ML20238E708

Application for Amend to License NPF-38,changing Tech Specs to Modify Annulus Fire Detection Sys.Description of Proposed Sys & Surveillance Requirements & Field Test Documentation to Demonstrate Sys Performance Encl

ML20238E708
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	12/22/1987
From:	Cook K LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20238E710	List: ML20238E708 ML20238E726
References
WEP87-2233, NUDOCS 8801050303
Download: ML20238E708 (22)

Text

.. .

. o s 1

NNE STREET e P. O. BOX 60340 LOUISIANA / 317 NEW BAR ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70160 * (504) 595-3100 POWER & LIGHT NONsOE l

December 22, 1987 W3P87-2233 l A4.05 QA U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk i Washington, D.C 20555 l

SUBJECT:

Waterford SES Unit 3 1

Docket No. 50-382 Annulus Fire Detection System Modification l

l l

REFERENCE:

Louisiana Power & Light Company Letter Number W3P86-2525 from l J.G. Dewcase to G.W. Knighton dated September 12, 1986 l

On July 21, 1987, representatives from Louisiana Power & Light Company (LP&L) met with J.H. Wilson, Waterford 3 Licensing Project Manager, and D.J. Kubicki, Fire Protection Technical Reviceer, to discuss a proposed change to the annulus fire detection system. The existing system, with detectors installed within the annulus, is essentially inaccessible during plant operation and has a history of spurious alarms. A Technical Specification (TS) change was granted in Febrt.ary, 1987 as an interim measure, pending further evaluation by LP&L, in response to difficulties entailed with the system. Prior to the TS change, the spurious alarms resulted in fire watch patrol entries into the annulus every eight hours for extended periods of time. While the T3 change has reduced the fire watch patrols, a more accessible and improved detection system is still desired. Surveillance and most maintenance activities can be accom-plished only during shutdown periods: during plant operation the environment within the annulus is not recommended for personnel entry.

Temperatures range from 100 F to 120 F, radiation dose levels can be in excess of 100 mrem /hr, airborne contamination is present and oxygen concentration is such that self contained breathing apparatus (SCBAs) must be worn during entries. ALARA and other personnel safety concerns, including those involved with performing the surveillance, were also considered in the development of an alternate method of fire detection for the annulus.

During the July 21, 1987 ceeting, LP&L presented the proposed modifica-tion to the annulus fire detection system, and received verbal concurrence to procaed with the modification based on the conceptual design that was presented. It was agreed that LP&L would develop an in situ acceptance test .and surveillance requirements, and provide those details, along with design information, for review and formal concurrence.

NS20696 8801050303 071222 ADf PDR ADOCK 0500 g2 g

(

P

S W3P87-2233 Page-2 Several telephone conversatiant have uccurred since that meecing which have resulted in a revised scope of su.bsiittal: rather than describing an in situ acceptance test to be performed after system installation, LP&L is providing documentation ' of a field test which was performed in September 1987, and demonstrates in advance of installation that the system can perforin as intended. Attachment 1 to this letter describes the proposed annulus fire detection system and its surveillance require-ments. Attachmer.t 2.is a copy of the field test documentation. A TS change is required to implement this modification. Attachment 3 is a copy of the proposed TS change which b.ss been submitted and is included for information.

Should you have any questions or require aditional information regarding this matter, please contact C.D. Groome at (504) 595-2845.

Very truly yours, K.W. Cook bd f Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Affairs Manager KWC:CDG:ssf Attachments cc: R.D. Martin, J.A. Calvo, J.H. Wilson, NRC Resident Inspector's Office (W3), E.L. Blake, W.M. Stevenson NS20696 1

- t e e ,4 LV

.L p b

. , ' h I

(

/'

q f

5 ATTACHMENT I

6

Attachment I Proposed Annulus Fire Detection System Modification The existing. annulus fire detection system consists of 69 ionizatier type smoke' detectors circling the annulus in three loops'at elevations -4, +21 and +46. These three loops comprise two zoncs of detection for alarm purposes . The proposed fire detection' system consists of two photo-electric smoke detectors mounted on the' Annulus Negative Pressure System (ANPS) ductwork with sample tubes penetrating into the duct. A number of alternatives to the existing system were evaluated, and the duct mounted detectors were determined to be the best choice for this application. In addition to providing an adequate level of fire protection for the annulus,

1. The detectors will be accessible during all modes of operation;

2. Entries into the annulus will not be required except for fire watch patrols in the event of loss of operability of both detectors; and

3. Surveillance will be more easily performed, and without the personnel hazards associated with scaling the annulus wall.

The annulus - is an open area, approximately four feet wide, located between the primary containment steel wall and the secondary containment concrete wall of the Reactor Containment Building (RCB). The ANPS consists of two 100% capacity exhaust fans arranged in paralle1~, connec-ted to a single duct system which penetrates the Shield Building and discharges to the plant stack. The ANPS operates continuously during normal plant operation to maintain the annulus nega 've pressure greater than five inches water gauge in accordance with Tr i unical Specification -

(TS) 3.6.6.2.

Equipment within the unnulus consists of the smoke detection system, communication and lighting fixtures, and the piping and ventilation ducts of the ANPS. All of the electrical cables for these systems are routed in conduit. Other components within the annulus are those which pass through from an adjoining building into the primary containment area.

Such components include the fuel transfer canal from the Fuel Handling Building, personnel accessways from the Reactor Auxiliary Building (RAB)-

and piping from the main steam, feedwater and purge systems. Electrical-components including power, instrumentation and control cables are enclosed within metal sleeves.

The only in situ combustibles within the annulus are the smoke detectors themselves which represent a negligible combustible loading, and a polyethylene foam expansion joint installed between the steel of the primary containment wall and the concrete foundation. Prior to imple-mentation of the smoke detector modification, the polyethylene foam in the annulus will be covered with a noncombustible material. All cable in the annulus is routed in conduit or metal sleeves. All cabling meets the non-combustible test requirement of IEEE Standard 383, "IEEE Standard NS20696

\

1 Type Test of Class IE Electrical Cables,. Field Splices and Connections for' Nuclear Power Generating Stations". All insulation and jr.cacting material for piping penetrative assemblies passing through the annulus is non-combustibic. Transient combustibles used during repair or mainte-nance operations are strictly.. controlled by ' administrative procedure. .A fire protection evaluation performed in September 1986 in support of a TS change request has detmanstrated that there would be no decrease in the level of fire protection for Weterford 3 even if the detectors were deleted from the annulus. This conclusion is based on the absence of combustibles and ignition sources and the low oxygen concentration in the annulus which inhibits the combustion process.

The operability of the proposed detection system was verified during a field test of a mock-up which closely approximated the proposed system design. Originally, the field t est, ccnducted on September 1 and . 4, 1987, was to be used to ascertain certain desigr. parameters for the system. However, the test conclusively demonstrated system operability, and as egreed during a September 30, 1987 conference call between LP&L and NRR, is also considered the acceptance test for the system in lieu of an in situ test performed after installation. The test report is attached for review and indicates response times for various detector positions and test media for both ionization'and photoelectric detectors.

This test effectively demonstrated that the duct mounted smoke detectors can detect combustion products adequately for this application. Based on the test data, it was decided to install photoelectric, rather than ionization, smoke detectors. An added measure of assurance that the proposed modification will provide appropriate protection for the attendant hazards is found in the fact that penetrations traversing the annulus are located below and in the same relative vicinity of the annulus as the intake duct of the ANPS.

Surveillance requirements for the annulus fire detection system will continue to be in accordance with TS 4.3.3.8.1 and 4.3.3.8.2. Ilowever, as a result of moving the detectors to a location outside the annulus, the detectors will be accessible during plant operation and will be surveyed at six month intervals rather than at the less frequent "each COLD SHUTDOWN exceeding 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> unless performed in the previous 6 months" requirement for inaccessible detection instruments. The surveillance procedure will include, in addition to the TS channel functional and supervisory circuit tests, provisions for visually:

1. Verifying t,he integrity of the ANPS ductwork in the vicinity of the detectors;

2. Inspecting sampling tube gaskets for deterioration; and

3. Inspecting sampling tube filters for obstructions; and taking corrective actions as necessary.

NS20696

---

,-----,,-,,--.----.-----,-,-----,-c--,.,--,7---..--.---.-.- .

9 g 4

• }t 4

,9 l'j f 1'

s ATTACIDIENT II L

p

I P

l

{

i FIELD TESTS - DUCT SMGKE DETECTORS

)

ABSTRACT Duct mounted smoke detectors were verified for operability for the annulus negative pressure system (SM 951) by field testing. In addition to operability data, beta 11ation data was also obtained concerning sampling , tubes and differential pressores. These testa determined, based on overall response characteristics, that photoelectric detectors are preferable for this spe:tfig appiteation.

$$ NA9$7 Fire Profection Engtreer date~ l Ac N/NP/lm W Witness l'are I

l l

l 1

1 1

s t

' PAGE 2 0F 6 INTRODUCTION This report desertbes the field tests conducted September 1 and September 4, 1987 on a duct mounted smoke detector and includes descriptions of the test, ,

assemblies. tested,'results and conclusions. The test was conducted in support of Station Modification 951 which is for replacement of the ~ annulus' smoke detection system with two duct detectors located on the duct of. the annulus negative pressure system.

TEST OBJECTIVES l The general objective was to determine the operability of the proposed arrange-ment . under maximum system air flow conditions. Specific objectives were as follows:

1. Datermine oper6b111ty of six inch inlet and three inch outlet sampling tube.

I

2. Determine operability and differences between metal and plastic sampling tubes. i

3. Determine number of inlet holes in each type of sampling tube. ,

j

4. Datermine detector sensitivity to various testing media, *

5. Verify that the differential pressure- across the sampling tubes are j within manufacturers specifications.

6. Determine operabf.11ty and docueent response characteristics of

?

photoelectric and innization detector heads.

i TEST CONFIGURATION i

Eighty feet of straight 10" duct was provided with a Coppus Vano 175 blower .I which provided a valocity of approximately 2750 ft/ min. (Active velocity in the annulus negative pressure system is approximately 2600 ft/ min.) Detectors.were positicned at distances of 21, 41 and 60.5 feet between the blower connection and the inlet tobe. This represented the best to worse case plant locations for l detector installation . and is considered conservative since the existing plant l arrangement contains turns which would reduce velocity and therefore increase {

detector effectiveness. The test duct was positioned on the ground in a north-south direction with blower on the south end. Duct air flow was south to north. Wind direction was from the north. Temperature was 89'F. Test gas and I smoke gensrators - (referred to as test medium) were utilized to activate the detector, i

1 1

E

PAGE 3 0F 6 i i

The test was conducted at each location using various combinations of inlet  !

sampling tubes, tes> media and detector types. A manometer war used to measure differential pressure prior to each test. The test medium was placed one foot from blower intake. Response time was recorded for the following detector configurations:

A. Ionization Detector: Ten inch metal inlet tube with eighteen 0.193 inch holes and a five inch plastic exhaust tube.

B. Ionization Detector: Six inch metal inlet tubes with ten 0.193 inch holes and a three inch plastic exhaust tube.

C. Ionization Detector: Six inch plastic inlet tubes with ten 0.165 inch holes and a three inch plastic exhaust tube.

i D. Photoelectric Detector: Six inch plastic inlet tubes with ten 0.165 inch holes and a three inch plastic exhaust tube.

The numbe? and size of inlet sample holes were provided by the detector manufac-turer.

I 1

h l

PACE 4 0F 6 TABLE 1 TEST DATA

,21' Location DG A. B. C. D.

(

DP -

.4 .35 .35 RT Gas (135] [30] [301 11 RTI Smoke 9 11 8 14

( (

RT2 Smoke -

10 - -  ;

41' Location t DC A. B. C. D.

('}

DP -

.39 .39 .39

( O RT Gas [30] - -

11 RIl Smoke 19 10 8 14 RT2 Smoke -

(} -

(} -

(} -(2) 6_0,.5' Location DC A-, B. C. D.

CP -

.39 435 .35 RT Gas (30] [30] [60] 17 RT1 Smoke 15 22 13 17 RT2 Smoke 10 -

I ^

(2) j

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • et*********************************************e**********  ;

1 D_C

= Detector configuration as described f.n test conf?guration sectior..

of this teport.

.DP = Pressure differential between san.pling tubes in inches water, j RT Gas. = Response time ln seconds using test gas, i RTI fmoke = Response time in seconds using 30 sec. smoke generator, j RT2 Smoke = Response time in seconds using 3 min. smoke generator. i l NOTES: (1) Brackets indicate time of application with no response.

l (2) No test conducted with three min. emoke due to acceptable 30 l

second smoke test.

(3) Test not conducted since it was clearly evident response would not be obtained. i (4) Differential pressure not taken during preliminary test of j September 1, 1987.

l

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ = - _ .._ =

PAGE 5 0F 6 RESULTS/ CONCLUSIONS

1. The six inch plastic inlet sampling tube obtained consistently faster response than the six inch metal inlet sampling tube when ecmparing icnization detectors. However, the difference in response time itself was negligible and is not a consideration in sampling tube selection. The manufacturer recommends ten holes for the plastic tube and eighteen holes for the metal tube. It is not possible to pouttion 18 holes in a 6 inch tube, only 10 were provided. The differential pressure measured for each tube was well within, manufacturer's requirements. The plastic tube is l preferable because. the manuf actr.rer's requirements on number and size of holes.can be met.

2. The differences between the photoelectric and tonization detectors were significant with respect to response to the test gas. The ionization -

d.etector would not respond to the test gas even when subjected to prolonged .

periods of expocure. The photoelectric detector responded to the test gae.

within 17 seconds. Photoelectric detectors are typically celected for a slow burning, smoky, low oxygen combustion scenario where, large particles

.are produced (such as an annulus cable fire). Ionization detectors are typically suited for fast burning complete combustion condtrions where small particles are prdduced. The smoke generators produce particles in the 0.01 to 1 micron size. The test gas produces partic12 . sizes of 0.1 to 1.8 microns. The particle etze produced by the gas may have beec outoide the sensitivity range of the icnization detes. tor. It is also possible that the high velocity within the duct may have diluted the volume of smali particles. Particle size sensitivity would also explain why the photoelectric detector is " Listed"/" Approved" for velocities of up to 1000 ft./ min. beyond the ionization detector.

The response of the photoelectric.c detector to the smoke was slower than the tonization detector. However, the acutal difference in time (4-6 seconds) plus the capability to detect the Igrger particle site of the test gas indicates that the photoelectric detector is preferable for this specific application.

3. Differential pressure across sampling tubes will be clo6e to the range of 0.35 to 0.4 inches of water. This is approximately in the middle of the manufacturers acceptance range of 0.01 to 0.85 inches water.

Based on these testa, detector operability under the existing duct size and air i flow limitations has been verified. In addition, the photoelectric detector is I 7ecommended for this specific application. l 1

i i

i b - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._

c

• e PAGE 6 0F 6 TEST EQUIPe1ENT

1. 2" range inclined tube Manometer, Mertam Instrument Co. Model 4GCD10-WM. )

1

2. Joval 10" diameter 28 gauge Duct - 80 feet. i l

3. Coppus Vano 175 blower - 1500 CFM, 3/4 H.P.

I

4. Honeywell Model TC805B-1010 duct detector assembly. l j

5. Honeywell Model TC805B ionization smoka detector. I

6. Honeywell Model TC804B photoelectric smoke detector.

7. Hensywell metal inlet sampling tube, part number BRKS851-DH-1.

8s Honeywell plastic in}e? sampling tube, part number BRKPSy; MH-E.5.

9. Pyrotronics fire and smoke detector test gas, net vt. 2.5 ozs. l l

10. Superior Signal Company - 30 second smoke generator, part number .1-A.

11. Superior Signal Company - 3 minute smoke generator, part number 3-C.

I t

- - . - _ - - , , - _ _ - - - - - - - - _ , , - - - - - - - - , , - . - . - - - - - , ----,-----,,--,-__--.,,y, , , . . _ _ - - . _,.,,-_.,,

e ~ t t

4 es.

I PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION R

8 4

(

)

l 1

1

.. . . = -

M.

4 l

.ga.

g )

... -~s =. ,

l

. ...._:..8

- l

)

- - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ l

9 .

ame l

l t- . i d4P

.4 J e.

1 n'% .

1 p~., . .

}

- e *% .

..$q. * {

I '.-

... 4- *

. l N ,,

e .

Y.',. .9- , j , a GP ,,

.j .9 e ..

~

f.a .'?'.

.: z . . . .

\} -

q }, . . . ..w : . . ', .7 . . . .

.s. .,-

4j

. .g* . ; .;/ .. .

3.

d *..:

4,* r f. *

. !, ' , . * - { ,*

~.: -

, 4 .. .

., 1 6

1. g. , . .,

"g) . , *. 9

,g 'e ,. .

. * .4-'

s f.

.,.' . ,,3j . .

4 ..

,V #j . isp * -

. ,,; * ;. 4. % j .. :, . r ..

,,; - 1 _ . j4ay '.4- ,- g,, l

,s. $ ' ,' 'e ' .' O ,. . s ' -

1 4 .' . . ...

. e. -. .,- l

. . t .. q g  ;

I M . ..,

1  : *

• 4

-4 *

'{.'. -Q.

~

. . ', .. 4 * '.'(a,,.

, . . c. .. . '.b

@ M g .~., 4* *

.,,.y 4' *% ' ,, ,

, a s ., . f. . '

- . ' 4 '. *<% . .A 'R

,f> - * ' 4 ..- * ' ,' -

4s og .x . R 9- o. -

.d . '.y . * ~

• p'# '* ...J, ' f. J, .

. . .,'..:M? ..

[ ,, .I[ . .

y, .,

., , ,i, ' O . .; q

.- )

1 i

l 1

1

. .' u , 4 ( . ; :q ,.. g ;p,,.;e,

' Y.. e- '?

7 14 .j - l'.-

p.. ' '

• e

• (.;' ' (, **;* ,, .! +p ,. p b'i ',4j.c..t g'

. j , .t, , , s. -. ..e )p,' .; * + ,,e a ; .. . . . . ,, g . s ..

4 -..*

, $ '.'.y 6' d i W ,,* , . ,. . g

• ks *Y ,

, s o.? .., .~: ...' '. !?> -

1 . .. ..m.-,. cg c?a.,Y.. ' *at

. .s .

e >

'( *f 4 e**,f.e; ,,J.,.

4

.r j.s., A

• p. ,p

, ** , +. ,.4.

?

, * ,. , 7 " .. ..,-

?

.. . l y ,. ..- *.,c,- .. t s ~;- .>. .. . , , .. 9 e4.e ;, .

s

, o, ,s O

. * $ e *!' , 4 i ,. '

.i.~'. f.

r .

• . 'g.. .. ._ .

,, 4'. .a1 -*. ,

. n. . 'a .

1 .,

9f.' . . $' *

.,",f..

+. '  : >;,

. . , . yg :

's .

y;j. j. ,

. 'M . - , ~!ihN ^'

.e ,d. i. 4 s

.d* .

• . *g ' -

g_

!'g.: .;.: j 4;

. . e ,.,.. , .' ,

' gg ' ' * '

• i.

.e.,' 4* 4

. ,' ? . ' ,' : : - - 4

, . . . +- '

. .. e . . . . ..

- . . 7 ,,, gg* . .;

.. . ,.. ~ . , .:, .,

• • • 's, , *,. .

gp '

.' ,

• g . . .4, s ..

4- . g 3 -

' %'f g 4 g

- ** .g . 4 4g...%.. L s . W

. -( ;~.b; . .'  ;,

,)

p;.

)

l l

l

<- l o * ,

l 1

k i

(*. ,

, 4-1.

i ."

a

=* ' ' .- - I l g- . ,.

i', o= *Q')*

(85,.i.). 0 . .

s h.

t i

e..s. .. -

m

. . . ,4 3 'O

• ) ". s 4,.

. ., , ). .

g.

, , , . , ,.$'g f' ,

• v

. ^/,.

e ' e.

, . - 6 . 9, _

a p h e q

, _ g e - .-

p j

1 1

1

a' 4

m

_n M -

' ~

et t

.e +

Q

.' , , D

• g . s a 4 . . .

\ . . .

- ..- . v .

p e I

. t

.. AMes .

• .. *g y- * *'.

,.*4 g 4p.'%g

, . ... * , l e p%,w - - g-

. - - y .r '

j - y_ 3, p,y , &.-~ y. le %. .

3, .3 ,

V- A

. r 1 sO., . - - ,

s e. .

2*  : I

• • ' ,' "* MS

\ i**

,,i , g s

, ,. M. . ..

• j , ' . ,

s.

.. w- M 5 ' - 1

.~.. 1

"' ee~

a 1 ~ t'4 ' . ., ,'. . 'ut

• ke -

9, u

. 7' - k. . . .y

.9 -

.'e <..

e

. e , , -4

. .g N * ,e W b j' 9 -

s'.~

4 i

M 's 9y 4

9 *#*

1 1

1 l

l 1

j j

l l '

t  ;

l

~. .

4 I

. - . - g .s :

l .- -'

., .  ; s.:-

l

,;. 4. j. awe

. -' ~ , y,sU ..._'.

' Ay . ... R , W ~

i '. . . . . , . .

..3.., .

' (,;I I

1;;pw " ' l

-- ' s I

. >. . . N; ; .- y . s s -,.

a ?"n*,:,**

f'.- ff v'<; , 'l'; *

~' ~ - - -

,;,* ~~

. *.14 v- C .'. *. ,

I

<u.f....Q . . ll;i.fej

k. ~, yd 5 % .

'Ng*;W A 4

W gg+r

~

. ,s . --

~

y ".. , , ,

.. .p- I}Q. 4:-

,e 94 5 M

)

s i

"' .' . . .$ - . .'?,$

j{;%, .. . . .v ... f'*T~. '&

g 58.'1%,$l?TW:$:.5" ~?* Y$$-l

' W . * .~ g

' % :y. ;yt -  ; '1 r.

.r.y *

• ~- *

• J:p -

- .. ~. ,.4 l-Q&..

?'.,"." -

.,$n.G.

' f:.c-s . .. -

. sr.

.".*, .,w..,EQ.e,s

$se%f....,. b,.~.

.g.

s .s re - .. .

.. .- ,.: 4. . -

'; Y:;Q,y

'tq .+h  %' d;a.yjff.hi,~'yfqg.  ;,p, 4. ;,s..

~4 ; . : . .,. ~'_ . . - ..

, ...v - >- :

rng, . /.:a o.:7 r

-~-

..:~.

.~ .y. . .- -

w..-

. ~.; ..< .T .

.r.. .

? -

. s. - ~ . . ,,

,' -- ' . ' ' ' ' . * ,..g,,'*' .

I

'-t,  ; %'j

+

. .. . . .  %* %e.W fs pn

.:' ~~~.. . w.e.-Q. N t -

%. '* .** . .- ~ , %

?.* . . . . '.* r.-.

. c . . .. s

=**s. <

s. .o *t ; p " -

, .4 -

r

-c,.'- *'

, , , " *e*

. 'T '$.:b

.'~..O .. . . .z~

. . *. i.s

. . ~-

! -9* N,*,* - .4 .

.I

, . ' . . . ', [ r * '*" (* *b. h8 ~~ $

si

=r. w. .,.. ~ .s. g ', y4 j, w .* $.

N.' _r*

. ' .\ u v .ar.

= , . v. N % .**

• ' , .{ ' *'*.'

. i; g. . * '***4. . t+. *;.'4.is . 'p y(

L '.y,C. .

. ~ . . 'N. Y's ur.. n? ,f. r =M.

~

..s s .

.-m:.m. g % 'gq.,E,r. m., ; .

. t y 9...'"r..'

a. , % . I ', ,

. s .:..E .gOf r. *,'. Rm.s . ,4. * '

' , ' <r -

. f ,': 4.iA - . '; s' .'

• • ,' 0. .r* f h p

I O

em i

S

~, h

) j g

5 . +'

• ~p

. g. > J. 2r 4

.6+

w y

N '

, ' ' ' , n .. 9  ;.

$cg _., ,

y ;t-? .7 s= .

~

NhN?Tyl'. ,

- {*f,,'

" ' ?.

~-- .

1

--,,-.-,-.------.,-,--.-.,-7w..--,-,-- - - , , - , - - - - - - , - .m ,,-.,---, -- -.

4 k_' O 1< t'.

I. e>

l, I

l I

l l

\

ATTACHMENT III l

l l

l 1.

I