N 98206687006599323562 7 E SL TR U 01541892763355240750 4 L AL NU J 32504256532355530225 3 B EE ET 22222222222221222222 2 A RC CA T AI RR T EE MN PP RO M Y 08650152344229087944 5 EM 0E A 27353147329867643455 9 H 0T M 31916527747324606323 1 TE 1 22122221221222121221 2 OG S SA S IR E E C V X R 71072405360136177530 4 A E P 01668495099015010191 1 A 95892535466299537791 1 Y 1111222221121 222112 2 L

H T

N O R 56370982731962650230 8 M A 45125493513943573806 5 M 48666248614459356246 5 R 22222222222222222222 2 O

F B 50614574430987682353 6 E 65770080618480936214 4 F 99155968899857088681 8 22322222222222322223 2 N 34739425214747878401 7 A 71 813458254761345043 6 J 37267609643486738954 5 222222322222222221 22 2 89012345678901234S67 N GG7777T7777788888@88

) > > > 1 l l 1

) 1 A

l

V 908676461 48228198642 G O 95174174442897179475 6 N 88766189821 979394612 9 111112111.221 11 211 222 1

^

T 34545198787234996825 7 C 105862775462964881 84 5 O 00827892789078983386 9 2212111211 12111 12211 1

P 34892501512336164677 7 S E 63146316264936454470 0 E S 13332311331122188042 2 R 22222222222222211222 2 U -

T A

R -

E G 50108916255492896560 5 P U 49153033856623140578 9 M A 02454554255224524423 3 E 22222222222222222222 2 T -

C

) R -

SI G EO E L 74026890155452228747 3 RV D U 46464758127220107204 0 CR J 43463347423322794533 4 AE R0 22222222222222212222 2 S E .

NE W1 IR O 3 ( P:

O E N 14881171504344230050 9 E SL TR U 29448703521839853267 7 L AL NU J 97250833208928195981 9 B EE ET 1121212222112 211122 1 A RC CA T AI RR T EE MN PP -

RO M Y 25006567416460750410 2 EM 0E A 0921912723679152251 3 H 9T M 9647218040097175998 7 TE 11112211221112 1 11 1 OG S SA S IR E E C V X R 20767820817670256167 6 A E P 4 64268609283 962891 8 A 2 03819109962 083946 5 Y 1 1112122 11 212 11 1 L

H T

N O R 81528664514270800897 4 M A 69910343783341 803785 5 M 94133715249016822792 1 R 12222122211222122112 2 O

F B 13815090928090381106 6 E 18866431062917064870 5 F 76822645557533855249 5 22222222222222222222 2 N 88521879442770560475 9 A 36388942733538922900 2 J 14034377321263416632 3 22222222222222222122 2 89012345678901 234567 N GG777777777788888888 i ) 1 ) ) ) ) ) 1 ) ) 1  ! ) ) ) ) )

A l

V 433891 23363654740739 8 O 63163752299475651 029 3 N 66544867698757073499 7 111111 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 211 211 1 T 10465454042450462684 9 C 974450425349741 60655 2 O 77606670567756761 064 7 11 1 21 1 121 11 1111 12211 1

P 49354015316692287954 6 S E 27599761 719561020816 5 E S 90009089018990966729 9 R 12221211 221112111 121 1 U

T A

R E G 961771 221 95957108627 4 P U 43366365077456550819 1 M A 70121221 022991291100 1 E 122222222221 12212222 2 T

C

) R -

SI G .

EO E L 66290831 1 84598242704 2 RV D U 03079349505445178171 7 CR J 1013901 4090988441290 0 AE R0 222212222121 1 1212212 2 S E .

NE W1 IR O 4 ( P:

O E N 36677346086810036823 6 E SL TR U 8669485667832 413514 9 L AL NU J 3185629985158 746437 4 B EE ET 11 1 11 111 1111 11 111 1 A RC CA T AI RR T EE MN PP RO M Y 03380720430156020140 8 EM 0E A 1093773 39 262 8 16 1 H 8T M 3920852 04 406 4 41 0 TE 1 1111 21 1 11 11 1 OG S SA S IR E E C V X R 00007594200500313060 9 A E P 57229 4 422 51 0 A 16464 8 528 58 6 Y 11111 111 L

H T

N O R 420057015062311 54568 6 M A 624385178 0721220052 2 M 206989717 2362277047 6 R 12111 121 11 12111111 1 O

F B 60338364179053963490 4 E 16398355622905354633 1 F 43589311 014209421806 2 22211222222221 222122 2

_ N 44162284926303388043 5 A

_ 78518152889080284746 5

_ J 81711 1 34098031283409 0 12122222211222212121 2

- 89012345678901 234567 6G7T7777777788G88@@8 1 1 > ' 1

' 1 ' : ' '

N L

V 83306794806514793261 7 O 92383628091781718399 8 N 01099211 1 331 02428723 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 T 12973298944587089075 5 C 50366859639260425229 7 O 2214001 3011201113419 1 11111 1 1 1 1 11 1 111 1111 1 P 45896550408033940097 6 S E 1 4658820486686882124 1 E S 34342323442323200153 3 R 111111 11 1 11 1 11111111 1 U

T A

E E G 80546335453949365651 5 P U 89504656337097457732 5 M A 83354453254014502433 3 E 111111 1 1 111 11111111 1 T

C

) R -

SI G EO E L 69486401853075007191 7 RV D U 001924900098525 5186 3 CR J 000579178904175 3379 0 AE R0 1 1 11 11 1 1 11 1 S E .

NE W1 IR O 5 ( P:

O E N 00500094900000000000 0 E SL TR U 5 975 L AL NU J 2 753 B EE ET A RC CA T AI RR T EE MN PP RO M Y 00000000400000000000 0 EM 0E A 3 8 H 6T M 4 TE OG S SA S IR E E C V X R 00000000000000000000 0 A E P A

Y L

H T

N O R 00034097000007000000 0 M A 94 57 8 M 63 10 8 R 1 O

F B 19331970161438642422 9 E 70039117316982514262 6 F 65582541256415349559 2 111 111 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 N 033751 00043854194741 7 A 46649050893823406286 7 J 24043416333374536933 3 1 11111 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 11 11 1 89O12345678901234567 N 66?7777777778888@S@@

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1

' > ' > ' > ' t H

1 - '

1  : ,I L 1c IY

- 7 g

~ .

t-C E

16574558802709442955 1 D

61638493398400910681 0 44316344543444243334 4 V

O N

37660350278679545487 729647031 76803546115 34333344444344543744 8

1 4

T C

28122754293111321057 48329621018877680187 6

8 O 43453334443333331433 3 -

P 63385630503399842396 7 S E 50669218022258514686 1 E S 3423 233443422332123 3 R

U T

A R

E P

G U

02016080030002000500 1 20 9 4 36 19 0

M A 3 1 2 32 22 E

T C

)R -

SI G EO E

_ L 00000006000000000000 0 RV D U 2 CR J AE R0 E

S .

NE W1

_ IR O 6 ( P:

O E N 00000000000000000000 0

_ E SL TR U L AL NU J B EE ET A RC CA T AI RR

.T EE

_ MN PP

_ RO M Y 00000000000000000000 0 EM 0E A H 4T M TE OG S SA S IR E E C V X R 00000000000000000000 0 A E P A

Y -

L H

T N

O R 00000000000000000000 0 M A.

M R

O F

B 40006560001800050004 0 E 27 025 571 3 9 F 41 322 321 1 7 N 01574108012916206910 3 A 985287 4611662076057 9 J 332423 2355474545344 3 89012345678901234S67 N G6777777777788888@@@

) ) ) r >>) 1 1 1 t ' ' > ' l A