(creck or updates EARTHAND Geophysical Research Letters’ & RESEARCH LETT! Drift of Earth's Pole Confirms Groundwater Depletion as a HO TORSOAGL ISSO Significant Contributor to Global Sea Level Rise 1993-2010 oni tuna Ki-Weon Seo!? ©, Dongryeo! Ryu? ©, Jooyoung Eom! ©, Taewhan Jeon? ©, JaeSeung Kim! ©, Tacispchesetedewes, _Kgokyoun Youn ©, Jani Chen™* ©, and Cark K. Wison™® © Seton ane rie ‘Department of Earth Science Bavcation, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, “Cente for Educational + Intsang moweteas dele Rescate, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Kore, "Deparment of Infasructure Engineering, The University ‘fet eaimated dof Far of Melbourne, Parkile, VIC, Avsalia, ‘Deparment of Ears Science Education, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, roaonal polars emalably ws Repwhlic of Korea, “Department of Land Surveying and Geo- informatics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, wiht Cina, ‘Research insite for Land and Space, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Chia, "Deparment of Geological Seine, Jtkson School of Geosciences, Univesity of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA, "Cente for Space Supporting Intrmation Research Uivenity of Texas at Astin, Austin, TX, USA Supporting infraion may eon io the lo version of tise Abstract Climate model estimates show significant groundwater depletion during the 20th century, consistent with global mean sea level (GMSL} budget analysis. However, prior tothe Argo float era, inthe early kiwi 2000's, there i litle information about steric sa level contributions to GMSL., making the role of groundwater seokineon au ake ‘depletion inthis period less certain, We show that a useful constraint is found in observed polar motion (PM), In the period 1993-2010, we find that predicted PM excitation trends estimated from various sources of surface iain: ‘mass loads and the estimated glacial isostatic adjustment agree very well withthe observed. Among many S20, K-W, Ry D, BJ eon, contributors to the PM excitation trend, groundwater storage changes are estimated tobe the second largest 1, Kin, 1S. Youn. Kea (4.36 erly) toward 64.16°E. Neglecting groundwater effects, the predicted trend differs significantly from. (@a23) rin of Earp canis creche lee esate the observed. PM observations may als provide a tool for studying historical continental scale water storage Scotia al aoe se vatiations. 19982010, Grophsea ead eer, 0, comaxcL10900 6 Plain Language Summary Melting of polar ice sheets and mountain glaciers has heen understood we a8 amain cause of ses lve ise associated with contemporary climate warming. I hasbeen proposed that an Recned? MAR 223 Jmportant anthropogenic contribution is sea level ise due to groundvater depletion resulting from irrigation. A ‘scpeg 9 MAY 203 climate model estimate forthe period 1993-2010 gives total groundvater depletion of 2,150 GTon, equivalent to global sea level rise of 624 mam. However, dzet observational evidence supporting this estimate has been Author Contes Jacking. In his tad, we show thatthe mode estimate of water redistribution fom aquifers othe oceans Conception Hen ‘woud esl in dit of Barth's rotational pole, about 78.48 cm foward 64.16°E, In combination with other Pane oS, ‘welhundestood sources of water redistribution, such as meting of polar ie sheets and mountain glaciers, good Kootioes You agreement with PM observations serves as an independent confirmation of the groundwater depletion model Formal ana Keon Seo estimate Funding soon: Kio So Invetgntion Ki: Woon Se, Methodology: K-¥eon Se, Dongs 1, Introduction Sea level rise is one of the most significant phenomena associated with the warming climate. Contemporary Sete hn eo sen eel rise has been monitored extensively by multiple observational techniques. For example inthe peviog rin: Cit Ws 2005-2015 seliteakimetry showed global mean sa level (GML) rising at arate of 35 mn, ata fom ose iormaton the Argo float newvork show that ocean density changes coteibued about 1.3 rar in steric GMSL rise OWCRP, 2018), The remainder (3.5-1.3 mm/yr = 2.2 muyt) is caused by ocean mass increase as confirmed by GRACE (Kim etal, 2019). GRACE also provides estimates of separate ocean mass contributions to GMSL rise (©2023. The Asis, th the Greenland ice sheet (GrlS), Antarctic ice sheet (AIS), mountain glaciers and terrestrial water me Sees ale are storage (TWS). The TWS contribution has in the past been mistakenly understood as a contributor to GMSL_ neuro Ci Comme. deteas (eager ct al, 2016) because variations in Earth enter of mass (gsacenter wee not properly accounted “License, which permits use and for in GRACE data processing (Jeon et al., 2018). With proper consideration of geocenter motion, TWS change Sesion nay mes, roviédsbe ig recognized asa significant contributor to GMSL rise, ~0.3 muir (Kim etal, 2019). TWS mainly includes ee teeta ot al reservoirs behind dams, soil moisture and groundwater. The inereasing number of ‘ipo we made dams and corresponding water storage increase have mitigated GMSL rise since the carly 20th century. Therefore, contributions from arti SEOET AL. Lot?a AGU Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 Wiking origina ra: K-Weon Seo Jat Seung Kis. Cen, Cla 8 ‘Wirlng reve & stn: Kien Seo, Dngrye! Ry, Tal Chen, Crk Wison ‘contributions of TWS to GMSI. rise inferred from GRACE data would be likely associated with declines in soil ‘moisture and/or groundwater. Prior tothe GRACE mission, limited in situ and remote sensing data indicated that increasing storage in artificial reservoirs behind dams was a source of GMSL decrease, while melting ice from AIS, GrlS and mountain glaciers contribated to GMSL rise (Chao et al., 2008). Groundwater depletion simulated by climate models has been. identified asa significant contributor to GMSL rise during the 20th century (Wada eta, 2010), bu the limited availability of in situ or remote sensing groundwater data has left observational evidence lacking. Alternatively, ‘the contribution of groundwater depletion to GMSL has been understood by examining time series of altimetrie observations of GMSL. For example, Dieng et al. (2017) compared the observed GMSL rate and an estimated ale obtained from all known contributions to GMSL including anthropogenic sources (dam and groundwater effects) with arate of 0.12 mnvyr for 1993-2015. Considering the effect of GMSI. decrease due to impounding, water behind dams, a positive GMSL contribution from anthropogenic effects is mostly associated with ground water depletion (Chao et al, 2008). Agreement between observed and estimated GMSL rates provides evidence of global groundwater depletion and GMSL rise. However, analysis ought to include steric sea level changes Which are highly uncertain prior to the Argo float era, beginning in 2005, when measurements for estimating steric effects to 2,000-m depth became available (Chen, Wilson, & Tepley, 2013). Dieng etal. (2017) showed. \at in the period 1993-2015, steric contsibutions to GMBSI. rie were in the ange 0.90-1.70 mm/yr, a range that exceeds the likely groundwater contsbution of ~0,30 munye ‘on water mass redistribution are provided by polar motion (PM), variations in the posi- tion of Earth’ rotational pole relative to the erusl, Groundwater and olher surface mass redistribution sources (including mountain glaciers, water stored in artificial reservoirs, AIS and GrlS mass changes, and soil mois ture) all affect PM. PM is driven by degree-2 order 1 spherical harmonic changes in Earth's gravity field as well as atmospheric winds and ocean currents, with no contribution from steric sea level change. Therefore, both GRACE satellite gravity data and PM provide constrains on the magnitude and geographical distribution of groundwater depletion, assuming that good estimates of other contibutors are available. Changes in Earths dynamic oblateness (degree 2- order 0 oJ.) might also help constrain water mass redistribution, but J is found lo be relatively insensitive to groundwater depletion (see Section 4). ‘This study reviews the budget of GMSL. in the period 1993-2010 using data and models for various hydrologic sources, We use associated PM predictions and observations to understand groundwater depletion estimates from ‘climate model. The study period was selected considering availabilty of both observations and mode! estimates. 2. Materials and Methods ‘Figures la and Ib show AIS and GelS contibutions to GMSL rise, respectively, Two different estimates are avail- able during the study period. Red lines are based on a mass flux method that incorporates radar remote sensing of ice discharge and climate models for surface mass balance (Mouginot etal, 2019; Rignot eta, 2019) Blue lines are from the Ice sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison Exercise (IMBIE) (The IMBIE Team, 2018, 2020) that ‘combines various remote seasing and regional climate models over both ice sheets. Flux estimates show larger AIS and Gr1S contributions to GMSL rise relative to IMBIE, Mountain glacier mass changes have ben estimated by glaciologic and geodctc observations since the carly 20th century, We show the three recent estimates of Xu ‘and Chao (2019) (blue), Marceion etal. (2015) (black), and Zemp eal. (2019) (ed) in Figure L. Contributions of three main TWS components to GMSI. change are shown in Figures d-If, These include vari- tions in soil moistue (including snow water, a minor component) (Rodel et s., 2004), impounded water behind dams (Lehner etal, 2011) and groundwater (Wada etal, 2010), respectively. The soil moisture contsibution shows. pronounced interannual variations but litle trend over tine. Dams are an important cause of GMSL decrease ‘The impounded water in artificial reservoirs was estimated from a global database including locations, maximum cities and construction completion times for 7,320 dams with cumulative capacity of about 7,000 km’ since 1900. Seepage effects have also been included here. The fist year of the seepage effcet after impoundment was assumed to be 5% ofthe initial maximum capacity and it grows slowly proportional to squate root of time (Chao es al, 2008). Groundwater depletion was derived using groundwater recharge and abstraction computed by the global hydrological model PCR-GLOBWE (Wada etal, 2010, 2011). Groundwater abstraction is based, ‘on a groundwater withdrawal and irrigated areas database around the year 2000. Groundwater abstraction ofthe SEOET AL. 20f7ASL . mney Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 saa benchmark year 2000 was extend 0 or periods sing nt groundva- ef ter demand estimates (considering surface freshwater availability) simulated eo by PCR-GLOBWB. Groundwater variations have a relatively large effect on i eee | iste Fac AIO Figure 1. Global mean sea level (GMSL.) contributions from the Antarctic Jee shoe (AIS) (a), Greeland ie shoet (GS) (), mountain laces (), soil ‘oistire (2), ical eservors behind dams () and groundvater(f). Note shferenesin the verti scales, Using terrestrial water and ice mass change data described above, sea level variations were estimated based on mass conservation between land land oceans considering selfattraction and loading (SAL) effects (Jeon tal, 2018), Figure 2a shows total groundwater depletion during the analysis period, 1993-2010. Northwestern India and western North America show significant decreases in groundwater storage (Figure 23). Most of the world’s ‘oceans experience an increase of near 10 mm, but a sea level érop over the Indian and the Pacific Ocean adjacent to regions of groundwater depletion (igure 25) is a consequence of SAL that causes sea level to decrease near regions of diminished water mass on lan. ‘Coanges in terrestrial water (¢1)(¢g., Figure 2a) and aceanie (a0) (Figure 25) ‘mass loads were converted to spherical harmonic (SH) coefficients of the geod 2100.) + 9000.1) = DY AR ano [Ercan +Feanimo] where ope is the Barth radius times water density, (0,4) are latitude and longiude, Fe ace normalized asscined Legendre polynomials and ky are load Lave numbers. Using the combined mass fel, 0118, 4)+ 008, 2),PM excitations (22) were computed from the degree 2 = 2) onde 1m = 1 SHE coefficients va Chao, 1985; Seo eal, 2021) 2 = 150510 in which M isthe Barth mass, and C end A are Earth principal moments of inertia.) and zy from Equation 2 include effects of rotational feedback. We then estimated monthly (13) changes from groundwater (storage on. land and associated sca Tevel change) plus the other sources (AIS, Grl alaciers, dams and soil moisture. 3 and zz ate mostly determined by terrestrial storage changes with minor contributions from corresponding sea level rise due to relatively uniform distribution of ocean mass as shown in Figure 2b, Contebutions of sea level change Ce ee 120° 60" ovo" 120° 190" -120°-60"_ soo -400 200 “00 100—=~C« BNO . 58 10 [igure 2. Total groundwater storage change on land a) and the associated sea level vation (fr 1993-2010, Units are mmm of water, SEOET AL. 3017a AGU Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 (mas) xe l08] 1995 2000 2008; 2010 Year Figure 3.7 (8) nd 7) variations fr 1993-2010, Red lines ae observed PM excitation (7), ) an lus lines te ‘estimated fom al now sources shown in Wve line in Figure I. Barometric pressure, oceatbotlom pressure, atmospheric ‘wind and seeanearrentconebutons are also inelided. Blk ines show estimated PM excitation due to groundwater epltin. ‘resulting from terrestrial water and ice variations to and ys are estimated to be about 20.81% and 25.17% of, total variance, respectively Additionally, we estimated (71,72) associated with barometsic pressuse (Hessbach etal, 2020), ocean bottom pressure (K¢hl, 2020), atmospheric winds (Hersbach et al, 2020) and ocean currents (Kil, 2020). These changes should not have notable contributions to trends in GMSL, but are an important source of PM excitation (11,2) at seasonal and shorter time scales. GIA Models (e.g. Peltier etal, 2018) provide predictions ofthe GIA contribution to (yi, 73) but there is some variation among model estimates. Recently a new GIA estimate has been oblained by combining GRACE and. PM observations (Seo et al, 2021). We used tis result, as well as predictions from models of Peltier etal. (2018) and Caron etal. 2018) 3. Results We fist compare time series of PM excitation (y1, 22) {rom observations with estimates from all known sources ff PM excitations. Red lines in Figure 3 show the two components and y» from observations (Bizouard etl, 2019) from 1993 to 2010. The dominant Chandler wobble resonance was mostly removed using a digital ‘ter (Wilson, 1985), The Inetnational Earth Rotation Service (hips! www irs. or) provides various PM series, and we used the longest, EOP CO1 TAU2000. and 2 are in milliaresecond (mas) along the Greenwich meridian and 90° east longitude, respectively. Blue lines show estimated (1, 72) fom all known sources of GMSL change shown in Figure 1, and effets of barometric pressure, ocean bottom pressure, winds and currents. Because we ‘considered two estimates of polar ice sheet contributions, and three for mountain glaciers, six different estimates of (zi, £2) ate possible fr each GIA PM estimate, The estimate associated with blue lines shown in Figure | uses AIS and GrlS mass changes from IMBIE (The IMBIE Team, 2018, 2020) and mountain glacier mass changes from the most revent estimate (Xu & Chao, 2019) as wel as soil moisture (Rodel etal, 2004), impounded water bbehind dams (Lebner etal, 2011) and groundwater (Wada et al. 2010) Effects of barometric pressure Hersbach, ‘etal, 2020), ocean hottom pressure (Kohl, 2020), winds (Hersbach etal, 2020) and currents (K@hl, 2020) were also included. Each PM excitstion contribution is shown in Supporting Information $1 (Figure $1). Most high frequency variations in (zs, z2) are explained by changes in barometric pressure, ocean bottom pressure, winds and currents, PM excitation variations associated with ice mass loss from mountain glaciers and Greenland show sireotional changes in PM excitation similar to previous studies around 1998 (Deng etal. 2021) and 2005 (Chen Wilson, Ries, & Tapley, 2013), respectively SEOET AL. 4017 i | fl t i | i- AGU Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 Figure 4. (a) Individual contributors othe PM excitation end, (6) Sum of PM eacitaton wend contibutors with (old bis) and without dashed ble) groundwater depletion, Re arrow isthe observed PM excitation ‘Figute 3 clealy shows that estimated and observed (ys, 73) agree well with each other. shows a positive trend igure 3u) and 7 a small acgative read (Figure 36), likely due both to GIA and contemporary surface mass redistribution (Adhikari & Ivins, 2016; Chea, Wilson, Ries, & Tapley, 2013), If groundwater (Show in black lines) were neglected, the estimated trend in ys would disagree with the observed value (see Figure 4 in detail) The importance of groundwater contributions tothe rise in GMSL from 1993 102010 ean be seen more clearly in a polar plot (Figure 4), which shows both magnitude and direction of trends. Each contribution from blue lines in Figure | is displayed in Figure da, Minor contributions toy, z:) tends from soil moisture, barometric pressure, ‘ean bottom pressure, winds and currents are not included. The red arrow shows GIA PM moving toward the west coast of Greenland at arate of 6.74 erye (Seo etal, 2021). Figure 4 shows that groundwater depletion isthe second largest contributor to the tend in PM excitation. Figure 4b compares observed (red) and estimated (blue) PM excitation tends. The estimated PM excitaion rend isthe vector sum of all arrows in Figure 4o, additionally including effects of soil moisture, barometric pressure, ocean bottom pressure, winds and currents. Ellipses repre sent PM excitation rate uncertainties estimated from the sum of squared formal erors in tend estimates a 95 confidence level. The solid blue aad dashed arrows show PM eacitation estimates with and without groundwater, respectively. Excluding groundwater, estimated and observed PM excitation tends do not agree well The differ- ence is grealy reduced when groundwater is included. Observed GMSL rae from multiple satelite altimetry is also closely explained when including groundwater depletion data (sce Figure S2 in Supporting Information S1), All six estimates (combinations of two polar ice sheet and three mountain glacier estimates) are shown as blue circles in Supporting Information SI (Figure $3). All agree reasonably well withthe observed (red arrow). Addi Uionally, two different GIA model predictions (Peltier etal. (2018), geeen rectangles, and Caron etal. (2018), cyan triangles) are combined with the six estimates, Cyan tangles associated withthe GIA prediction of Caron. etal. (2018) show PM trends similar (o the blue circles. Green rectangles show more westward motion than observed. In any case, by neglecting groundwater, agreement between estimated and observed trends is poorer. 4, Discussion The various mass redistibution sources in Figure I can also be used to predict changes in dynamic oblateness, J, J, is proportional tothe degree 2 zonal coefficient t= NSCS e Figure $4 in Supporting Information S1 shows observed (red) and estimated (blue) J, time series from the sum of all sources shown as blue lines in Figure | using the GIA prediction of Peltier eta. (2018). Baromet- Fic pressure and ocean bottom pressure are also included. Both time series agree well w SEOET AL. ? i ia AGU Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 tere is some difference in trend. Most high frequency variations are explained by barometric pressure and. ‘ocean botiom pressure, as in the case of PM excitation in Figure 3. The black line shows changes in J, due to groundwater variations. When compared with Figure 3, it is evident that J, is insensitive to groundwater {depletion when compared with PM. A negative J trend from groundwater depletion ever land (mosly at low latitudes) is largely canceled by the corresponding contribution from sca level rise, so J, does not provide 8 useful constraint on groundwater depletion. In addition, uncertainty in GIA effects on J, further limits its ‘iit as a constraint. Figure $5 in Supporting Information S1 summarizes observed and estimated J, rates from the sources used in Supporting Information S| (Figure $4). Adopting the GIA predietion from Peltier et al. 2018), there is a minor trend disagreement between the estimated (ced box) and observed (gray hor zontal box) J, rates. Mitrovica e al. (2015) proposed a modified mantle viscosity profile and re-estimated the GIA J, rate (green line). Tae eesult is much less than observed. The GIA model of Caron etal. (2018) is based: om inversion of vertical motion data (rather than employing an ice history model to predict GIA). It provides a different J, rate (blue line), with the resulting sum shown by the blue box, slightly smaller than observed. Because disagreement among the thrce different GIA J; preditions is much larger than the estimated J, ate associated with groundwater depletion, J is not, at present, useful in further constraining terrestrial iefwater ‘mass changes and sea level rise Previously, a similar PM excitation was estimated based on GRACE data (Adhikasi & Ivins, 2016) for 2003-2015. A comparison of PM excitation between this study and the previous study during the common, period (2003-2010) would be useful to understand the relative accuracy of the PM excitation estimate here Figure S6 in Supporting Information S1 shows the two PM excitation time series for 2003-2010. Annual ‘components were removed and effects of winds end currents were not included to be consistent with the previous study. Both time series show very similar variations, but there are some teend discrepancies, Trends in PM excitation (1,22) based on GRACE data were estimated to be 3.27 and 3.43 masly, respectively (Addhikazi & Ivins, 2016), compared to 3.63 and 2.49 mas/yr from this study. The minor difference between, the two estimates is likely due to some missing information here, with GRACE data included inthe previous study, Storage changes in natural lakes, not considered here, would be a non-negligible source of GMSL and/or PM variations. However, the high variability of many lake levels leaves their contribution to the long-term GMSL_ luend uncertain (WCRP, 2018). Another difficulty is the lack of a global database for lake level variations, in contrast to one for artifical reservoirs, Mantle convection would be another potential contributor to & PM wend (Adhikari etal, 2018), but have not included this effect due to its large uncertainty. Large earth- quakes would also affect the PM trend (Xu & Chao, 2019). The small end discrepancy (shown in Figure 4) ‘observed and estimated PM excitations found in this study may be further reconciled by including these effects, 5. Conclusions Global climate model estimates indicate that groundwater depletion is a significant contributor to GMSL tse Since the lunch of GRACE, observations of time-variable gravity show large amounts of groundwater depletion and resulting sea level rise. Prior to the GRACE mission, GMSL budgets indicated declining groundwater, but ‘confirmation from direct observations was lacking on a global sale. Independent confirmation of groundwate's ‘contribution to GMSI. changes might come from variations in Earth's dynamic oblateness(J,) and polar motion (PMD. We found that J, is nol especially useful fr this purpose because of the geography (low latitudes) o aqui fers that have been depleted inthis peviod, and uncertainty in GIA predictions regarding J, On the other hand, PM excitation, (7,11) for 1993-2010 is sensitive to global groundwater changes, and observed and predicted PM excitations agree well with each other. We found that groundwater depletion was the second largest (4.36 em YP) component of PM excitation tend toward 64.16°E during 1993-2010. Among known sources of PM excita ‘ion, groundwater changes are particulaely important to explain the 22 component, trending toward 90° east longitude. Neglecting groundwater depletion inthe PM excitation budget leads toa trend that is more westward, than observed. Various choices for estimates of other surface mass load contributions lead tothe same conclu sion. This confirms that groundwater depletion is a major source of GMSL. rise during the last a few decades as previously indicate by these models. SEOET AL. 6017 3 : i iGeophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2023G1.103509 Acknowedgments “Tis work war soporte bythe Kora Insite of Marne Since &Tesholny Promosion(KIMST) grt unde by he Miniry of Onan Psoris (RS 200 (028667, P2020), 2 Naa Rewach Foun of Kaen SR) Gras No, 223K AICIOO5R) 3G is soppy Py SHS and CRW, supper by NASA Gans \Nesppresine ¥ Wad fr proving se posal depletion eal Data Availability Statement ‘The data that support the findings ofthis study ace available from a data repository of Open Science Framework (htp:/doi.org/10.1760S/0SF 10/S9VEN), References Aaa $e. Sabre Regs), Rien, KK, Marion a 248, Wo ive 298 etry pol no Earth nan Sis Later 0, 18 13 Magi Sehepa 2809 daar 84 Ise © R010, Ciena mon 2908015. Scene Aden, 4, S16. poo mar, amber; Catan C, Reker, 0 & Rca, I-¥. 2019), Te HERS EOP HEM son or Fah ritinn paane nt wit RE: 2014, foural of ety), 21-485, te pO 109.06 se (co vn Ee aos, ar Sy Blew G13, GIA mot ati ir GRACE dog, eigen runic, Grp Rh ear 56) 200 223 ps0 os eas ‘ua, SH, Oe exon fe at pr mtn, opel Reseach Leer, 2, $2659, bp 10.1029! 02m Cuno, Wo,¥ HL, YS 0 np f tf srr Hr ipeandnea on be eel ces J2ASAD) 22-316 pecan cet (aes! Ly tn €-R_ Rey © Tap, B,D. 1D, Raping es Br pl othe ek, Grp Recah eter "en asa yk i oe 8s (hee ion, © RTs, 8. Go, Chan chet in gle co ents ele. ere Goce, cy, 30-350 heaton panes Deg SLi dang La Bac tea 02) Polar in he Deepest aes age ges Gap te Reh et, 0) SOBLOIIA hp io ' 090—09 Dig hy Caco A Nga, An, MOTD, Nowe fhe cee oe ie a ev at rc Genpact S640 1201 8 thn Bl Retr sa, 8a A MoS fa G2) The ERAS ae Quartet Jara sec, Sure Yoo KC fy WiC 8) ltl ss ev ch ore by GRACE si Seu Rpon Aa 39 ian tian To in 13 Seu on, Che, 14 Win, € GOI). Msg ga contin el Genpak deters a) 268-135 hs 0 12H pgOSAD oid, lng be CHCCOS Tou 218 ean aA configu frniiing he MPLESM line ode Quartet “uate Rip Mtge! Soe, 1899) 290 29 hp 0 I 90 ein Lau CR Roepe Wena, Pele B, Cote Fc 1) Hibresoea gpa be was tua rss er fw management Ptr a soy andthe Emon 1), S02 ned pas aren Lele #'W, Col @, Auch H G01, et commenten Gl oneness can ig the Bh ery ean Cncpee 40), 299-20 hp nga 99 308 tn ay Me Raps Be Dato, MX Say D8) Renting at hangs Fa oto wih 2 cay pl vel se Reh Maca Sence Abs I) <0 tsp 2d 50679 ong) Rg BB ers yn en oe Min Mee My tl 210) Poa es of Gres Sheet aoe 1972 218g of he Nato cen ofS the Une St of Aner, 119), 9-928, pein eau ete beer WR: Ago bP Drayend R201), Cnet on Anse fe CEG (VMS gine a by Bat Joraf opel ec Sd Ear 283) 209-20 yee oa or Ty ath get, 8 We, DS ey AM, OL), hc tel a swe by teen Ppl. Sen 2162, 9-0 hap oases no Ig Magn) Sct van dow, as Wes Moki & Maighe M219), dasa Anta Shots bc om 19 2017 roeding 9 he Moa cade of Snes of fe ed Se of mee) 109 10 input Pope HOI Ao nt 1 Chen y envi, Vet, Ha & Win. 08). asa eis of aptanpinon ‘ine GRACE acer Cepia sh eer 120) 20808 peg rsp So RW KIS, YK Che, Win € R200, Seca pol on arte GRACE ora of Gedy #40. Tips go Gono 02 146 ‘ye Ream, Mas af the Anas Sheet om 9 27 Na, 88070, 219-2, bp so 108! “RIMM Tea 0) Ms bao be Gres Ke Shs fm 199250 citseoro se? ‘wa, Yeas PB, an Kempen, Rema) WT M, V8, eng M10 la eplten f ousdeer ‘wow GepyidRah ase 0, L200 isis pO AES ‘wid, ¥stus cee EP WD. Da HT Wenge Brey, MBP QO. lb oy wes: 2 We “ena city of ae te Water ears Reseach 0) MOTE. hie [09700492 wen iy, lal steele 19 pe ar Sm Seer) 181-199 ipo ST 951-2018 ‘Wit 89, Dis pl maton cut, Gonpy! a te Rel Sno Sein A, 518 pli mpl it aet ate en sO Mud Yo a Cho 8 FGD0y Ste efit ote ec if be Eat tn leon of GephelRsac: Sol ar 12a hip an og 2900 8H 68 “ep My at, ker MeN Re eal (201) lb ka ans ad sense ttn 9 201 Na, ERTS eo Hse OTN 8 Naar, STATS), 28-238, hp or 1038 SEOET AL. 7 0f7