ML20215A498
| ML20215A498 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/01/1986 |
| From: | Cilimberg R, Jocelyn Craig NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215A484 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900081 NUDOCS 8612110304 | |
| Download: ML20215A498 (18) | |
Text
. ,
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION INSPECTION DATE: 10/27-30/86 ON-SITE HOURS: 54 N0.: 99900081/86-01 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Exxon Nuclear Company Nuclear Fuels Department ATTN: Mr. C. J. Volmer, OA Manager 2101 Horn Rapids Road Richland, Washington 99352 ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: Mr. C. J. Volmer, CA Manager TELEPHONE NUMBER: (509) 375-8257 NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY: Nuclear fuel assembly supplier for Westinghouse, General Electric, and Combustion Engineering designed reactors.
b n D.
ASSIGNED INSPECTOR: An#4 g 5 Date R. L. Ciliif.bergT Specialpojects Inspection Section (SPIS)
OTHER INSPECTOR (S . C. . Abbate, SPIS W. S ier, Consu tant APPROVED BY-4 )hn W. Craig, Chief, S I
, Vendor Program Branch
/ 8[
Date INSPECTION BASES AND SCOPE:
A. BASES: 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and 10 CFR 21.
B. SCOPE: Review fabrication, testing, and computer code (CC) design activities, follow-up on previous inspection findings and fuel problems reported at St. Lucie Unit 1, Yankee Rowe, and Big Rock Point.
PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY: PWR facilities with fuel supplied by Exxon Nuclear Company (ENC).
eg21gggg;gggg 99900381
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 2 of 12 A. VIOLATIONS:
None.
B. NONCONFORMANCES:
- 1. Contrary to Section 3.0 " Design Control," of the Exxon Nuclear Company, Incorporated Quality Assurance Program Topical Report for Nuclear Fuel Design and Fabrication, XN-NF-1A, Revision 7, dated January,1985, and Section 1.2.12 of Quality Assurance (QA) Procedure XN-NF P00,002, the verification calculations for the addition of the Moody critical flow model in the RELAP5/M002 computer code (version U0CT85) did not adequately test the imple-mentation of the new modelling with the theoretical basis.
(86-01-01)
- 2. Contrary to Section 9, " Control of Special Processes" of XN-NF-1A, Revision 7, an operator used an unapproved procedure to operate the x-ray machine while performing fluoroscopy on fuel rods in the manual mode. (86-01-02)
- 3. Contrary to Section 9 of XN-NF-1A, Revision 7, an operator used an unapproved coordinates chart to read the values on a current ultrasonic testing (UT) trace being used for the zero settings on the Gould ES 1000 recorder. (86-01-03)
C. UNRESOLVED ITEMS:
None.
D. STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS:
- 1. (Closed) Nonconformance (85-01-01)
Contrary to Section 2.2 of ENC QA Procedure QAP No. 2, Licensing and Safety Engineering per sonnel, engaged in performing safety-related ccmputer code calculations, are not formally indoctrinated and trained into the vari)us fuel reload computer programs used by ENC.
ENC has prepared a package of documents which contains the basic reouirements for computer code control Software Development Records (SDR), calculation files, and nuclear safety hazard reporting. The documents are distributed to all new employees
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FilELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 3 of 12 and have been distributed to all current employees involved in safety-related analyses in the Licensing and Safety Engineering (L&SE) organization. In addition, ENC initiated a training program for L&SE personnel that addresses various aspects of PWR and BWR analyses including the methodology of the computer codes used in reload analyses. The training program was initiated during November 1985 and has continued on a schedule of approximately one per week. ENC also committed to maintain this program on an ongoing basis such that new employees will enter the curre.nt program schedule. This item is considered closed.
- 2. (Closed) Nonconformance (85-02-02)
' Contrary to Section 3.6 of ENC Topical Report XN-NF-608, Revision 5,
" Procedure for Control and Administration of Computer Codes for Engineering Design Calculations,"
- a. ENC failed tn comply with the reporting requirements which states that written notice of code errors shall be submitted to the Manager, Fuel Engineering and Technical Services (FE&TS) from the cognizant Section Manager for appropriate action.
- b. In order to prevent further use, ENC users of ECCS computer code T00DEE-2 were not formally notified of the existence of a coding error, found on St. Lucie Unit 1, soon after its discovery by ENC.
- c. A review of the SDR for T000EE-2 failed to produce written notices pertaining to previously reported code errors.
ENC has transmitted letter WVK:029:85 to all L&SE personnel which describes the T000EE-2 computer code error. The Manager of FE&TS has issued letter GLR:86:221 to all section managers reaffirming the requirement of ENC procedure XN-NF-608, Revision 6, to provide written notice of computer code errors to the Manager of FE&TS. A letter has been sent to every member of the PWR analysis group which formally notifies them of the T000EE-2 coding error and the discontinued use of augmentation heat transfer factors. Wri tten notices of the T000EE-2 coding error have been entered in the SOR.
This item is considered closed.
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 4 of 12
- 3. (Closed) Nonconformance 85-01-03)
Contrary to 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion III, and ENC Quality Assurance Procedure XN-NF-P00-002, Section 3.3.2, ENC's document-ation and independent review of analyses performed were deficient in the following areas:
- a. Adequate documentation such as a calculation notebook or other fom of design analysis documentation was not main-tained concerning the safety-related analysis described in the ENC Topical Report XN-NF-82-20, Supplement 4 This topical report describes a modification to the ENC ECCS methodology and includes calculations performed to verify changes implemented in the T00DEE-2 computer code.
- b. The independent review of the T00DEE-2 computer code input data for the St. Lucie Unit 1 ECCS Analysis (E7380-963-D) was not adequately documented.
ENC has documented and completed an independent review of the analysis described in XN-NF-82-20, Supplement 4. This analysis is identified as E-T210-887, dated February, 1986. ENC has completed an independent review of the input parameters used with the T00DEE-2 code in analysis 7757-963-1 which supersedes analysis E7380-963-D. Additionally, the review of 7757-963-1 included the input of earlier data associated with E7380-963-D and the documentation is complete. This item is considered closed.
- 4. (Closed) Nanconformance (85-01-04)
Contrary to ENC Quality Assurance Topical Report XN-NF-608, Revision 5, Section 1.2.7, the verification and qualification calculations performed for the UJUL84 version of the T00DEE-2 i computer code were not included in the SDR and were also not retrievable.
l ENC has updated the T00DEE-2 SDR with documentation of the verification and qualification calculations that were performed for the UJUL84 code version. Additionally, XN-NF-874, " Procedure for Computer Code Development and Documentation" was issued with a checklist that identifies the SDR content and requires review of the SDR and signature of the code developer's manager. This item is considered closed.
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 5 of 12
- 5. (Closed) Nonconformance (85-01-05)
Contrary to Criterion V of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B and Section 6.0 of ENC Analytical Procedure, " Spectrochemical Determination of Impurities in Uranium," Revision 7, dated November 28, 1983, ENC laboratory technicians, responsible for oxidizing uranium, failed to raise samples to a 900 C state for a minimum period of one hour (one minute vs. one hour), as required by procedure.
ENC issued P69269, " Spectrochemical Determination of Impur'ities in Uranium," Revision 8, dated September 3,1985, which now requires heating samples to 900 C with no nolding time. ENC has performed tests which indicate that a one hour holding time is not necessary to ensure complete oxidt tion of the sample. This item is considered closed.
- 6. (Closed) Nonconformance (85-01-06)
Contrary to Section 7.0 of ENC Analytical Procedure, " Calibration of the Quantometer," Revision 4, dated November 28, 1983, ENC failed to formally approve detection limits and calibration curves prior to placing equipment in service.
The NRC inspectors determined that P69268, " Calibration of the Quantometer," Revision 5, dated September 3,1985, was issued to include an approval form and changed the approver from Spectroscopist to Chemist or Laboratory Manager. The required apprcvals have been documented. This item is considered closed.
- 7. (Closed) Nonconformance (84-01-03)
The Software Development records for the REFLEX and T00DEE-2 computer codes were incomplete with regard to identification of purpose, preparer, and independent review.
The SDR for T00DEE-2 has been updated to conform to the require-ments of Section 1.2.7 " Software Development Record." However, during this inspection, ENC made a commitment to update the SDR's for REFLEX and other safety-related codes. This item will be reviewed during a future inspection.
The SDR for T00DEE-2 and REFLEX have been updated with the require-ments of Sation 1.2.7 "Sof tware Development Record." This item is considered closed.
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 6 of 12
- 8. (0 pen) Nonconformance (84-02-01)
No requirements concerning necessary action to report significant errors in Structural Dynamic / Heat Transfer computer codes such as NASTRAN or ANSYS have been established by ENC.
ENC has requested error reports for NASTRAN and ANSYS from UCCEL, an ENC computer services supplier. An incomplete set of error reports from the past several years has been received for ANSYS.
In addition, ENC has established a Special Code Coordinator to review and evaluate the effects of these error reports on previous safety-related analyses. However, none of the error reports received to date were determined to be applicable for evaluation on previous analyses. This item will be reviewed during a future inspection.
ENC is receiving computer code error reports for NASTRAN from the Macreal-Schwendler Corporation and from UCCEL. Additionally, a log has been maintained which contains a review of the applicability of the errors reported on ENC safety-related analyses. The error reports for the ANSYS code are being documented, but the written evaluation of the applicability of the code errors on the ENC analyses is incomplete. This item will be reviewed during a future inspection.
E. INSPECTION FINDINGS AND OTHER COMMENTS:
- 1. Entrance and Exit Meetings Exxon managerent representatives were informed of the scope of the inspection caring the entrance meeting. The inspection findings and observations were summarized during the exit meeting on October 30, 1986.
- 2. Computer Codes The NRC inspectors reviewed safety-related analyses and SDR for computer codes. The results of this review are summarized below.
- a. Computer Code Development and Documentation The review of XN-NF-874, " Computer Code Development and Documentation," Revision 0, dated February 1986, determined that the procedure contains the SDR content, reviews, and approvals needed for computer code development. The forms
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 7 of 12 and checklists that are required for an SDR are also in XN-NF-874. This procedure will be used in describing the development of new computer codes and the implementation of modifications to existing codes. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- b. Computerized Code Development System ENC has developed a new Computerized Code Development. System (CCDS) that is currently being used to provide automation to maintain developmental and production code versions, code modifications, and test problem data. The CCDS maintains a log of all activities in the code evolution and controls the development of new codes. ENC is converting existing codes to be compatible with the CCDS. The CCDS should provide for an improved control of code development and allow for retrieval of previous code versions while preserving the history of code modifications. The new system provides for the traceability of code changes in response to the discovery of errors or other problems. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- c. RELAP5/ MOD 2 The NRC inspectors reviewed nine versions of the development of the RELAPS/ MOD 2 computer code. ENC received RELAPS/ MOD 2 from the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) and imple-mented the INEL version in July 1985. Subsequent versions were implemented by ENC using the CCDS and have followed XN-NF-874. The code methodology is intended for use in small break loss of coolant accident analyses and has been submitted for NRR review. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
I
- d. The Moody Model l During the review of the RELAP5/M002 version designated as 00CT85, the NRC inspectors noted that the implementation of the Moody critical flow model was not adequately verified. The verification calculations included only the case of all steam flow and showed that the code calculation agreed with a theoretical solution. The calculation for that part of the Moody model which includes two phase flow conditions I
l
9 ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE R of 12 important for small break calculations was not verified.
The NRC inspectors determined that all options within the new modelling are required to be verified.
Nonconformance 86-01-01 was identified in this area,
- e. UJUN86 The NRC inspectors reviewed the calculation notebooks associated with four qualification calculations performed for RELAP5/ MOD 2.
Each notebook included a description of the analysis and a detailed independent review. However, all calculations were not performed with the latest version of the code identified as UJUN86. A detailed review was made of the calculation results which determined that the analyses were either performed with FORTRAN coding equivalent to the latest RELAPS version or the accident analyses code modification was not pertinent to the calculation. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- f. RELAPS Upgrades ENC has established a contract with INEL for ENC participation in the RELAP5 Newsletter Service. This was initiated in order to obtain timely access to INEL RELAPS upgrades that enhance the code or correct reported errors. ENC has received the news-letters and performed informal reviews. The NRC inspectors observed that ENC does not have a system to document the review
) of the newsletters with emphasis on review of error reports l prior to performing licensing calculations with RELAP5/M002.
No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- g. H.B. Robinson - COLAPS The NRC inspectors reviewed the calculation notebooks associated with the XCOBRA code for the steamline break analysis for the H. B. Robinson nuclear plant. The calculation notebooks were complete and indicated that an independent review had been per-formed. However, the data analysis used the COLAPS preprocessor code to prepare input parameters for the XCOBRA code. The H. B.
Robinson analysis was verified under a version of XN-NF-608 which did not require COLAPS to be reviewed in detail. The procedures described in the current version of XN-NF-608, Revision 6 define l COLAPS as a " Peripheral Code" which requires a more detailed
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTPENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 9 of 12 review by ENC. The review of Peripheral Codes will be included in future NRC inspections. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- 3. Nondestructive Testing (NDT)
The NRC inspectors reviewed ENC procedure P66,789, " Radiographic Precedure for Through Rod X-Ray," Revision 0, dated June 28, 1985 and ENC procedure P66,785, " Radiographic Procedure for Fix.ed X-Ray Unit," Revision 0, dated June 25, 1985. The operators followed the steps of both procedures until reaching section 4 of P66,789 which requires fluoroscopy of the pellet stack in the manual mode.
The NRC inspectors observed the operator performing operating steps in the manual mode which were contained in a document with a blue cover dated December 7, 1984. The document exhibited the title
" Draft Operations Manual" and was not referenced in procedure P66,789. The use of this unapproved procedure was brought to the attention of ENC management. Nonconformance 86-01-02 was identified in this area.
The NRC inspectors reviewed two ENC procedures for UT of zircaloy tubing in accordance with ENC specification XN-NF-535055, "71rcaloy Tubing for Fuel Rod Cladding," Revision 0, dated April 30, 1986.
The ENC procedures are P69023, " Fuel Cladding Ultrasonic Test Stations," Revision 19, dated April 29, 1983, and P69027, "3D Gage,"
Revision 11, dated August 26, 1985. The operator followed the steps of both procedures during the UT of 40 tubes from ENC Lots 0000-2000-26027 and 26028. Section 9.6 of P69027 requires that a current trace or graph be made of tubing standards to provide values to be used for the zero settings on the Gould ES 1000 recorder. The NRC inspector observed the operator using a coordinates chart to improve the readability of the values exhibited by the current trace. The coordinates chart was not a part of procedure P69027 and was not referenced by any approved procedure. The use of this unapproved chart was brought to the attention of ENC management. Nonconformance 86-01-03 was identified in this area.
- 4. Fuel Rod Manufacture The NRC inspectors reviewed the ENC Manufacturing Order / Follower for fuel rods. The follower contains each step performed during the manufacturing process, the operation number, work center, and l a place for operator signature and date. The follower also lists the acceptance criteria for weld overhang, Total Indicator Reading (TIR) and weight, and has an area where lot and identification numbers are recorded for traceability.
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 10 of 12 The NRC inspectors observed each step in the fuel rod manufacturing process to assure the rods were being manufactured according to written procedures by qualified operators. The following manufac-turing steps and procedures were reviewed: P66,417, " Tube Cleaning,"
Revision 12, dated December 26,1984; P66,770, "K-Lower End Weld,"
Revision 0, dated May 14, 1985; Process Qualification XN-NF-PQ-454,
" Jet Pump Lower End Closure Weld for .486 inch Nominal Clad OD (K-Welder)," Revision 4, dated May 30, 1986; P66,557, "Line 1 and Line 2 Rod Loading Stations," Revision 6, dated May 9, 1986; Process Qualification XN-NF-PQ-397, "BWR Jet Pump Upper End Rod Weld (.486 inch Clad OD) H and J," Revision 6, dated May 13, 1986; P66,787,
" Helium Leak Check, Horizontal Test Station," Revision 7, dated October 7,1985; P66,788, " Operating Instructions for Model II Rod Scanner," Revision 1, dated July 22, 1986; P66,433, " Final Etching U02 Rods," Revision 17, dated May 9, 1986; P66,529, "Autoclaving Rods and Components," Revision 14, dated June 18, 1986; and Quality Control (QC) Standard XN-NF-P68,537 " Rod Inspection," Revision 11, dated May 1, 1986.
The operators are qualified to work at a number of stations and the NRC inspectors observed several different cperators at each work station. The operators were knowledgeable of the procedures being used and followed the procedures. No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
- 5. Fuel Incidents at Reactor Sites The NRC inspectors reviewed selected information concerning fuel incidents which have occurred at reactor sites which may have been caused by steps in the manufacturing process at ENC. Information was obtained during meetings with site personnel and by review of ENC documents. The results are listed below.
- a. Failed Rods at Big Rock Point Between December 1983 and May 1984, it was determined that 26 rods in three fuel assemblies had failed and 84 rods in four fuel assemblies exhibited outer diameter (0.D.) surface corrosion. ENC examined the areas which could have caused the failures and corrosion. These areas included the Quality Control records and shop travelers for each defective rod, and reactor events which occurred during the fuel cycle which could have affected the fuel. As a result of these investigations, ENC issued a report, XN-NF-85-40(P), " Findings on Big Rock
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 11 of 12 Point Reload H-2 Fuel Failures," in May 1985, which discussed the findings. ENC discovered that all of the defective rods contained the same lot of cladding / tubing supplied to ENC by a West German vendor who is now out of business. ENC was unable to determine the exact cause of failure, but concluded that the failures probably resulted from high corrosion suscepti-bility of some of the cladding in the lot, outside contamination during manufacturing, and changes in reactor chemistry during the fuel cycle.
- b. Failed Rods at St. Lucie Unit 1 In November 1985, six failed and two damaged rods were identi-fied in four fuel assemblies. The failures and damage were a result of fretting caused by debris in the reactor or spacer springs, and secondary hydriding, as described in the ENC report, XN-NF-86-29 (P), Revision 1, dated April 1986 "St. Lucie Unit 1 Fuel Repair, Inspection and Evaluation."
As a result of the ENC evaluation, several manufacturing corrective action measures have been implemented at ENC to decrease the possibility of recurrence. These are: (1) increased inspection of assemblies for loose rods which could fret, (2) a new spring design to decrease fretting, (3) more training of site personnel on handling fuel assemblies, (4) a new bottom end cap design, and (5) new top and bottom spacer designs. Another area being examined by ENC to further decrease fretting is a debris resistant tie plate.
- c. Failed Pin in Yankee Rowe Assembly In December 1985, a failure of one rod was identified at the Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Station. The NRC inspectors were informed by ENC staff that the failure consisted of one rod, and the fuel was in its second of two cycles, therefore no investigation was performed to determine the cause of the single failure.
- 6. Fuel Assembly Operations The NRC inspectors observed the fuel assembly process for manufactur-ing order 7681KEW001, Revision 2, dated October 14, 1986, being produced for the Kewaunee nuclear plant. Some of the steps perforred l
l
ORGANIZATION: EXXON NUCLEAR COMPANY NUCLEAR FUELS DEPARTMENT RICHLAND, WASHINGTON REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900081/86-01 RESULTS: PAGE 12 of 12 for receipt and inspection of spacer components, assembly and welding of spacers, skeleton fabrication, insertion of fuel rods in the skeleton, and final inspection of the fuel assembly were observed.
Activities were performed utilizing the following documents: Drawing XN-303,908, " Spacer Inspection," Revision 4, dated July 7,1986, Drawing XN-305,763, " Spacer Assembly," Revision 1, dated August 7, 1986, P66775, " Spacer Assembly, Welding and Inspection," Revision 2, dated June 18, 1986, P66,778 " Generic Cage Assembly," Revision 0, dated July 24, 1985, P66779, " Guide Tube Insertion - Skeleton Assembly," Revision D, dated June 5, 1985, P66780, " Guide Tube Flaring - Skeleton Assembly," Revision 0, dated June 5, 1985, P69602, "PWR Bundle Rod-to-Rod Inspaction," Revision 6, dated August 15, 1985, and P69049, " Measuring PWR Assembly Envelope and Perpendicularity," Revision 1, dated June 7, 1984 The steps of the written procedurcs were properly followed and the required documentation was completed as specified.
No items of nonconformance or unresolved items were identified.
F. PERSONS CONTACTED:
R. Andress D. Kolesar S. Atkins D. Lewis' ,
D. Atkisson J. Manus
- G. Busselman A. Mercado H. Chow *W. Nechodom D. Cooper *D. ?erry
- R. Copeland A. Price C. Davis M. Prince R. Delpozo *G. Ritter K. Ford K. Sickle C. Franklin B. Stavig B. Fryer M. Stricker R. Hancock J. Tandy
- N. Harbinson A. Tarantino R. Hill C. Thoren
- J. Holm *M. Valentine S. Hoyem *C. Volmer G. Judson D. Westover R. Kantonen *H. Williamson
- W. Yale
- Attended exit meeting.
i i i ! :
\ < ' -
! ! l .
! I i i :
i ;
s co s o i
- !4-14 i
Q D A i , . .
.+
i i o i .
{l w q)? .
e--
'g:4 sg'i I
0- 11 ' i i l , ~
R *4 o
i
- i Ri i i i
- e t j l
Q u t
- w e w
.d' i..
s x!!
g ., ,! .
5tN 'g p- d! N" u" ge ik- W 'i ldI N % %)$ $l %
Cd 4Q'M i N w "2 Qg y v
7 d -
i ds .u J aM e f$a \w>
! [tC:i s x, e d g sls . Ye- Iu 4', t
+
r:: 4N e ' Q NRs d
%s 4 '
L Qy1 3 C ~
9 Y 0 3 T
-i v1 d! 9 s R
$
- ql \q 3 9
7- '
4 w s v i qe ei 3 4 7, %* s i 2
) %t4 Q; I
gi Y
% ~g i d1M
. g w!c +2 v
. i t' i o g '~ E! -. ;
g, m y '
m !
1 m, .P e s
4 ,-
wT:
E u ,io.t x't eu R
's
's h N
q -d, w%j'-s 4, h, in g a
- 7 nr vT U U-y i A N
$t
.e e a w Y sa. 3 v ~d' i
w r
d u A iemei .N!R s.
- s. .
g! .Ts. e mi t' .
m u o v t w la *-
2 2 s .t' y, 't w u s. r mt s 2, 3 e c
.- u .i : %
8 N ,
gt go ( ed f et r3-; 9 CJ %v ,
1
,m t& w u ,ww
- g. -o .g m
! '9 it 'T % ' $w $ !4 '5L , $. y.4 2: 5
! I
'is ' i l $ ' S p'S I'$ $'3!'f4 $J'$ '?J.S E li!
y!
t i1 N
w 5 ol i l st b Q T f d re ol OI ni %i 'si b o! .
. 5 !
e -
a, u
- n
- e- o > w A-1 ,
I g 2 m x n % = %s, % ~ N e* ,
M
-- %. A c s9 '3 tu
- c. o- a-l a cJ m v a ca s, ..eg= -
t -
2
.e 2ue:-
o PI uj l 1 ) _ wee i a a - l -
F o tu, C- U c. O oi o, 0!
e ,2 1 p aj p!cu ng:=u c% ,.a 2d cz C4 q! cz ,N:
ew 28 Wj 1 cd c_ e c._ cu cd .. cu tt e.2 =~ . m j Uo_. 3 G2 0 :.tr c'
. 'o b ,
m e: >cv.m<== ,
W, d N & p t '4 c! C,-T ; ,em "v hs D '
dl m! Y
4 -
/ N ._
g .
o . l 7i_ .
v
/ _ l _ _
M_ 4 6 - .
o 2 _
/ _. _
C _
/
9 -
, d A W/ .
9 [S_: ,O 6
_ dc ln a
a, e. s_
t_ _d k 0, . _
.a d _. -
4g' 2- _ - .
E 5
v,_ y _ 5 bo /
s
, t s E Ylf n i .
wtgG IA u
h y _ _ .
oRp cn i.
s
[t r _ .
A_ku s
J d_ _ -
e
{r o
(vi
/
O A
/ e
~ -
1 1
s v _ o IA -
_ ; . k _. _
T u lFe __. _ .
c w .
I n _
lA ey _
M.
A- b'T E t
8 0
l l li lec v, D E / 5 r e ab e d b , T- O us u N e e l . l E bt . n s . i T l A n t f A M I T 4 0_ d_ n e _
.. Nl A _ . .
f _Ir /s_ R . E l-A ._ l-i W A W T S G f i
% s $nc J, P, T
S L D N nJf _ G Y o _ _ E lt e _ _ A i C , a . _ R t
)t Q t; n a
d u a c ) - u _. T n, k5 1 . e /s F _ _ _ o
$_DR D _
R ___
$ 4 b u /G c E $ _ _.
T , 9 _ . r ~ l _
)$ lH
._ t
/'
- n I _
D c.
% Y'. ._.
._ t V.
_-~ E b 2 2 _ n I I O R - _ _ _ _ . _ r t' . R r s E u e 3 . B $ _ - M s b A L~ i f y5 N 6 7 l e Nv _
.r S i .
n
%nhNe m_2 $
/
b s 1 h _. _ i iCI 1 L
/ x - Y o n2At t s c, tCJt t eu l C 7 _
c e5 7 O3 s
'c
. o R _ .
_ 6 CAos
& c o G .
_ n ec C 1 ( T O O b W E Q W r i rTo# sI PI\ c.
$ P _
C R _
.o tS( Qq
- E E , P T G P T) _.
P P _ _. c e. - - S o c " . _
> t ri t ti n J
t I S 7 h. J1 7 d1 I 0 i s 's tAe vT nl
- Od e g
1 2 _ _ i'l
l ! i l T i ; .- . , - 4 ' k l i l , i C _ l i e i i a
' , ] s C C'? c v '
, g i a fd n o d ~
o i ! L E fj i 4 ! 3 "8{- q dj 'l
$ I e 6-4 +
!T id QJ m d !
i
.S 7
5
" q j ).-
gnw q $
~
%e i
,p ~L '
i i l ece -, m i t i
- 1 ~3a EEI bl t l-lY <5 _
;e !dD k4 1 3 e "g" s]e d
Jl Y Y +( g . 4 t o E. 1 7
- 1 I x s L v.b' LL n ;
; s.
e
- 4 e8 N
f 1i h W '2 r W q c
*O 3 l
M D cJ .2 b S { n '%/ gj 4j9 $ C o a g 2 p. . y m r 5 C a w c;. 3 sw c o i 2, G ' -e, Ia Zip w &
- m. ~d c i
9 .,
'I h! c ,
j +h hy h Iu -esit b[ 7l s e.! m $ d i,. x t - d ,Q 3 ; u Y. ds a C T= 2 4.. ' i -
.d
" e J C, g m L g. g 5; .
e - - 1 .a w 2 w c e _d c e e i;7 F 0
- s ci
; ys 3w'0 e- i (4 gc -avtu
' i g - '
I o g ;+ C
~ ,y>c _
a l Th D. ] y d _ ' -F o . r
~
c -. d. a n v i nj Y -4
@S.Y3t?L 10 \ $
\ Uab a $
u (( e ~. b e- $ I V v l E M. @ M
- s y3 .m. M 3 h E !i P
C r 7 4
~ g
. ~p -- ~
w M N v., g Q y a l
.1 g -
r i{t 4' Ot r m " n y's ? 8 V) -.W s_,
- xr- r:
(' -
-~+
2
~i D s, y? .
N O w - J l'l ei s1 \ s v s $ t , C 'z -S 1IC II M C bl d Cl SI' O! $. ! j u M c c t 'C c 'y e c d0&V 8 hh b % k Y 14 53 Ak j' 2.L I
! 1 d '$ S w Ed<
S $ n.$ mIS3cac~% 5$N xn c., a c., a m$ .. e m : o G-, 2 .c 2 u .o
.. e2 :
l I CgG C cje.ue 5aq-:o 2 S o 4l 0._ . C O Ps C C C C ego 2e m w a.-' ! l a.L S Gu cJ l Cd Cd CD, bu\ b y8 : o ; 0 :. c c-dW ct
. c1 2.' 6, Cog-O Co> i @ m~ y i oo r . s,3..;_;'
2 a s i 1 t : . v H@ , 7e2 j g . jl ! I jj , C; j j _4 si*2"': t --
= <w
b;; , I l ;C i
-I l
- l
~
I . I
! ! : 1 t
i w - u i i : . i ( [ ' h y l l N ! , c ,- 7 , , . i i i
+ f i
c 1 ,2 a l c - , c I ! e
- j ,
q~ C ' , 1 b Y l I
- l l
,d : l i [ ~O w v :
' i I' i l
*dT [J e~e c
, < i ' i.
gw I b
; i l !
y af W i ( - n l l w k i l g &@ 9 i ! i I I i i e 8 aw 0kg i t oh f_1 ' L {Mr }g ' ! l ! I i 9 N l l
, .: c 5
,cr -
( Q'C ? 9 < l r
- -: e e .
j i j b Y A NO C d! d I n ch y- s S-i l 2 - m 0 1/3 Yi -
'> j i #
W \ 7 b : i
< 2 !'
Q. kj , i j
!,- ) i,
. - a ,. _ . _
% I C k l ! l 1 e #
4 2l w O g) i j i i ! e - T - i 2 Q<
.r ou 0
0' - t I l y . t \J C : D : I l 3 % < R L 4 l o ,
\
c ~D
~
c ' "d !
< u t
o ' t _ 7 ! l O Nb d [b l l l }
! l 5 !
w e w 4i c
~ a i
l I i, i. e m es
- i t.c i !
l fii a % % f , l. t I d OD I G T l , I, i !
'l ilI
. 9 -
j d k I C C \ l l s l l 'l ,- u
--y s-e b. Lf C r ' h I4 4
,3 I g
( , I 2 Y 0 2# 1
'4 yd Iy 2,4 7 .e l ;
i i, c ;,,, 32 7~ gen _, , i ge i 4 x 6' dd Xh $d) esso:
* -=1 c ,d 2uc25 g)
~
S II$U e, i E g
'I l .u wc
- q. cq$
u w l 7 I ie - e c. e e gy c oo ey e ; , w 7 . : cmc: 0 "2 V 34 pr i i j
" $ $ ( (l 1 ; ,
j 5bNN
4
) t A 4 1 4 4 4 t e a =k 4 1 f k 4 5 - 4" ,
3
't k h
.p
'A ..
o 4t g x 4 6 ., g Sw L. ** %
,. . I ' %, .:
as, g %g e x yc , 4 a *
-g ad < 4 ,
.y 5
'b W Y T k a h sa- h s b N - * .x e4 9 o r 8 $ e 1 ( e4t 4 e3 c. s 4 j
=
4i2 s- d ,)g 24r ,= a
~
!=
J w ' i-U 1 4 (, Ov r d w gR i
'O ; E 'i 4l 4 4. 54 1 4 *' a l
- u L y g g d
- t. i*t y e h4T Q
- C ($-
e a 4 y i N !I 43'd M .N 3 I E 3 H I 4 I 5 f D
- 4
- J M du 4 4 .
w x
'$ G h
9
'4
.1
- l-2 a
b .j lW w I
;ev>~u 8 ]t E g -
2 f4
.k. C 4 $ M' 2 y w --n &
Z d i J *. .
**- I E a m a
- lUj h.l w 'E $
w g t; w,z g D Y: y
~
0
$, b Y 5 M O t
I e M u g r h u 3 g i e B E e - - . . .. O h ik h g E,g 1g o -a
; '4 o y e o o 92 o o e o o o o % o e
':r-b i 8
ei Y . t u ; @ e . - >
. ae a t
.. - . m
- .: F -
M.
- e A G
a w 5 3 , o & E e , W v e t i i e T 4 E k 7 > h *h M T m W o gwa= 3 b w == V d V U
'# -- O asks ' "
5 wh kv d o e N g g " t 4 g 9 4 S
.9 s * . "i e"ii l
C .. rs " - c a - 3 v e e 8 sd ,
=
mm .
- NW z U e
.$r=E=
r m foA
- vi
$g e # a m - w o e-- % u.- a e d e r I
Ji Vbl 30*d LPSC-E8C(9TS) # tl O I I V H H I 3 tI O D - 8 V 7 7 . I V__ tl fl _ 3A__V H- ,_. M O___,_ O H 8 CI:0T 98 50 ^ot!
3 l ' f. i k' . v h , k W d E t
'N 3 WI 4
- s g
; h w ,
~
J 5 j e
$ y g J' . }
2 J r 4 m 4
.. 8 7 7 i* e L
" a 8 h %a
.x $
j5 d E g s 52
= w sm 3* -
1 w b a r 5
=
y $
>> m a j e s 3 gs > i o a ~ m ~2 1 _ _ ==
W E w.i 2 3 e a c c e e 4 e 4 D m c = ,,,,i l
'$ $ ) d 3 2 4 I I -
i o is i lc {_g i 3 I 8 i 3 . E a- % W W e .,. - H t e a e u e E 7u 'e & g a w .'. - P.
- g a 8 i e ? a * .
I ~ = 3 Qwa
% s M S 8 >
4 [ e
- c 3 Eed$$$
5 scO15 gg 8 2%84E e oms ==
.. wg a a y e
w w b$ N 5b S b
$ e y g 5 o.
r demos
$5mg m
$ d e w
, .c 2 A
N
}/)Jdl 10*d Lp5Z-78C(9IS) # NOWN N-M#
. - _ _ _ _ - _ - - .. . ._. - __ - - _ _ _ .}}