. ‘1.._ww“ .1wx..". ".- .,.. . 1-!" .........-......» —» -vr.-¢ .a‘..- . . .. 7 , ‘V I ‘ > u _5 ACOMPARAT! ANALYSIS. ‘ .. OF ‘BARG'ESHTP SYSTEMS , ” ; WITH EMPHASIS 0N T 'EVIR IMPACTS 0N - 7 NSITED STATES SEAPORTS AND ' _ V INLAND PORTS - ' " f Dissertation for the Degree of 2b. D ‘ : j ’ j. . MICHIGANSTATEUNWERST < __.,'j _ 5,; , . KENNETHM BERTRAM . V. r ~ ~ . . _ ’ > . . 4 , . . ' I .. _ , H .A . ; . .7 » . ,' . - - ... . - v . ‘ ' vr: ..::.—on;.<~... - ~ ;;_ ¢.:”..—..,.,.'-' ,«3: .- T ' it ,,'.'3’...— -- u 1 Ol’lfrvi—1' {0" ‘- ’I‘r "I!” #15 U." . , ”hf-W"? ‘ 7 In ' ' : J7: Meir":- 'r...3-';... ' . '43:... o 7' . . , par/fl. m:.r7§?v" . “ I'i'd‘~ D o‘v . .. g . "r7“.- ‘ . . f. . T _ . ‘- .1 T . ' . ..' .. .. . .‘ , , ', .3 ‘ V ' ...4‘~ _' -.. ', ..' ' H - .n', , . . ..‘ ', - - . . . ' I _- - . ,- #39117” ' ' 37.2?" r TMWM WWWW L LIBRARY Michigan State University $301.39 199% ' ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BARGESHIP SYSTEMS: WITH EMPHASIS ON THEIR IMPACTS 0N UNITED STATES SEAPORTS AND INLAND PORTS By Kenneth M. Bertram This dissertation's purpose was to increase the organized knowledge of bargeship systems in the United States. A comprehensive, organized compilation and presentation of all recent literature relating to these new systems was made. This information was then combined with analyses which compared bargeship systems to the other two major general cargo vessel systems, containerships and conventional ships, and deter- mined bargeship system's to-date and anticipated impacts on the nation's seaports and inland ports. The comparative bargeship system impacts studied were primarily those of U.S. major seaport general cargo volumes and investments, and the international cargo expectations of U.S. inland ports. Null hypotheses in each of these areas were tested, and many additional relevant analyses were made. The primary data sources were separate sets of four question- naires sent to the nation's seaports and inland ports. The latter population also included both the nation's minor general cargo sea- ports, which were classified as functional inland ports and defined as those ports located on seacoasts with volumes less than 1,000,000 Kenneth M. Bertram current annual long-tons of general cargo, and inland terminal companies performing essentially as public ports. The methodology utilized combined accounting and statistical principles and techniques. Near- population data was acquired for the tests of seaport hypotheses, and approximately one—half of the inland port population responded. A null seaport investment hypothesis was disproven, with required bargeship system implementation investments generally being found to be far less than those of containership systems. Specifically, this was the case for such investments on a direct absolute cost basis, direct plus indirect absolute costs basis, and direct cost basis rela- tive to cargo volumes handled. The situation in which bargeship and containership system investments were roughly equivalent was on a direct plus indirect cost basis relative to cargo volumes handled. A null seacoast relative utilization hypothesis was also dis- proven, and the Gulf Coast was shown to have both a far higher current and expected utilization of bargeship systems than the East and West Coasts. Gulf Coast bargeship system volume is at a level of approx— imately l9.8 percent of total general cargo volume representing about 3,500,000 long-tons per year, versus about 1,000,000 each on the East and West Coasts, which amounted to 2.2 and 3.8 percent of their respec- tive general cargo volumes. A null inland port hypothesis on expectations was also disproven because l9 inland ports, or a minimal 8.6 percent of the population of 221, were found to expect significant increases in their international cargo volumes because of bargeship systems. While these l9 disprove the hypothesis in general, research also found that 68 of ll2 respondents Kenneth M. Bertram did not expect any bargeship system traffic within three years, and the majority of these cited very high probabilities against such traffic. At the same time, 54 of 112 respondents either had bargeship system traffic (36) or expect it (18) within three to five years. Much other important information was gathered through the ques- tionnaires which was related to the above hypotheses. Regarding major seaports, it was found that the "average" U.S. port expecting bargeship systems by 1978 expected such traffic to comprise 16.3 percent of its general cargo traffic versus 8.1 percent in 1973. In a pattern similar to that shown in the seacoast utilization hypothesis test, the average Gulf Coast seaport expected the bargeship system share of its total gen- eral cargo traffic to increase to 22.7 percent by 1978, with 10.5 and 10.3 being the respective percentages on the East and West Coasts. Containership system shares were also expected to grow at the average port on all three coasts, exceeding even the conventional ship share on the East and West Coasts by 1978, and approximately equaling it for the United States as a whole. The 36 inland ports with bargeship system traffic estimated 1973 bargeship system traffic at about 1,220,000 long-tons in 1973 versus 822,000 long-tons in 1972. In addition, this traffic was esti- mated at maximums of about 2,500,000 and 4,000,000 long-tons in 1978 and 1983, respectively. Comparisons were also made between to-date and expected inland port volumes of international cargo movements via bargeship barge and other international shipping systems. Bargeship barges were found to have considerably more volume and potential than waterborne container movements but less than international Kenneth M. Bertram non-container movements. Bargeship system investments at inland ports were found to be generally included in those designed to increase over- all traffic, rather than being specifically designed for these systems. Analyses of the factors influencing bargeship systems by coastal region and at seaports and inland ports were also performed. The number of inland waterway miles of a coastal region was found to have a major influence on the amount of bargeship system traffic experienced by that region. For instance, the more heavily utilized Gulf Coast was found to have 14,383 miles versus 7,002 and 3,575 on the East and West Coasts, respectively. Similarly, the lack of entrenched, sophisticated contain- ership systems on the Gulf Coast, when combined with its heavy flows of agricultural, non-containerizable commodities and the above-mentioned inland waterways, were found to encourage this traffic in this region, whereas opposite situations were found for the East and West Coasts. Analyses of seaport and inland port opinions regarding factors encouraging and discouraging bargeship system traffic were also per- formed. These resulted in findings which, while not enabling absolute rankings, gave insights into how different factors were viewed by ports as a whole and by their coastal location and bargeship system traffic status. Based on this research, the author recommends that United States foreign policy encourage and help to develop bargeship systems in the world's underdeveloped countries, particularly those with situations sim- ilar to that of the Gulf Coast. This recommendation is supported by the findings that bargeship systems require far lower direct port investment costs and a far smaller scale of implementation than containerships. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BARGESHIP SYSTEMS: WITH EMPHASIS ON THEIR IMPACTS ON UNITED STATES SEAPORTS AND INLAND PORTS By Kenneth M. Bertram A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration 1973 .Efi;~- :J‘ca / . 35"\ W ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is deeply grateful to Professors Richard Lewis, Edward Smykay and George Mead for their contribution as advisory com- mittee members of this dissertation. Their timely advice concerning the study's scope and emphases were invaluable, as well as their expeditious reviews and analyses of drafts submitted by the author. Further, the committee chairman, Professor Lewis, is given my deepest thanks for his extraordinary contributions in that capacity. His advice and encouragement provided brilliant insights and strong motivation at every crossroad. Words cannot express the gratitude I feel toward this man, who is a truly great teacher in every sense of the word. Special thanks are also given to the study's questionnaire pre-testers, especially Professor John Hazard, who in addition to his services in this area, also provided expert direction in the preliminary phases of this research. Professor Hazard's advice, based on his knowledge of international shipping, provided a solid foundation of insights concerning the research questions addressed by this study. In addition, I would like to thank all of the individuals at the nation's seaports, inland ports and terminal companies, and Chambers of Commerce who responded to this study's questionnaires. Their contributions were essential to the organized knowledge set forth herein. Similarly, a special thanks goes to Mrs. Grace Rutherford for her professional typing efforts on this project. Her expert and timely performance, especially on the multitude of difficult tables herein, were invaluable to the successful completion of the study. Finally, I would like to express my deep gratitude for the constant support and encouragement of my family and friends during this project. Being well loved by my parents and brother was one of my most important assets during this endeavor. Similarly, I consider myself quite fortunate to have been another major beneficiary of the matter—of-fact confidence of my brother's wife in the Bertram mold. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............... LIST OF FIGURES ............ Chapter I. THE TOPIC ............. Introduction . . . . . ...... Bargeships Described and Defined . Other Definitions ........ Hypotheses ....... . . . , . Implementing Tasks ........ Hypothesis 2 ......... Hypothesis 3 ......... Implications . . . . . . . . . . . II. LITERATURE SEARCH ..... . . . . Introduction ........... Sources . . . . . . . . . ...... Vessel Systems . . . . . . . . . Barge-Carrying Vessels . . Containerships . . . . . . . . Conventional Ship Systems . , . Ports . . . . . . - . . . Seaports . . . . . . . . , .. Inland Ports . . ....... Inland Transport Modes ...... Barges .............. Railroads . . ........ Trucks . ........... External Factors . . . . ..... Labor ............ Government . . . . . . . Relevant Studies' Findings . Introduction . . Discussion . . 000000000 0000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOO I O ( O ....... OOOOOOOOOOO G 000000000 Hypothesis 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ........... OOOOOOOOOOO .......... 0000000 3 O '3 '3 U 0 O 0 O u) L OOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOO G O O ' C u 5 >>>>> t- OOOOOOOOOOO JJJJJ OOOOOOOOOOO 0000000 0000000 FIELD RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................ Introduction ...................... Questionnaire Development ............... Questionnaire Pre-Tests ................ Development of Port Lists . . . . . .......... Follow-Up Efforts ................... Basic Analysis Methodologies .............. RESEARCH RESULTS . . . . . . . . ............. Introduction ...................... Seaport Results .................... Hypothesis 1 .................... Hypothesis 3 .................... Treatment of Minor Seaports (Functional Inland Ports) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , Inland Port Results .................. Hypothesis 2 .................... Treatment of Functional Inland Ports (Minor Seaports) ................. Waterway Locations of Doubtful Status Results Seaport and Inland Port Opinions and Other Relevant Information ..................... Introduction .................... Overall Coastal Region Analyses .......... Seaport Analyses .................. Bargeship Operator Correspondence ......... Inland Port Analyses ................ SUMMATION OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary and ConclUSions ......... . ....... Introduction ................. . . . Secondary Research . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . Primary Research ................... Hypotheses Tests and Related Information ....... Hypothesis 1 . . . . . ................. Hypothesis 3 .................... Special Definitions ................ Hypothesis 2 .................... Inland Waterway Locations of Doubtful Status . . . . Opinion Analyses and Other Related Information . . . Overall Coastal Region Analyses .......... Seaport Opinion Analyses . . . . . . . . ....... Inland Port Opinion Analyses ............ Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1V Page 166 166 T66 170 171 174 176 176 178 T78 195 211 220 241 243 251 251 260 276 295 341 341 341 341 342 342 342 345 347 348 350 350 351 353 355 Page United States Foreign Policy ............ 360 United States Domestic Policies .......... 362 Other Implications ................. 363 Recommendations for Further Research .......... 364 Inland Transport Mode Research . . . . . . . . . . . 364 Follow-Up Study .................. 365 Bargeship System Private User Research ....... 365 Appendices A. U.S. Major Seaports Addresses List, Preliminary and Cover Letters, and Questionnaire Set .......... . 366 B. U.S. Inland Port Authorities and Terminal Companies Addresses Lists, Preliminary and Cover Letters, and Questionnaire Set .................. 389 C. U.S. Minor Seaports (Functional Inland Ports) List . . . . 422 D. U.S. Inland Waterway Locations of Doubtful Status List, Cover Letters, and "Mini-Questionnaires" ......... 423 E. U.S. Inland Port Authorities and Terminal Companies Follow-Up Letters ............... . . . . . 428 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................... 430 \I Table 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. LIST OF TABLES Approximate Barge-Carrying Vessel Investments to Date . . . Navigable Lengths and Depths of United States Waterway Routes ......................... Number of Total Piggyback Units and Containers Moved by All Modes, Years 1964-71 ............... Estimated Barge Transit Times Between Selected U.S. Ports and New Orleans .................. Representative Tare Weights and Cubic Capacities Marine Containers for Highway Trucking Compared with Conventional Trucking Equipment ............. Legal Overload Experienced by Two Maximally Loaded 20-Foot Containers ................... "Gains“ and "Losses" by Diversion of Liner and Liner- Type Cargoes in 1970 .................. Comparative Labor Costs for Container Handling--l971 Assumptions and Port Cost per Ton Calculations-- Break-Bulk Berths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assumptions and Port Costs per Ton Calculations-- Bargeships ....................... Assumptions and Port Cost per Ton Calculations-- Lift-On/Lift Off Container Berth ............ Structure of Space Cost per Freight Ton of One Cubic Meter ........................ Comparison of Estimated Future Costs by Type of Vessel 1975 Container Lift Capacity by Port . . ........ 1975 Container Berths and Pure Container Cranes by Seaboard ........................ vi Page 25 63 7O 73 92 93 110 131 133 135 138 139 148 149 Table Page 16. Present Rail Carrier Capabilities at Major Ports ..... 152 17. Present Motor Carrier Capabilities at Major Ports ..... 153 18. Unit Marine Terminal Cost ................. 158 19. Inland Transport Rate Comparisons for Grain Shipments Between Selected U.S. Seaports and Inland Ports-- 1966-1967 ......................... 162 20. Major U.S. Seaport and Seacoast Investments--Overall and by Vessel System ................... 180 21. Summary Table--Estimated Recent U.S. Seacoast Investments by Vessel System ............... 183 22. Bargeship System Working Facilities Breakdown--Comnon Usages of New Containership and Conventional Ship Facilities . . . ...................... 185 23. Computation of Bargeship Share of Commonly Used Containership Facilities ................. 186 24. Bargeship System Working Facilities Breakdown-- Facilities Investments Indirectly Required, Directly Required, and Not Required ............ 189 25. Major U.S. Seaport and Seacoast General Cargo Volumes by Vessel System ..................... 196 26. Summary Table--Estimated U.S. Seacoast Volumes by Vessel System ....................... 201 27. U.S. Seaport and Seacoast Vessel Current and 1978 Projected Estimated Shares of Total Volumes vs. Cargo Flow Types and Inland Waterway Miles ....... . 202 28. Minor Seaport and Seacoast Investments-~Overall and by Vessel System ..................... 213 29. Minor Seaport and Seacoast Estimated Volumes by Vessel System ....................... 214 30. Status of U.S. Inland Ports Regarding International LASH/SEABEE Traffic and Expectations .......... . 221 vii Table 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. U.S. Inland Port LASH/SEABEE Volume To-Date Data by Coastal Region, Waterway Miles from Nearest Seaport, and Size of Inland Port .................. U.S. Inland Port LASH/SEABEE ExpectatiOns and Potential Data by Traffic Status, Coastal Region, Waterway Miles from Nearest Seaport, and Size of Inland Port ....... U.S. Inland Port Conventional Barge International Cargo Volume To-Date by Coastal Region, Waterway Miles to Nearest Seaport, and Size of Inland Port ....... U.S. Inland Port Conventional Barge and Mini- Containership International Cargo Expectations and Potential Data by Coastal Region, Waterway Miles from Nearest Seaport, and Size of Inland Port ....... U.S. Inland Port LASH/SEABEE vs. Conventional Barge International Cargo Volumes and Potential by Coastal Region and Number of Waterway Miles from Nearest Seaport .......................... Inland Waterway Locations with Doubtful Status-~Barge Traffic Information .................... Seaport and Seacoast Bargeship System Information ..... Seaport Opinions on Whether Nature of Port's General Cargo Items Is Major Determinant of Vessel System's General Cargo Shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . All Seaports (Unclassified by Seacoast or Expectations) Favorability Rankings of Bargeship and Bargeship Barge Traffic Influencers .................... U.S. East Coast Seaports Favorability Rankings of Bargeship and Bargeship Barge Traffic Influencers . U.S. Gulf Coast Seaports Favorability Rankings of Bargeship and Bargeship Barge Traffic Influencers . . . . . U.S. West Coast Seaports Favorability Rankings of Bargeship and Bargeship Barge Traffic Influencers ..... U.S. Seaports with Bargeship System Traffic--Favorability Rankings of Bargeship System Traffic Influencers ..... viii Page 224 226 232 234 235 245 253 256 277 278 280 Table Page 44. U.S. Seaports Not Expecting Bargeship System Traffic Within Three Years--Favorabi1ity Rankings of Bargeship System Traffic Influencers .......... 282 45. U.S. Seaports Expecting Bargeship System Traffic Within Three Years (But Not During 1973)--Favorability Rankings of Bargeship System Traffic Influencers . . . . 283 46. U.S. Minor Seaports (Functional Inland Ports) Bargeship System Traffic Favorability Rankings of Bargeship System Traffic Influencers ................ 284 47. Summary of Factors With Overall Favorable Versus Unfavorable Rankings in Order of Favorability and Unfavorability (At Between 18 to 23 Major U.S. Seaports) ........................ 285 48. Seaport Major General Cargo Items—-Overall and by Vessel System ...................... 286 49. U.S. Seaport Cargo Items Cited as Major Items Moving Through Port Via Bargeship Systems ........... 292 50. U.S. Inland Port Distances from Nearest East, West, or Gulf Coast Port vs. LASH/SEABEE Traffic and Expectations Status ................... 317 51. A11 Inland Ports (Unclassified by Coastal Region or Expectations)--Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers ................ 319 52. U.S. East Coast Inland Ports-~Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers .......... 320 53. U.S. Gulf Coast Inland Ports--Favorabi1ity Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers .......... 321 54. U.S. West Coast Inland Ports--Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers .......... 322 55. U.S. Inland Ports with LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic-— Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers ....................... 323 56. U.S. Inland Ports Expecting LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Within Three Years--Favorability Rankings of LASH/ SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers ............ 324 ix Table Page 57. U.S. Inland Ports Ngt_Expecting LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Within Three Years--Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers ........ 325 58. U.S. Functional Inland Ports--Minor Seaports: LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic-~Favorability Rankings of LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic Influencers ........ 326 59. Summary of Inland Port (Terminal) Opinions on Factors Influencing Bargeship Systems Over Time ..... 327 60. Factors Specified as Most Encouraging for Bargeship Systems Traffic by Inland Port Groups .......... 328 61. Factors Specified as Most Discouraging for Bargeship Systems Traffic by Inland Port Groups .......... 329 62. Recent and Planned (Within Three Years) U.S. Inland Port (Terminal) Investments Designed to Increase LASH/SEABEE Barge Traffic ................ 330 63. U.S. Inland Ports Major Overall vs. LASH/SEABEE Barge Cargo Items vs. Inland Transport Mode Availabilities and Competition ..................... 332 64. U.S. Inland Ports With No LASH/SEABEE Traffic, Expectations or Potential--Major Overall Cargo Items, Waterway Miles From Nearest Seaport, and Inland Transport Mode Availabilities .......... 338 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Container-based freight distribution systems-- representative flow alternatives ............. 142 2. Comparative direct operating costs ............ 144 3. Comparison of transportation costs by inland mode for 40-foot container .................. 145 4. Comparison of transportation costs by inland mode for 20-foot containers .................. 146 xi CHAPTER I THE TOPIC Introduction The purpose of this research is to analyze and compare barge-carrying vessel systems versus containership and conventional ship systems, with primary emphasis on their impacts on United States seaports and inland ports. The analyses and comparisons herein are designed to show both the structural and financial differences between alternative distribution systems at individual seaports, as well as the effects which the economic and geographic characteristics of the differ- ent coasts can have on these systems. In addition, the most recently developed of these vessel types, bargeships, are analyzed regarding their effects on inland ports. As is set forth in detail in the literature search chapter which follows, many claims have been made in recent years concerning the growing importance of bargeship distribution systems. These systems, while an extension of the containerization concept, nonetheless exhibit some major differences when compared with those of container- ships, not to mention conventional ships. While many of these differ- ences have received extensive treatment in the government studies mentioned in the second paragraph to follow and discussed in detail in the literature search's section on existing analyses of ship—based distribution systems, others have not, especially regarding the aspects contained in this dissertation's hypotheses. This dissertation has been undertaken because of the continuing need for comparative and impact analyses generated by the continuing growth of the bargeship as a major shipping system after the studies which have been made concerning it. While estimates and expectations play a large part in this dissertation because of the newness of barge- ship systems and the lack of data in many areas concerning them, as in the previous studies, the inevitability of the future impacts of this system motivated this dissertation's primary research into the extent and magnitude of these impacts for both seaports and inland ports. In addition, the basic absence of an extensive compilation of the literature concerning bargeship systems and their relationship to other shipping systems, seaports, inland ports, other inland transport modes, labor unions and government has motivated the gathering of this knowledge in this dissertation. Further reasons for this research arise from the following facts: (1) bargeships have emerged as a major new form of ocean shipping, comprising over one-fifth of all ships currently under construction or conversion in the United States;1 and (2) of all the government sponsored studies2 in this area, none of them analyze: l"Modernization of U.S. Merchant Fleet Includes 49 Ships for Linear Trade," Container News, December, 1971, p. 15. 2Matson Research Corporation, The Impact of Containerization on U.S. Economy, Vols. I and II (San FrancTsco: U.SI Department of Commerce, September, 1970); Maritime Cargo Transportation Conference, Inland and Maritime Transportation of Unitized Cargo (Washington, D.C.: (a) the individual respective capital investments required by coastal ports to accommodate each of the three vessel system types; (b) the up-to-date or anticipated effects of barge traffic (with or without containers) from barge-carrying vessels on inland ports; (c) the effects of the geographical, economic, and transportation characteristics of seaport hinterland areas on the three vessel system types; (d) the effects of bargeship barges on the other inland transport modes. The set of facts under two above represents research gaps in the knowledge of maritime competition and its supporting U.S. domestic distribution systems. This research is directed toward filling all but the last of these gaps, as is explained in the next paragraph. These research gaps have arisen largely because of the impacts and anticipated impacts of bargeship systems. Seaports, for example, need no longer make massive investments in port facilities in order to participate in efficient containerized cargo movements when such cargo is carried via bargeships’--yet New Orleans is making a major investment to facilitate bargeship cargo movements through its port now,2 though National Academy of Sciences, 1963); Planning Research Corporation, Transoceanic Cargo Study, Vols. 1, II, and 111 (Los Angeles, Calif.: U.S. Department ofTTransportation, March, 1971); and United Nations, Unitization of Cargo (New York: United Nations, 1970); Southern Illinois University, A Study of River Ports and Terminals (Carbondale, 111.: Southern Illinois University, June, 1968); andTManalytics, Inc., The Impact of Containerization on the United States Transportation 5 stem, Vols. I and 11 (San Francisco: 015. Department of 66mmerhe, FeBruary, 1972). 1Bohdan Nagorski, "Port Problems in Developing Countries," Dock and Harbour Authority, May, 1971, p. 11. 2"Gulf Ports Outlook--New Orleans," World Ports, May, 1972, p. 10. such cargo has long since been moving through it.I The reasons behind these events, plus the well recognized fact that efficient standard container movements through seaports require massive port capital investments,2 impelled the close investigation made herein. Similarly, the fact that because of bargeships, United States inland ports were for the first time considering themselves potential international ports3 merited similar, careful analysis. In addition, it is generally recog- nized that the through movement of containers inland maximizes the efficiency of containerization by eliminating rehandling of container contents. Therefore, since inland waterway networks are required to accommodate the movement of bargeship barges (often called "floating containers")“ inland, analyses of the flows of each general cargo vessel types through coastlines with (the U.S. Gulf Coast) and without (the U.S. East and West Coasts) such waterway networks, as well asother differing economic and transportation system characteristics were effected insofar as obtainable data allowed. Finally, since the effect of bargeship barges on other inland transport modes is a subject of sufficient complexity to constitute an entirely separate dissertation, 1United Nations, Unitization of Cargo, op. cit., p. 13. 2"Coming Role in Barging in Marine Container Operations," Waterway Economics, April, 1969, in reprint of vols. II-IV, January, 1970, p. 62. 3"New Marine Systems Bring Containers to Inland Ports," Traffic Management, July, 1970, p. 63. I’Jerome L. Goldman, "How LASH Was Born--LASH Inventor Describes His System to ICHCA," ICHCA Journal, April, 1970, p. 9. only limited, illustrative investigations of this area were made in this research, in order to indicate the relative significance of bargeship barges as an inland transport mode. The basic methodologies utilized in this research were a literature search, questionnaires, direct correspondence and telephone calls, and statistical, comparative, summary tables and tests. The literature search was used to present a comprehensive, organized compilation of the secondary information relevant to the topic area. Questionnaires were used to analyze the United States seaport and inland port traffic and investment situations regarding bargeship and other alternative systems. Direct correspondence and telephone calls were used to refine and help interpret questionnaire results. Finally, statistical tables and tests were used to organize, analyze, and present questionnaire results. Bargeships Described and Defined As the newest and least known of the vessel types studied in this research, bargeships warrant early individual treatment with regard to describing their characteristics and defining them for the purposes of this study. There are two different types of bargeships currently in opera- tion or under construction, LASH and SEABEE. LASH is an abbreviation for lighter-aboard—ship. SEABEE is not an abbreviation. LASH ships are by far the most numerous of the two, comprising 24 of 27 bargeships currently in operation or under construction.1 One major difference between LASH and SEABEE ships is the size barge they are designed to carry, the farmer's barges being 13' x 31' x 61' and holding approx- imately 370 long-tons of cargo each. The latter's are 17' x 35' x 97' and hold approximately 850 long-tons of cargo each. However, since LASH ships carry up to 89 barges, whereas SEABEES' ships carry 38 of the larger barges, their cargo-carrying capacities are roughly equivalent. Both LASH and SEABEE ships may carry various combinations of barges and containers. Both have huge cranes for handling barges. LASH cranes are movable gantry-type and have a 510 long-ton (one loaded LASH barge) capacity, while the SEABEE cranes are elevator-type, located at the rear of the vessel, and have a 2,000 long-ton capacity, enabling them to lift two SEABEE barges or sets of eight forty-foot containers (on special container pallets) at one time.? Additionally, both LASH and SEABEE ships can be equipped with gantry-type container cranes, enabling simultaneous handling of barges and containers. LASH and SEABEE ships differ in their stowage patterns. A vertical stowage configuration accommodates the LASH traveling gantry- type barge crane, with barges being stowed atop one another. SEABEE 1Maritime Administration, Bargeship and Shipbarge Informational Data (New Orleans, La.: U.S. Department of Commerce, February, 1972), p. 7. 2U.S. Army Mobility Equipment Command, Comparative Analysis of the Multi-Mission Ships (MMS) and Multi-Purpose Ship (MPS) CTNorfolk, Va.: U.S. Army Mobility Equipment Command, September, 1971), p. 36. vessels, on the other hand, store cargoes horizontally below the main deck, utilizing a mechanically operated transporter wheel system to move the barges which the elevator-type crane has lifted to the desired height. Once a barge is in position, this conveyor-type system moves it longitudinally into its desired position on the appropriate one of the ship's three interior deck levels.1 In many ways, bargeships are similar to containerships. Like larger containerships, bargeships are between 800 and 900 feet long, can be completely loaded or discharged in about one day, carry tonnages between 25,000 and 32,000 long-tons, have operating speeds slightly in excess of twenty knots, and have "freight rates between ports generally the same as those filed by both containership and conventional ship operations."2 Similarly, depending on their size, bargeships and containerships vary in cost between $15 and $30 million each.3 Finally, for both larger bargeships and containerships, reduced time spent in port plus their faster steaming speeds results in each one of them equaling up to five conventional ships in yearly tonnage capabilities. Because of their unique abilities to carry and handle barges as well as containers, bargeships are defined in this research as basically different from containerships. The definition is as follows: 1Maritime Administration, "The Impact of Bargeship Systems on Traffic Management in Foreign Trade (unpublished slides presentation; New Orleans, La.: U.S. Department of Commerce, n.d.), pp. 18-21. 2Ibid., p. 24. 3"Modernization of U.S. Merchant Fleet Includes 49 Ships for Linear Trade," op. cit., p. 15. Bargeships are those vessels capable of carrying both barges and containers, and are able to load or discharge barges not only at a pier but rather at any appropriate anchorage in a harbor area. Other Definitions In addition to bargeships, certain other terms utilized in the description of this research require complete understanding in order to prevent misinterpretations. This section is devoted, therefore, to the clarification of the following additional critical terms: conventional ships; break-bulk cargo; containerships; van containers; vessel systems; U.S. domestic distribution systems; distribution system components; distribution system sub-components; East, West and Gulf Coast seaports; inland ports; and inland transport modes. In this study, conventional ships are those possessing only break-bulk cargo carrying capability. Break-bulk cargo includes indi- vidual packages, palletized or similarly unitized cargo, and vehicles which are lifted on and off the ship. Containerships are those which transport 20-foot or longer van containers. There are two sizes of these containerships--fu1l-sized, which carry 300 or more van containers; and mini-ships, which carry under 300 van containers. Van containers are 8' x 8' x 20' or longer rectangular modules constructed of steel, aluminum or similar materials. All three vessel types are considered vessel systems which are combined with the inland distribution systems defined below. Strictly U.S. domestic distribution systems are analyzed in this research. The terminology "distribution systems" has been used instead of "shipping systems" because these systems include not only the point-to-point transportation movement found in the latter, but also functions found in the study of physical distribution management such as storage and handling. The word "inland" is used interchangeably with "domestic" in referring to these distribution systems since both indicate the inland portion of international cargo movements, and the former has a more universal and less provincial connotation. Finally, only those U.S. domestic distribution systems beginning or ending with East, West and Gulf Coast ports are examined, as those are the distri- bution systems which support the ocean-going vessel types studied here. These U.S. domestic distribution systems consist of a set of participating system components. Distribution system components are those organizations which are involved in the handling, storage, and transportation of goods as well as the administrative functions asso- ciated with the delivery of goods from the original producer to and through seaports for export, or through and from ports to the consignee in the case of imports. These components are grouped geographically and functionally in order to aid in understanding them and the larger sys- tems of which they are a part. Sub-components are the parts of these components and are delineated and analyzed when their component is analyzed. It is emphasized here that in the analysis of these dis- tribution systems and their components, port movement of goods either begins when the ocean-going vessel enters its first U.S. port-of-call, or ends when the vessel embarks on a direct course toward an overseas destination. 10 East, West and Gulf Coast seaports here include all ports along these seacoasts functionally capable of berthing full-sized conven- tional ships, containerships, and bargeships--and thus considered "major" in the dissertation hypotheses. Inland ports in this study are those ports either geographically located inland, or located on one of the above seacoasts but not presently functionally capable (due to insufficient facilities or relevant volume) of handling full—sized containerships or bargeships, and therefore performing the functions of an inland port. Regarding sufficient relevant volume, one million current annual long-tons mgt_consisting of predominately bulk-carrier (irrelevant to this study) cargoes, was set as the cut-off point. Inland locations included those on the Great Lakes, whose St. Lawrence Seaway cannot accommodate full-sized containerships and/or bargeships. Inland surface transport modes include all the surface means of transportation utilized to deliver goods to or from the above ports. This includes barge, rail, and truck. Airlines are completely exempted from this study since they almost never compete or coordinate with barges due to the vastly different operating characteristics of the two modes, and analyzing the relationship between LASH barges and other modes is the reason for this definition. Hypotheses Hypothesis number one is that there is no difference in major seaport (component) investments required to implement bargeship versus containership and conventional ship domestic (inland) distribution systems under any conditions. Here the purpose, utilizing the null hypothesis technique, was to determine if different seaport investments 11 are required for each of these vessel's inland distribution system, if certain investments are difficult to allocate to a particular system due to commonality of usage, if distinctions must be made between in- vestments which are required to support a vessel's inland distribution system and those which merely facilitate such a system, and if differ- ing investments may be required for the same vessel inland distribution system under different conditions. Hypothesis number two is that bargeship systems have had no effect on the international traffic volume expectations of inland ports. Here the hope was to determine whether there have been significant positive changes in the international traffic volume expectations of many inland ports, whether many inland ports have already experienced either signif- icant or at least initial encouraging volume changes which buttressed those expectations, and whether some of these ports (inland distribution system components) are making investments in facilities (inland distri- bution system sub-components) to support anticipated and/or real in- creased cargo movements. Also investigated were factors upon which the realization of such volume increases was contingent, including whether a given inland port's hinterland commodity and product needs and outputs were suitable for international movements via bargeship barge, whether reciprocal demand for international products was required from these ports, and whether there were or will be sufficient numbers of bargeship system barges available for serving expectant inland ports. Finally, determinations were made concerning the influence of "mini-containerships" at those select inland ports with sufficient waterway depth to accommo- date them, as well as the influence of international containers shipped inland on conventional barges. 12 Hypothesis number three is that there is no difference between the U.S. East, West and Gulf Coasts regarding their relative utilization of the bargeship versus containership and conventional ship systems. 'The goal here was to determine whether the bargeship system share of major ports' total general cargo volumes varied by U.S. coastline. Also analyzed here were various geographic, commodity, flow, and transpor- tation network characteristics of each coastline in order to attempt to gain insights into some of the probable causes of any utilization differences. Finally, future volume expectations were also secured and similarly compared. Finally, it should be noted that after careful consideration by the author and the members of his dissertation committee, it was decided to limit the dissertation's hypotheses to the above three and not to hypothesize or enter into any involved investigations regarding the highly complex and controversial area of how bargeship barges may affect the other inland transport modes, namely rail and motor carriers. This latter area was considered to be of sufficient magnitude to constitute an entirely separate dissertation, and that to treat it as a part of this dissertation would therefore be inappropriate. Furthermore, it is recognized that the absence of the inland transport intra-modal compet- itive aspects of this area limits this study's contribution to public policy decisions to strictly a compilation and presentation of data, conclusions and recommendations regarding the positions of U.S. seaports and inland ports as they relate to the development of the international cargo vessel systems here studied. While investigation of the compara- tive effects of these vessel systems on inland transport modes is highly recommended here, it is beyond the scope of this research to do more 13 than indicate in its literature search that some such effects do exist and warrant future investigation. It is emphasized, however, that the above statements do ngt_imply that the often critical role of intermodal cooperation in the efficient development of distribution systems using various forms of containerization is ignored in this research. To the contrary, its asserted and proven importance is treated in depth wherever appropriate in the literature search. Similarly, those readers interested in quantitative analysis of alternative methods and modal choices for transporting containers inland are referred to the Relevant Studies' Findings section of the Literature Search chapter. Included there are discussions of two extensive govern- ment sponsored studies into this area. The first was the one by Matson Research Corporation cited on page 3 and includes diagrammatic and cost analysis of such alternatives. The second was by Manalytics, Inc. and includes a model which "involves a computer program for evaluating the prime measures of any [container] transportation system: costs, man hours, and elapsed time."1 Implementing Tasks Inherent in the foregoing hypotheses and related investigations were numerous implementing tasks. For the respective hypotheses these were discerned to be as follows: lManalytics, Inc., The Impact of Containerization on the United States Transportation System, V61. I TSanTFranETECO: U.SI Department of Commerce, February,T1972), p. 24. 14 Hypothesis 1 A. Determine the recent (within 10 years) and planned investments required by major individual U.S. seaports directly required to implement bargeship, containership and conventional ships systems. Determine, insofar as possible, the extent to which recent (within 10 years) containership and conventional ship investments are utilized regularly by bargeship systems. Determine, insofar as possible, the extent to which bargeships utilize old, unmodified, already existing facilities which could not be considered directly or indirectly required for bargeship system implementation p_e_r__§_e_. Compare the seaport investments required for implementation of bargeship, containership and conventional ship systems, performing the cost allocations and exclusions appropriate in tasks A, B, and C. Hypothesis 2 A. Determine the experience and expectations of inland ports with respect to international cargoes moving through them via barge- ship barges. Determine the investments in facilities or other actions which have been made or are planned by these inland ports in order to facilitate such cargo movements. Determine how the actual and expected international cargo movements through each inland port compare with the port opinions regarding factors influencing such traffic, the port's location with regard 15 to rail, motor and barge services, hinterland supply and demand characteristics, and distance from a seaport. Determine the importance of "mini-containerships" and inter- national container movements via conventional barges at inland ports. Hypothesis 3 A. D. Determine, insofar as possible and using estimates if necessary, the respective bargeship (in barges versus containers), contain- ership, and conventional ship volumes of the U.S. East, West and Gulf Coasts. In this way, attempts were made to indicate the degree to which each of the three vessel types serve the three coasts, as well as indicate barge versus container usages. Determine the geographic characteristics of the three coastlines, especially in terms of extent of inland waterway networks. Also obtain relevant data on the percentage of each's economy which is non-agricultural versus agricultural, which ports have inter- national traffic in manufactured goods versus raw materials versus agricultural commodities, and the number of serving bargelines for each port and seacoast. Determine port opinions regarding factors influencing bargeship traffic through their location. Compare results found in A B and C above. 16 Implications The major implications of testing the first hypothesis were expected to lie in a better knowledge and understanding of the three vessel systems as they currently relate to major U.S. seaports, as well as in an indication of what will probably occur when underdeveloped areas are increasingly opened up to modern ocean shipping systems. For instance, it was anticipated that bargeship systems might be proven more suitable for seaports in underdeveloped areas, because of lower invest- ments required by these ports for these systems than containership systems. Regarding the second hypothesis, the main implication of its test was expected to be greater knowledge and understanding of the current situation and future expectations of inland ports regarding international cargo flows via bargeship barges through them. For example, it was expected to be proven that there are small but growing amounts of such cargoes currently flowing through these ports as a whole, and that some of them are experiencing far more activity in this area than others due to various locational, economic, and product characteristics. In addition, by studying the effects of bargeship systems on U.S. inland ports, some knowledge of the probable effects of these vessels on inland ports in currently underdeveloped areas served in the future was expected to be obtained. Testing the third hypothesis was intended to increase the knowledge of the state of the current and anticipated situations regarding the relative utilization of bargeship systems by major 17 U.S. ports according to seacoast, as well as how such utilizations compare with the geography, agricultural versus industrial economic orientations, and transportation networks of these coastal regions. Assuming at least some meaningful estimates of major seaport volumes by vessel system could be achieved, such comparisons were expected to shed light on how the latter characteristics appear, using logical inferences, to affect the suitability of a coastal area for this study's three vessel systems. It should be noted here, however, that while the above hypoth- eses and their implications are important to this study, they are only part of its overall contribution. The organized, comprehensive compi- lation of knowledge in the Literature Search chapter is also important. Similarly, much other useful information was sought in the study's questionnaires which was related to, but not part of, the hypotheses tests. All of these information sources were expected to enable an integrated, multi-faceted analysis of the comparative impact of barge- ship systems on the nation's seaports and inland ports. Finally, the opinions of U.S. seaports and inland ports sought by the questionnaires with respect to the factors which encourage and discourage bargeship traffic at their location, were expected to yield further insights regarding which factors are thought to affect the bargeship traffic suitability of a location or area. CHAPTER II LITERATURE SEARCH Introduction This chapter is composed of two parts: (1) a description of the procedures used and sources consulted during conduct of the disser- tation's literature search, and (2) a summary of the information gathered during this secondary research concerning the alternative distribution systems, their components, and relevant exogenous forces. The first part is self-explanatory. Regarding the latter, initial emphasis is placed on giving the reader an overview of the historical, current, and projected situations of barge-carrying vessel and containership systems, with secondary attention given conventional ship systems for comparative purposes only. Next is a discussion of the domestic components of these distribution systems which receive primary emphasis in this dissertation, namely U.S. seaports and inland ports. Finally, the inland transport mode components, the labor and legislative situations influencing the distribution systems, and the relevant findings of existing studies are discussed. Sources Relevant material was gathered in this literature search through the use of reference sources and direct correspondence with 18 19 organizations involved with the t0pic area. Reference sources included Dorothy V. Ramm's Containerization bibliography from 1965 through 1970, the Guide to Business Periodicals from 1969 through the current date, Northwestern University's Current Literature in Traffic and Transpor- tation from 1971 through the current date, and the Maritime Research Information Service's MRIS Bulletin from January 1971 through June 1973. Organizations contacted for their available infonnation included most seaports and inland ports serving the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts, the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Maritime Commission, Federal Maritime Administration, Interstate Commerce Commission, Asso- ciation of American Railroads, American Trucking Associations, Inc., and the American Waterway Operators, Inc. Unfortunately, though contact was made with the two most expe- rienced LASH vessel Operators to date, neither could be of substantial assistance due to the confidentiality of information required by com- petitive considerations. Finally, recent editions (1969 to present) of scholarly publi- cations such as Dissertation Abstracts, Harvard Business Review, and Journal of Marketing_were also covered, in order to insure the origi- nality of the subject area. Though two dissertations were discovered in the abstracts which analyzed subjects relevant to this research,1 nothing was found which threatened its originality. 1William F. Schoell, III, "Causes and Effects of the Recent Growth in Barge Transportation: With Emphasis on the Period 1953-1964” (University of Arkansas, 1969), in Dissertation Abstractions Interna- tional, Sect. A, Vol. 30, No. 7, January 1970, pp. 2699A-2700A; andT 20 All researched material was recorded, retained, and categorized according to sub-topic area of interest for the reader of this disserta- tion. The following sections of this chapter treat each sub-topic area in depth. Vessel Systems Barge-Carrying Vessels Barge-carrying ships, as containerships before them, were devel- oped in response to inefficiencies in the operations of conventional ship systems. The creator of the LASH system, Jerome L. Goldman, describes the reasons for his invention as follows: . the origin of LASH goes back 18 years. . . . I became strongly convinced the conventional cargo liner design required major improvements in the area of cargo handling costs and port turnaround time.1 The ship which Mr. Goldman designed in response to this need combines the elements of barging and standard container operations, i.e., it is capable of carrying both. On certain ships, containers may only be carried in barges, on others a separate container handling and stor- age facility is designed into the ship's superstructure. LASH ships operating off the U.S. East and West Coasts have a container crane and a 500 short-ton capacity elevator-type crane which lifts and lowers from and to the water the system's 370 long—ton capacity barges (long tons Vernon C. Sequin, An Investigation of the Factors Inhibiting Growth of Containerization in Domestic Surface Freight Shipments, Michigan State University, 1971. 1Jerome L. Goldman, "How LASH Was Born--LASH Inventor Describes His System to ICHCA," ICHCA Journal, April 1970, p. 4. 21 and short tons have a very slight weight difference). Many LASH ships which Operate off the U.S. Gulf Coast have just the barge crane, a fact which will receive greater emphasis in analysis of the suitability of these coasts for bargeship operations. The barge crane is capable of loading and discharging one barge every fifteen minutes from any loca- tion within the port area, not necessarily at a pier. The system's barges may be loaded or discharged using conventional gear except when their cargo includes containers or other very large items, at terminals located either within or near the seaport area, or at inland river port locations after being towed there either singly or several at a time in integrated tows. Several statements have been made about the advantages of the LASH system, with the following being clearest, albeit incomplete: l. The LASH system will leap-frog port congestion by leaving her inbound barges to wait for unloading opportunity, proceed immediately on her voyage with loaded outbound barges, and thereby spend more pro- ductive time at sea. Her cargoes are delivered sooner. 2. LASH will eliminate the necessity for exporters or importers making large capital expenditures for new warehouse and dock facilities. 3. The LASH system can service small river and canal ports which are now inaccessible to ocean-going vessels. A saving in inland transportation costs results. 4. The LASH system will mean a substantial reduction in the number of times cargo must be handled. The result is less claims, and, in turn, lower insurance premiums. 5. The LASH system will make possible a steady, regular flow of goods to the market place, thereby enabling substantial reductionsirlinventory. This, obviously, means working capital freed up for other purposes and lower interest charges. 22 6. The LASH system will speed up delivery of cargo by eliminating delays enroute. The number of ports of call of the ocean-going vessel will be reduced to a minimum and so will port time--barges will be placed in the water promptly on arrival at each, port, and distributed to loading or discharging docks without delay. All receivers should, therefore, receive their cargo at about the same time rather than the receiver at the first port, whose cargo is on top, get delivery first, while the receiver at the last port with his cargo on the bottom getting delivery perhaps two or three weeks or more later. 7. The LASH system will offer a thru [gig] Bill of Lading, reducing paper work, and facilitating clearance and entrance of cargo.1 Additionally, the following advantages have been claimed for LASH: reduction in fleet investment costs; almost the complete elimina- tion of bad weather port delays; reductions in pilferage and overstow problems; straight-time stevedoring of lighters, which only remain in port instead of the ship, reducing overtime.2 While union and other problems (to be covered later in detail) have prevented complete realization of all of these advantages, the viability of the LASH concept and LASH operations have been quite strongly reaffirmed, both in the statements of its operators and cus- tomers thus far, and in the extent of the financial investments made in it by both ports and new operators. Central Gulf Lines, the first LASH operator, negotiated a 10- year contract with the International Paper Company in 1968, in which 1Niels W. Johnson, "LASH System-Revolutionary New Seaborne Transportation," Zosen, May 1969, Uraga Heavy Industries, Ltd., New York, p. 23. 2"LASH System Gets Underway," Containerization International, January 1968, p. 19. 23 the latter agreed to use "eastbound LASH voyages for 250,000 tons of wood pulp and linerboard annually from its Southern plants to customers "1 Not only were these opera- in the United Kingdom and western Europe. tions, which began in October 1969, hailed as highly successful by International Paper personnel on both the American2 and European3 sides of the Atlantic after approximately nine months' operations, but these claims are supported by near-capacity shipments on the all-important “ without which even the ten-year contract westbound return movements, would be unprofitable, and favorable statements by European exporters using this service.5 Furthermore, when Central Gulf's two sister ships showed an increase in their 1971 LASH volumes (700,000 tons to Rotterdam-~Europort alone),6 it raised its number of LASH ships on order from one to three, all of which are due for delivery and service in 1974,7 increasing its fleet size to five. Evidence of the firm's ability to generate 1"New Marine Systems Bring Containers to Inland Ports." Traffic Management, July 1970, p. 64. 2Ibid. 3J. Fletcher Morris, "Why LASH Makes Economic Sense," ICHCA Journal, August 1970, p. 6. I'"New Marine Systems Bring Containers to Inland Ports," p. 64. S"Acadia Forest--A 10 Million Dollar Guinea Pig," Containeriza- tion International, July 1970, reprint. 6Frans Posthuma, "Rotterdam--Europort--Versatility Increases Efficiency," Defense Transportation Journal, May-June 1972, p. 52. 7"Central Gulf Orders Two More LASH Ships With New Orleans Avondale Shipyards," New Orleans Port Record, May 1972, p. 34. 24 additional traffic to support the new vessels exists for such cargo items as peanuts,l cotton,2 and steel coils.3 Central Gulf has not been alone among operators in its accept- ance and implementation of the LASH. According to correspondence received from John V. Borkowski, Vice President of LASH Systems, Inc., the following have also taken place over the last five years toward increasing the amount of LASH vessels in the international maritime industry: 1. In late 1967, but for 1971 and 1972 deliveries (as compared to Central Gulf's 1969 and 1970 deliveries), Prudential—Grace Lines and Pacific Far East Lines contracted for five (5) and six (6) ships, respectively. 2. In August 1970, Combi-Lines ordered two (2) ships for delivery in mid-1972. 3. In August 1971, Delta Steamship Company and Waterman Steamship Company each ordered three (3) ships for delivery in late 1972 and early 1973. The preceding firms have also ordered substantial numbers of LASH barges to support these vessels. Cost and quantity information on these barges, along with that of the LASH ships, is shown in Table l. 1"Peanuts Aren't Peanuts," New Orleans Port Record, March 1972. p. 32. 2Stanley MantrOp, "U.S. Cotton Industry Gets Boost," Journal of Commerce, March 25, 1971, p. 7. 3"Philip Bros. Ships Products Overseas in LASH Vessels," Traffic Management, March 1970, p. 17. 25 .wm .a .me_ .m cha< .mucmEEou co chcsoq =.pumcu:oo mmcmm :oPFsz mmm mvgmz< .mocm mxxA= can we .a .Fwor .wm acmzcmw .mocwEEou we Pmcgzon =.mcwsoo muvc: mmcmm memwmz mam .a .NNmP .xmz .ucoumm “Log mcmmFLo 3oz =.mucmx uawcm mpmuco>< mcmcho 30z cpwz mawgm Im<4 wcoz 03H mcmuco mpzw .mcucmu= ”Num_ .0 pwga< ..84 .mcmmpco zmz ..o:H .mempmxm Im<4 .ucwuwmmcaumuw> .mezoxcom .> snow soc; cmppmJ "moccaom coo.em gem ooo.oop m om_.mm mmm.~ 0mm.mmm 4N m_MB0H ooo.- mew ooo.oo_ m1. mazes max»; <\z oom.¢m m1. a_;msampm casempez <\z oom.ew m awgmsmmbm appmo oom.NF com oom.~NF 0 mew; “mum and occwuma oom.mp Doe oom.mo_ m mace; moatu-_m.pcanzca ooo.m com oom.m_ cow oom.o~ N mazes .8508 omN._m omo._ ome._oF m awcmeawpm e_:u _acpcmo Accomv Aooowv AOOOWV Aooowv pmou consaz “moo consaz “moo Longs: pmou Lamazz acmanu mamamm mmmzH 4mmmm> ozH>mmee Pewec9=5eu Lew wepeme ace use ee>ecesw came ue: o>ez cows: ewes» ecu .mewueeme Lezue .ucescge>em —mceeed me» »e ee>egesw omega mewee—ocw meueum eeuwez ecu we mpeceecu epeemw>ee ppm we mzumeep as» acemmcemu waxy newsman cw upemu mwcu cw exegm memeepws make .ees mcwxeeeeeeee epeeu .owm— ..u.o .eeumcwgmez .mcmecwmem we meceu xEL< .m.= we emwpneam eewueELewew Eecw em—wesee :.meueum eeuwc: we» we mxezceuez e_eemw>ez zp—ewugmhaxr...ue~ .mceueceeo xezgmuez eeuwces< mew ”muceem mm m N 111 m mm pm N F -- w on Aexmep< we e>wm=puxev mxezcmuez segue PP< ewe men m ea meN eeN ome mam m -- mm me mega; ueeco eem.m Nee Km New ewe emu mum.m emo.m em wmm woe emu mxmxceeez emeeu ewwwema mem.~m mew wee mee.e new.” eem.e emm.m mom oew wmm.¢ mom omo.m smumxm ce>wm wqawmmwmmwz ee~.~ -- em~.~ -- -- -- Amuse; menacepwe xuwu cameos-eep_< «Lea mcweepecwv wmw.p -- me.F -- -- -- cmecee eeewxez e» merge—d .Le>wm mxcez .em secw xezgeuez peumeeeeeueH wpaw mmm4e mew mew eee.w mmm vm~.m cmegee :euwxe: ea newcepm .ce>_m mxcez .um mmm.v mum on mmp._ new mmo.m EoLw aezgmuez Feumeeeecuem wpeu we o>wmapuxwv mxezgmuez umeou wpzo emm.~ -- eem.m we eem -- 4mm._ -- eoe._ me me -- newco_a .uma: sax o» crewmc_> .x_owcoz socw xazcauaz _aemaoouceee u_e=a_e< . r . - . , smumxm Peceu eme.a .ew.m we. see WV... New.” amcem macaw ace» zaz aceeaeuce can fleeces.“ .ema: sex a» ewcwmcw> .x_occoz mew m Pmm _ mmm ewm Fem _ ewe F secw xezceue: .eemeeeecueH uwucepu< we e>wmspexev mxezcmuez emcee uwuce_u< peach Lm>o a .uu e— .uu Np .uu m .um o aeogw .9; cp op Np cu a ea c Leec: emzezeepe: we mepwz cw ecumeme mmwaom ><3mmwwo emeeu eeeeeu-.m.:= .mecee .2 emcemo "eeceem e+ _m+ e we N NF ewwweee N+ em+ _ PNm m NeN ewueewu< eeeeeu w- Fm- F N_ N we ume35pcez ewwweea P- em- m NeN m wNm ewecewp< spcez mepepm empwe: Hozpomgo P- o_- N mN m mm ewwweea N+ ow+ e omw N om ewpeewu< eeeceu _+ ow+ m mm N mN pmechcez ewwweea F- ow- _ om P om_ uwpeewe< cucez meueum emewes Hozsomzfi Nev New ooov Nev New ooov Nev New ooov ewwwmew =:wew= ewwwegw :ewmce>wo ewwwecw cewmge>wo Pepe» ece wepew xe eecweo wepew e» umee we N e =mmee= we N ewwwmew we & e uwwwegw we uez we uez e we peeeeee< me =mmee= acmceee< :C .meu.. ommw zH mmowmH1mmzH4 oz< mmzHN no onmmm>Ho >m :mmmmoez oz< =mzH . . . . . . . . . . AceeeAesmL we» Lew Axe ooo.m we Aomme> a can meeecAm L.ew use ooo.¢ we Aemme> e cog: eemeev may eucee we» chAAmA> Aemme> emece>e we Ameu AAAeo we mm a . . . . . . . . . . . . . oEAu :Axcez we emeuceeeme we onmme> we Aoceeauue eueem wo.o mo.o A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wee; AmeeeAeA mNA.o mNA.o mos . . . As:eee Lee «A Ameu. AeAAaeu .we ceAAeeLw me pceEQAaee emcee we Amoe meeeeeAeAe: m m we: . . . . . . . . . . . .AmgeeAv acmEeAzee segue Lew eeALee eeAAe~AALeE< eoo.eo~ eoe.omA moo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aeecme can Av AcoeaAaaa cacao we Amoo AaeAaae on.o on.o ume . . . . Assece ewe «V. Ameu AeAAeee we :eAAoeLw we meceeu eceem we Amee meeeceAeAez mN mN ume . . . . . . . . . . . . . AmcemAv meeeeu egeem Lew eeAcee eeAAe~Aucoe< ooo.ooA ooo.ooA ume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AeueAe Lee my meeegu mgeem we Ameu AeAAeeu c Q UWQ o o o o o o o a o o o o n a o o o a o o o o o o Azgnhmo .5va me—MLU eocm $0 ng32 mo.o mo.o ms . . . . . . . . .Ae=eco Lee AV. Amee AeAAeeu we eeAAeecw we eeem we Ameu euceeeAcAez on on me . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AmceeAv eeem Lew eeALee eeAAeNAALesq 06 0? mo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.~0&¢E .Um Lwn ”v 005m $0 HmOU FQHPQMU OOO.O_. OOOAOP 0 . . . . . . . . . c o o . o c o . . . . . . . AWLQHQE .UMV 005m $0 MOLM too—I..— mNo.o mNo.o NE . AE=eee Lee «A umee AeAAeee we eeAAeecw we ease eucee eeeewcem we «wee euceeeAcAez ow oe N: . . . . . . . . . . . . . AwgeeAv Ameu ocAuewcam Lew eeALee eeAAe~AAcee< 0A 0A ~e . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aweues .cm gee Av. seem eucme we» meAuewczm we umeu AeAAeeu OOOAGF OOOAmP N o o o o o o o o o o o o o . Amt-3w:— uomv Same *0 QmL< mNo.o mNo.o .ee . . . . . . . . Azeeee Lee my Ameu AeAAeee we :eAAeecw we Acne we Amee eeceeeAeAez oe ow we . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AmceeAV Amee :eAAuecAmeee Aeee Lew eeAcee eeAAeNAALeE< ooo.m ooo.m e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aeoume Lee av eeAAuacAmceu Aeee we Ameu AeAAeeu omA oeA A Amcmuesv eueee we ercme ONA em a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .AAwAem\mee m Lem meeuv AAA>AAuaeeLe,emece>< OOOnONF OOOAONF u. u u . . . . . . o . . . . . o . o . . . AER—Cfl LUQ WCOHV “DQSUDOLSH 5“.me coma“ oomoP m o c o a o u o o c o o o o o a o u . a o o a o Apps—LC“ Lug “V FWQHW .Fo hLflan mmm&w>< O.mN O.m —. o . o o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AFVFCW L3 WV meLOIIJUOU Q $0 @003 OOOLQ>< oN om x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aeueee Lee Ame sway eeAeAeEe wweum we geese: Aeuew eN om e . . . . . . . . . . . . . AuwAem Lee memo eAem Leev emco> euA> Le uceemcewu AAeL Le eeee e» aAem segw emcee meAccmwmeecA eA eeAeAeEo mcmxcez-xoee we geese: Aeuew Agueeeu AuAceeu AeeEAm eeAAAeAweo emqum>mo :A eucem meAeeAm>eo :A eucmm xAsm-xaaem AauAaAA anm-xaacm AauAaAA meeAAesemme we AmAA eee mAeesAm we meeAAAeAweo .A Axeo eA eAme erm-xeegm AeuAeAA AuAceeu chneAm>mo :A eAgem erm-xeegm AeuAeAw . . . . . . . . . . . . :0» Log umou anon peach . . . . . . . . . . . .3ng um 95% .mQEm mo umou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mumou uc0EqAaam —eAAaou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mumou wwmum ten Lona-— AeeA Ame AV meeAAeAzuAeu :eA Lee Ameu .AAA Am - eAcae AA aeAA .maAem we Amoe e A u Ameo AeeEQAeee Leer Amy Aeew+eesvmee A u Ameo ececu eceem Aev Aemw+umsvemu.ema A Iml-mnnw11.- Amou eaem Ame A w+ Ev u.o A .111-1111-1- - Amoe choawcam Ame A~A+Nev~u.~ a A- cAA+A~ a A u w eeAe; eA u Ameu eAAem AAV 5:: Lame...» Amv + Acv + Amv + ANV + AAA u mAmeu AcQEQAzoe AeAAeeu .m 1m1.+.1m1 n mAmeu wweAm ecu geese .< m.x A.e meeAAeAeeAeu eeA Lee Ameu sew eeAeeLew .AA Am< oom.A cem.A oom.A cem.A 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . Aescee wee «V wexwez-xeee a we one: emewe>< AA mm ANA AA x . . . . . . . . . . . Aewwae can Ame wage uaAoAaeo wwaew wo waessz wN mA Nm AA e . . . . . . . AeAwme wee AwAew weev eeAeAeee mwexwez-xeee we geezez eAwem mcecu eAwem meewu eAwem meewu eAwmm weewu AeesAm :eAAAeAwee -AwAeew-N -AgAeew-A111 -AwAeew-N -AwAeeo1A AuAeeeu eeeer>eo wow mmeAe> .AwAceeu.meAaeAe>eo wow meeAe> mcewuaszmme we AmAA use oneEAm we mcoAAAcAwmo .A h¢ee Awuceeu ueAeer>oo 28 2.... 3 233235 :3 woe :8 .A: As: _-wAeA_+__ u eAw A. mm + edwn; . 5.3 S 8.: .we...» we :8 A3 L522A: _-AueAA+_~ n Auw AAeAIA: -wum : + 3w ceAcx eA mAwuw +wuskue.wue+AAuw+AAEVAuu.Aue+Awumw+wumskumu.wumeu w.u umeu aceEeAeeo Loguo Avv gum CAP+PVPI IUD: + on a AIuIIAAIAAu w guAgz eA u umeu oeeguuxwucea m e eAAwA: Ae wwe 5e e.e e A A N 6 E . NA 5A.... 5 nelelewll a :8 eeAeetem A: 3 .A...AA+A: A ww A ed 1'- : + U H WIFE. n w 5A.... 5 I111 n .58 5.25 A: c AA+AAA A w+ av u.» A: + A2 + A2 + A: . see 29838 .338 A3 amINMWNMHWM n wwuum nee Lone; A< Dom-Q com-V Down? coma? > o u e u o u a u o o o c a a o e u o o a AW)” OOCOmF *0 Pawn”, 5 see: venue may segue on» ueAuAmA> Aemmo> omewo>e we umeu AAAoe Am Am An Ac 3 . . . . . . mEA» eAxsez we «aqueougoe no onmmo> we Aueeeeuue sauce ”Duo ”Dec ”00° @000 v e o o o I e o o e e o o e e o a o o o o e o o o o u o o 3‘!- ““83:— ANAe 8; mm; m~A.e .5... . A552: 3.8 A333 we 538.: e. £88.; we :8 8.5.35... m m m m A»: . . . . . . . . . . . . Amueoxv «Leuuewu Lew veAwoe :eAue~Ausea< COO-m 8°.m 80am COO-m LHU . e e . o o o e e e o o e o . .Asfl—Q Lg ”V “1.3095“ F0 “MOD Pfluwns 0 m D M LOB . o e e e o o a o o o e o e o o . ASH-bx Lav "LBUUSH LAO Lvfl‘ zuMom «ease guMem cease gamma acewu guuwm cease Aeeaxm :eAuAeAwoo . Lucwmnw . wucemuA . Luce ”N . pew»-— auueeeu emmeAe>ue Lew mmeAe> AuuceeuwmAeon>uo Lew moeA~> toecAuceus-AA u4mme wev haze eA Amumee AmegmA; 5AA: meAwpceee emeeAm>ee wev weee ce eemee ewe memee meAAece; emweum .om .e .oAmA .xwe> zmz .emweu we :eAAeNAAAcz .mceAAmz emAAes "moweem e.e .wwwwr. ee.A Aeeew e.m eA.AA ee.A Aeeeee eeNAeeAAeev umeu chAeee; emwmu e.m memee eeeee . . e.eA Aeee zeee em N Ae A Amee AeeeAAeeeee e.e we.~ me.~ Aeee AeeAeee Aemee> Imee Anwr. menewu .Am.eA AeAeA m.m Ae.A ee.m. Aeee eeAAeeee emcee e.m meeee weeee . . e.eA Amee gate ee m Ae N Aeee AeeeAAeeeee e.e em.N em.m Aeee AeeAeee eAee weeAeAeee m.m em.me AA.mm AeeeA e.eA ee.em ee.AA eeeee eeAAeeee emcee e.m meeee emcee . . e.eA eeee zeee em e Am A eeee AeeeAAeeeee e.e em.N em.N Aeee AeAAeee eAee AeeeAAee>eee AAA Acme» wee emewe>ev zez Eeww pemwweu weuez uAe:UAmAmeu Ammme> we eexA mmpmm guzeww amazmm< mwmm> cmA Awewee eAeeo use we go» AcmAeww Lee A :Av mA m4m mo mmAA >m mhmou masks; omA)urefer to the method of transportation used to move freight between distribution system modes. The major transportation modes are truck (T), rail (R), and ship (S). The modes represented by triangles ([3) indicate facilities where freight is transferred between modes. Inland modes are represented by the letter I, port modes by the letter P. Containerized freight is represented by a rectangle (E3) uncontainerized freight by a circle ((3). There are two major functional mode categories: one where a container is filled or emptied as a part of the process of changing modes, the other where there is a change in mode only. On the Figure a mode within a container (55]) pre- ceded by a mode 'within acircle (@) indicates the filling of a container at that mode. The reverse sequence indicates the emptying of a'container.1 The labels at the origins of the routes are self-explanatory. The figure illustrates both some of the wide variety of possible routes a containerized shipment can take as well as the interdependence of these components of a larger system. 1Matson Research Corporation, The Impact of Containerization on the U.S. Economy: Volume 1, pp. 7-8. 142 @@ .w .e 6me £3,539... .eemkeeeww com 68238 we aegweeoe .m.: a Q m 8 Q m .5553 .m.= 93 ee ceAAeNAwecASeeu we weenie: 2: 53:39.8 zuweomem A538. "eugeem .mgAueanAe :eAw o>Au3eemeweowlm§Amxm eeAueeAwumAe 232w eemzuweeAeuceu .A 9:6: e @1? E a.» m m 0 °‘. 1- ..A. o F O @ 222553 l e 9 lg 58% emNAamerAzee Aez A. o .A. o w. o 3:353 eeNAmezAAAeweesee .N ewemAw eme.AA emA eeeA eANA wee we» meAAz eee.m meAAz eee.A eeAAz em 9 Q . Azm2m>oz Azou emNA emA emA me» emA meA meAAz eee.m eeAAz eee.A meAAz em 4 6 4 o . Azm2m>oz mmzA .xseceem .m.: we» so ceAAeNAwchmwceu we peeeEA we» .eeAueweeweo :owemmem cemuez ”moweem .wmeAeAceu peewnoe Lew wees eceAcA he memeo ceAAeuweemeewu we eemAweeEeu .m ewzmAw ememAAz ooo.m oom.m ooo.~ oom.A ooo.A oom om>04e2m AszQAzom RCA IPA: Amxuoe no H30 uuA umhmou \ \ \ V¢¢9 \fiwxav. \ \ \ 0V \ \ \\\\\\\\\ \ ..om F 0.? '13 'nO/$ T46 60-» ////l ‘ ,/ 50-- / (1 .e 40“ ./ E: X“ / // I / AA' 188 / Ac/h 5?: “y’ 00515: ICC-OUT-OF-POCKET WITH 5;; 10% R01 ON EQUIPMENT 10",:3, EMPLOYED I n J 1 1 L . 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3.000 Mileage Figure 4. Comparison of transportation costs by inland mode for 20-foot container. Source: Matson Research Corporation, The Impact of Containerization on the U.S. Economy, Vol. I, U.S. Department of Commerce, San Francisco, September, 1970, p. 68. T47 movement, add the differing cost characteristics of some inland modal alternatives, the latter two of which were verbally discussed earlier.1 Such material, when supplemented in this research with similar material, regarding inland ports and conventional and bargeship barges, should provide a thorough picture to this research's readers of all the inland transport alternatives available to shippers. This is not to say, however, that the Matson study does not deal with the seaport components of containerized distribution systems. In- deed, there are extensive surveys of containership facilities at U.S. ports2 in the study, as well as such analyses as the comparative costs of construction of a new container terminal versus a new conventional. terminal versus a container terminal converted from a conventional terminal.3 Similarly, the Manalytics study made some relevant observations regarding U.S. seaports. One of these was already mentioned“ and stated that container crane lift capacities were chosen by them as the best overall measure of container port capacity. Tables 14 and 15, extracted from the study, illustrate their estimated 1975 container crane situa- tions by individual U.S. seaport and seacoast, respectively (with off- shore crane data included for completeness). The Manalytics study explained, moreover, why the Gulf Coast capacities have lagged and are expected to continue lagging behind the 1See p. 65 and pp. 76-82, 90-97, supra. 21bid.. pp. 88-106. 3mm. pp. 29-34. 1'See p. 46, supra. 148 TABLE 14 1975 CONTAINER LIFT CAPACITY BY PORT Pure Container Cranes Multipurpose Cranes 2 Lifts 2 Lifts Lifts in Major Port Number (000) Number (000) Container Ports PACIFIC COAST Seattle 12 960 3 90 Tacoma 2 160 Portland 2 160 5 150 San Francisco 2 160 Oakland 15 1,200 Los Angeles 9 720 Long Beach 17 1,360 San Diego 1 80 GULF COAST Brownsville 2 60 Galveston 2 160 2 60 Houston 4 320 6 180 Beaumont l 30 Port Arthur 1 30 New Orleans 6 480 Mobile 5 150 ATLANTIC COAST Miami 1 30 Port Everglades 1 80 Jacksonville 2 160 6 180 Savannah l 80 2 60 Charleston 2 160 4 120 Wilmington, N.C. 3 90 Norfolk 5 400 Portsmouth 5 400 30 Newport News 1 80 l 30 Baltimore 9 720 2 60 Wilmington, Del. 1 30 Philadelphia 3 240 l 30 Camden, N.J. Staten Island 5 400 2 60 Brooklyn 2 160 Port Newark 8 640 Elizabeth 10 800 Neehawken 3 240 Edgewater l 80 Port Jersey 2 160 Boston 3 240 2 6O OFFSHORE Honolulu 6 480 l 30 San Juan, P.R. 6 480 Anchorage 2 160 Source: Manalytics, Inc., The Impact of Containerization on the U.S. Transportation S stem, Vol. II (San FFancisco: U.S.‘Department OTTCommerce, February, 1972), p. 85. 149 TABLE 15 I975 CONTAINER BERTHS AND PURE CONTAINER CRANES BY SEABOARD Container Berths Container Cranes Seaboard Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Pacific Coast 73 27 60 40 Gulf Coast 30 ll ll 8 Atlantic Coast 154 57 64 43 Offshore J3 __f3_ __]_4_ __9_ Total 27l lOO l49 lOO Source: Manalytics, Inc., The Impact of Containerization on the United States Transportation system,*VOTL II (San FrancTSCO: TUZS. Department of Commerce, February, 1972, p. 87. 150 East and West Coasts: ‘Mentioning the fact that a new dimension is added to Gulf Coast cargo movements by their inland waterway connections, the study cites the growing use of LASH and SEABEE barges on these inland waterway connections as'a major factor leading to caution by these ports in their decisions regarding container facilities investments.1 Simi- larly, the study states that: Only on the Great Lakes, where under present plans there will be no pure container cranes, and on the Gulf Coast, where the projected low level of containerization of containerizable cargoes has preSumably slowed container facility development, will lift capacity not be sufficient [by l975] to meet demand (measured as twice the combined foreign and domestic cargo flows in the heavy direction without regard to peak loads due to seasonality or bunched ship arrivals). Similarly, only on the Great Lakes, where direct container service has been uneconomical, and on the Gulf Coast, where low volume trades are not conducive to containerization, is the projected demand for container slots [berths] greater than the projected capacity.2 The statements regarding the Great Lakes above helps to explain why they were not included as one of the coasts in this dissertation's analyses. Another obvious reason for their exclusion is the fact that giant con- tainerships and bargeships are too large to travel the St. Lawrence Seaway. Finally, regarding U.S. ports as a whole, Manalytics observed that "port capital investment in terminal development is being approached with increasing caution, and few speculative investments are likely to made."3 In the same vein, one of the study's major recommendations was 1Manalytics, Inc., The Impact of Containerization on the U.S. Transportation System: Volume II, p. 89. 2Manalytics, Inc., Impact: Volume I, p. 20. 3Manalytics, Inc., Impact: Volume II, p. l03. 151 that regional port commissions be-estabiished to coordinate and approve such investments'on'the'basis'of'regional'needs,1 a recommendation already cited 'earlier herein as being adopted and advocated by the U.S. Maritime Administration.2 Regarding the inland transportation system, some of ManaLytics' findings have already been discussed,3 while others“ paralleled those cited earlier concerning railroads5 and trucks.6 In addition, the study contained data regarding rail and truck capacities at major U.S. seaports (i.e., an incomplete seaport listing) which is shown here in Tables l6 and 17, below. Another task performed by Manalytics was the development of world trade forecasts for containerizable commodities through 1980. These forecasts include projected total imports and exports between the U.S. and foreign countries. 'Seaboard shares of such volumes were assumed to remain constant from 1968 through 1980, since the Manalytics forecast was based in large part on the consensus of five other studies' forecasts7 (one of which was the Transoceanic Cargo Studx), which also made this assumption. *Manalytics also analyzed and compared the other 1Manalytics, Inc., Impact: Volume I, p. 3. 2See p. 122, supra. 3See pp. 88, 100, supra. “Manalytics, Inc., Impact: Volume II, pp. 97, 98, lO7. 5See p. 82, supra. 6See p. 95, supra. 7Manalytics Inc., Impact: Volume II, pp. 9-23. l!52 we ucmsucoaoo .m.: use Nuch .ucoaoc mcrxcogsouuo ogu c, ummmaomwu No covuacmao ucmmwca egg wo «Laue: on» son: acrvcmqou N—muNz NmNLN> NNNUNQou .mEs—o> we acmucoa m can» mmop Nu—vco: m .Noccogus< “Lea . «a» .co>.xu—uu .230» :33 3 9.5—2, taxmbcoas acoucumu .Ncuu_woc soc» so a» mcummcucu n ._N=.scah am a» Ncoa soap magnumcu enema .mo. .q .Rmno— .xcuacnmu .oucmssou ”oumpucacm :mmv Hm ._o> .Emumxm covuoucoawcach .m.= wgu co :oNuNNFmeNNucou mo uuaasm ugh ..uc~ .Nuvuxpaco: ”oucaom Ne CNN.N oo_.N o _ N_ 0N-c «N N N menu—cc x»: N NNo.N oom.P_ N _ N«N NN-N «N N N caumaox NNNNN Lose NN NON.N oo_.N _ P N N-N «N N N «PNNNNN F oo¢.¢ oo¢.N o o ON N-N\_ «N N N ago—ucoa ON NON.N ooN.oN N N CNN N\_ N_-_ «N N N ecu—NNO o_ oem.NN ooN.NN N N NNN oN-N. «N N N gunoN N=ONN<4 NNNNN NNN: om oom.P coo.N o o N N-N «N N N couma_cugu NN NON.N ooq.N o N N N-o o nxu_uuaau tango UCLA Nausea Nana caucaomco apgmcaczo N_N=Nscah acoa Neaucaa .o: .Nuca Npguco: au_N one: _.c_2cah NNNONNNNN accscoN «N Naagmaocgh NsoNNNN N=__ucaz mkmom mow¢t h< mmHH~4~m xngan Lohms op NNmuum umquLmeccsu .chmFumFgFuFaev 42 Lo chmF mchFNv 4m ma Noe Numomu .NstNc mFFE-OON a :Fchz mchmcFEcmu UFFFNLF gmcqucou Fo ucmocman .NucmEm>oE FFNL ncm xuscu on coFuFuum cF umpo: mew; Nucm5m>oe magma new omcmu LFN mo Nm53F0> FFNEmN .mm .a .FNNmr .xgmameu .mocwEEou;Fo ucmspcmamo .mm:. ”oUNFucmcm :mmv FF .Fo> .EwNNNm :oFuNpcoaNcmcF .m.: mg“ co :oFNNNchcFNpcou Fo NUNQEF msF ..u:F .NuFuNchmz ”mucsom F .chcn .LN> em mm ow om NcmmFLo 3mz F .chcz . F mm mm om om cepmao: Nm mN om mm F comechcu N A: F .LN> om om mm Nv Nvmom cognac: N .mwcca .LN> Fm oN om oF mcoEFmem F .chc: .LN> ooF mm FN mN NFcaFmvaFna F A: N NF mo om an NN xco> 3oz .Fz F u.mmc:: o mN mm Fm m coumom Nmcou Any new Fwy mmmu .Nbae aFabaaN OONF maesFacN a .aaae acceFNme oFNF NauaFacFN ON-NNNF oNN.NoF bNNN.ONN aFgm Faco_b=b>=ou ON-NNNF coo.N NN-NNNF NNN.N Febzopv bacon aFgmbNLNN ON-NNNF CNN.NF NN-NNNF FSN.o¢ Febcogbcav aFgmaNLNN Nbcaebmb>=H .N.= FNSOF ON-NNNF oom.NNN NN-NNNF NNF.NNN a_;mab=_ap=ou m>FuaFconoucoz w>FFaFLuNwoicoz Npcwsumm>cF FFNcm>o ON-NNNF oNe.NN n8N.NN ach Facon=b>=ou o NN-NNNF oNo.N Febzobv aNLNn aFgmbNLNN o NN-NNNF oNo.¢N Febco;bcav QFSNbNLNN NaFFe NNN.N\NNNOU amp: ON-NNNF ooN.om NN-NNNF ooo.o¢N anmcacFNbcou m>FuaFconaucoz m>Fuchummoucoz NpcmEuNm>cF Fchm>o omnmumF oom.mF mxnmmmF ONN.mm ach chowucw>cou omnmmmF ooo.N muummmF NwF.m Fumzouv magma aFgmmmgmm omnmumF omN.mF mmlmcmF mum.oF Aumgonucmv awzmmmgmm mmFFE mwm.vF\ummou Fon omummmF oom.F¢ mmumomF QN¢.FN awcmgmcmmucou w>quFcuNmoucoz w>FFQFLummoucoz Nucmagmm>cF Fchm>o NON.NN NNNN.ONN a_;m FacoFNCbseou o NN-NNNF coo.F Feb30Nv bNLNa anmbNLNN o NN-NNNF NFN.N Anacozacav aFgmpNLNN NaFFE Noo.N\bmaoo SNNN ON-NNNF NON.NNF NN-NNNF NNN.NN¢ aFgmcacFNbcou m>FpQFcumwoucoz m>FpaFcuNmoucoz NucmEuNm>cF FFNLm>o cowgma 05F» Fooowv umucmEEoo Accomv pesos< memo pesos< NmFuFFFuNm Emwmxm FmNNm> NmFFz Nazcmpmz ucchF Npcmsumm>cF nmzcmFm memo op NucmENNm>=F Fmm 4mmmm> >m mHZNZHmm>zF hmmFNu ocF ooF ooF ooF ooF o o o o o coomaoz ooF ooF ooF ooF ooF o o o o o NoFLugu axe; m m m m 0N o o o o o NcmmFLo :uz o ow o o o o cN o o c aconuFaw uFFFNLu Eoumam nchmmcmn o: unEuF #38 .33 4. UFFFNLN gunman anmumgaa o: FENF: oFFFNcu Eoumxm nFsmwaLan o: NouNFaLm>m upon OF S F: 0F 2 m m. m m m 222.352. <2 <2 <2 (\2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 52 32:23 ON ON 3 mn mu ON 8 3 N 3 eBmEEFF: 8F 8F 8F 8F 2: o o o o c 532.55 mm mm mm mm mm 2 2 2 mF mF 25?; m N N N m c o o o o 9.8.5:». 4. uFFFnsu Emumxm achwmcun o: manFoceFFca 8F SF 8F 8F 2: o o o c o are» 52 <2 <2 <2 <\z <\z <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 coumom "chou hmzou nz< 35555.28 .3: no muwFaeuFLegu==ee e.eFNL.> Fepzepe pecan aweNaNLNN . . N._ eeN.NN e.F eee.NN N.e eee... Feecoeueae aFemeeLeN e.NN eee.NNN.F e.Ne eee.eNN e.ee eee.eeN NFeNLecFaeeoe e.eeF eee.eee.m e.eeF eee.eeN.N e.eeF eee.eee.N FNNeF FFNLe>e 5.2. «.me eee.eNN.N N.Ne eeo.NeN.N e.NN eee.NNN.N QFeN Fe=e_e=a>=ee e e e e e e Fepzeev pecan NFSNaeLNN pcoeFeFeN F.N eoe.oNF N.F eoe.NeF N.F eee.NN Febcoeaeav aFemeNLNN N.NN eee.eNN.F N.NN eee.eNe.F N.¢N eee.eeN.F ngmechNeeee e.oeF oeo.mFN.m e.ooF mFN.Nev.m o.oeF me.Nee.m FeueF FFece>o segue F.mw eoe.eee.m o.Fm mmm.emm.¢ «.mm cmo.NNN.¢ ngN FeceFu=e>eeu e e Feazeee eaten aFgmaecam NFgeFeeNFFga o o Femcezucev ngNemLem N.eF eee.NNe e.N NNF.NN¢ N.¢ FNN.eNN QFgNLecFeeeoe a2568.: aeee.eee.NF . e.eeF eee.Nme.eF FaeeF FFNLe>e emcee N.FN ee.eeN.N F.NN oe.eeN.N e.eN eee.eee.N nga FeceFNem>=oe no no Femzeuv emcee ngmemcem xLeF zez e.F eeeo.eON-eNF NN.e ueee.eNF-NNF N.o Ueee.NNF.eeF Feecegucev NFsmeNLNN N.e¢ geee.eeN.N N.Ne NNNN.¢eN.N F.Ne aeee.NNN.e NF;NLac_ee=oe eem.eeo.F NNe.eeN FNe.NNN FNNOF FFace>e emcee N.FN eee.mem N.NN eeN.eNN N.Ne ee¢.¢NN ngN FaeeFe=e>=ee eoeNeN N.e NNN.N e.e e me.e FNe Fepzeev pecan NF;NeeLNN N.e eNN.N F.e NNe.F e e Feegegecev aFgmeeLNN N.N¢ eeF.¢ee e.Ne eeN.Nee e.eN eeN.NFN QFNN LeeFaecee nF98 FN .emu .cmw NeeF-mcee .Fe> .emu .eew NeeFiueee .Fe> .emu .eow Ncepumcee Ewumxm FwNNu> NeFFx Nasceuez ecchF :53 we N Que... No 1P Fae. Fe N NessFe> NNNF NessFe> NNNF NassFo> FNNF ereFozF m 4mmmm> >m mmxagc> ow¢o segue o.mm coo.moo o.om eem.me¢ o.mm oNN.oem chm FeceFu=e>ceo Fser Feeteuv emcee ngNemLem . . Faucezucev ngmemLem e.me coo.mme o.o¢ Nem.oFm o.mm mFe.omN ngNceeFeeceu FeueF FFece>o L230 o.ooF ooo.ooo.N e.ooF ooo.mom.F o.ooF ooo.NNm erm FeeeFu=e>eeu Aeezeuv emcee ngmemcem Neeeche>m ugea Feosecucev ermeecem ngmceeFeuceu coo.FNmAN oedamFo.N oomqoom.N FeueF FFNce>o segue e.ou ooo.mme.N o.mN ooo.omN.N 0.0m ooo.ooo.N ngN FeceFuce>ceu Ne 08. N Na S e F833 8...... £888 222.852. o o o Feocezucev ngNemLem o.om coo.moe.F o.mN ooo.omN o.o~ ooo.oem ngmcmeFeuceu ooo.o0m.N coo.ooN.N ooo.ooF.N Fence FFecm>o Legeo o.om ooe.omN.F o.om ooo.omN.F <\z <\z ngN FeeeFuee>=eu zee=e>em o Femzeuv magma ewgmmmcem m e.eN eee.eem e.eF eee.eNN e Feecegeeev ngNeeLNN o.om ooo.omN o.om ooo.ome <\z <\z ngmceeFeuceu coo.mom.F o.ooF NFN.vmm.F mme.eeF.F FeueF FFNLe>o cacao F.om ooo.ooN.F o.m¢ NFN.eme.F o.ooF mme.oeF.F ngN FeeeFeee>ceu :eumchFFs m.m coo.mm o.F ooo.mN Feezeuv emcee ermemLem . Femgecueev ermemcem ¢.m ooo.ooF m.e coo.mN ermmeFeuceu coo.omw.F mNF.omm.F oom.mmN.F FeueF FFNLe>o emcee «.mm oom.Nmm o.me FNF.woo.F N.mN oFo.eNo.F erm FeeeFu=m>ceu Nae 8N FBSF been 2:888 csmetze o.o ooo.oF mNo.o omN Femgezucev ngmemcem o.o¢ ooF.Nmm m.em coo.Fem m.¢N omN.mNm ngmcecFeueeu .Fe> .emu .cew NceF-mce4 .Fe> .emu .eew NeeF-m:e4 .Fe> .emu .eew Neeh-mee4 eeumxm FoNNe> FNm_Fm NezgewmzimmchFF Fave» me1m1 reach me a. lbeueh Fe m Fm NNmF NasaFe> FNmF hmoacmm ewchucouusmN m4me Lefie e.Ne eee.eeF.F e.NN eee.eem e.eN eee.eeF.F eFeN FaeoFeeescee eoemasFae e e e e e e Fepzeuv pecan aFngeLNN c.mN ooo.omv o.cF ooo.omF o o Avmsegueev ngNemcem e.N eee.eN e.¢ eee.eN e.e eee.eN NFNNLeeFaueoe eoe.eeN.N eee.eeN.N eee.eeN.¢ FNNOF FFNLa>e Lafie e.NN eee.eee.N o.eN eee.eeN.N e.NN eee.eee.N a_gm FeeoFNea>=oe seemeoz N.N eee.eNN Feaxeee pecan NFngNLNN a o.FN ooo.oom.F o.mF ooo.ooN Femgezueev erNemcem o.FN eee.eeN.F o.FN eee.eeF.F e.¢F eee.eme aFgmceeFNecoe eeo.eee.e eee.FNe.N eeN.FNN.N FeeeF FFeLa>e L28 ¢.ee eoe.eNN.e N.NN eee.NNN.N e.eN eee.eNN.e a_;a FeeoFN=e>=oe Nceb L :o e.eF oee.oee e.oF eeo.NeN e.eF eee.NNN Feazeev began aFeNeeceN F e z e.NF eeo.eem e.eF coo.NeN e.m eeN.NeN Fepcogoeav a_gmaecam N.N oee.eNN N.N eee.NeN N.e eoe.eeN aFgmcaeFeucoe eee.eeN.F NNF.NFN.F NNN.NFN FNNOF FFaLa>e e.N ooe.ee e.N NNN.FN e.N Nee.e¢ Nbecaa Legee e.NN eee.oeF.F o.NN NNN.NNN o.NN NNN.¢NN NF;N FeeOFNcb>=oe ease o o o Femzeuv emcee gFgmemcem F o o o Feecegueev chmmmcem . FeEFcFE v ngmcocFeuceu HF28 gene ooe.FNN.ee ooe.NFe.ee eeee.NNF.eN FNNOF FFacese ooo.mNF ooo.oFF ooo.oFF segue ANNeszue: F.NN eee.eeN.NN F.Ne NNN.NNN.NN N.Ne oee.eeN.NN e_;m FaeoFe=e>=oe eeaFeF No NNFFa N.o NNN.NN F.o NNN.N¢ Foo.o FNe Feaaoee mecca aFgmaNLaN Noe.N ceFmF e.N oNe.eNN N.F NNN.NeN e.e eee.NeN Nepgoeaeav aFgmeNLNN NN .emu .eew mcehimcea .Fe> .emu .cww Neeh-mce4 .Fe> .emu .eew Ncep-mce4 smumxm FeNNo> ”Ne—F: Nazcouez eceFeFv ES N0 N :30» N0 N 5°» .6 N F285... NesaFe> NNNF NeeeFo> NNNF NeeaFe> FNNF FNeNe eee.eeN eee.NNN eee.NNN Neohec a x.=e--cee.e e.NN eee.eeN.N e.ee eee.NNN.. e.Ne eee.NNN .em .eeo..ea>=ee Nausea. emcee ngmeecem eeuNFececu com 92 8923 e.e. 2568 e... 8...... €22.83 .238... e.NN eee.ee... e.eN eee.eeN e.NN eee.NNN a..w.p=.eeeee eee.eee.. eee.NNe eeequN .eeeF ..eLo>e ngee e.eN eee.eeN e.NN eee.NN¢ N.NN eee.¢.N a.eN .anFNebseoe usage. Feazo». be... a.=NbNL.N e.e. eee.ee. Feeeegbea. a.ngNLNN e.ee eee.eee e.NN eee.NNN N.e. eee.eN .FNNLeeFNNeee Nee.Nee.. eeo..eN.. eee.NN... .NSOF ..ece>e Leebe e.eN eee.NN... e.NN eNN.NN... e.eN eeN.NN... a.;m .aee.eeb>=oe ee...co. Femzeuv wagon erNemgem Feeceguee. ermemcem e.eN eee.NNN e.N. om...eN e.e. eeN.N.. n.5Nch.Neeee e.ee eee.e.e.N e.eo. eee.ee..N e.ee. eee.eNN.. .NNOF ..aea>e N.N eee.eNN N.N eee.eeN N.N eee.eN. Neeean--eeeee N.N. eee.eee «.mN eee.eee ..eN eee.e.e n.5N .aeo..=e>=oe a...aeN o e e e e e Feaxeev ooze. a.gmbeLeN o o o o o o Aeogezecev ermomcem N.NN oee.eNN.. e.NN eee.e.N.. N.NN eee.eNe.. a.gmtpe.a.eoe uF28 FNN: NNN.NeN.N. eNN.NNN.¢. NNN.NN..¢. F.N.OF ..Ncbse eee.oe NNN..N Nee.e¢ emcee e.NN em..em..N. N.N. NN..NeN... N.NN N...NNN... a.;m .eeo.eea>eoe .o wwwnnzmmmmu_emnvuw e.e .NN.NNN ..e NNN.Nee N.e NNN.NNN .eaze.. be... ..;NeNeNN NNe Legee e.eN eee.NN... e.eN Nee..NN.. e.NN eee.NN... g.cm .eeo..=a>=ee NpFLaee a... e.o. eoe.NN. e.e eee.ee. e.N eee.ee Faeroe. be... a.gNeNLeN Feocezueev ngmoocem ermcoeFeueeu .Fe> .emu .cmw Nee»-mee4 Feueh Ne N1 mmsaFe> man .Fe> .emu .eeu Neehimeee Feueh Fe N muesFo> Num— .Fe> .emu .eew Neehuoce. quepime N. muesFe> Fum— eeumxw FeNNe> vascFucOUuumN m4mo oee.emm.m ooo.eoe.m eoe NNN.N e N Ncmsuw m.em eee.eeN.om N.Ne eee.Nem.me m.we eee.eee.me F: FeeeFuem>ee . . ... eee.NNN N.e eee.N.N N.. eoo.NNN .emze.. magma .FgNmNLmN NmzemeN N e .«FeF ..N eeo.NNN.e e.N Nee.N.N.N N.e eeenNNN Femeoguem. a.gmmNLmN m.em ooo.eNe.NN N.NN eeo.NNe.eN F.mN coo mwm.oF ermcmcFeueeu mequwN.NN FemmNquFN meemwem.mF mFeNeN FFece>o eom.eNN.m mNe.Nem.c FeN.NFo.N Ncmgeo N» a: a . N.ee NNN.NNe... ..eN NNN.Nee.e. N.NN NN..N¢..e. ..em .meo.m=m>=oe . ”MAW“ N.M¢N.nw.»m N.e oeo..N N.e NNe..e .emzo.. mace. m.;mmmemN Nmo e.mN eom.NmN e.e¢ eoo.NFm e.em eoo.mmm mcmgeo e.mm eem.ewN e.mm ooe.¢oN o.em eoo.mmm ngm FeeeFN m>=eu Amcemx FNuNFNF Aemzeuv wagon chNmmgem emeFo :em o.mF oom.eFN o.m ooo.vo Feocesucev chNomcem o.m cem.FN ngmcmeFeuceu oeo.mNN.N eee.mNN.e coo.NNe.N .mp0. ..NLmso N.o ooo.omm o.m coo.mmN o.N coo.omm Aem\emv--gmnuo o.Fm ooe.emm.N e.mo eeo.FeN.N o.mm eee.mNN.N chm FeceFN=m>eeo FNLem» FNUNFNV Faeroe. magma ngNemgem NeFemc< Ne. ¢.N eee.eNF e.F eoe.ew Femcegecev erNmecem e.o¢ ooo.NNN.N o.mN coo.NNF.F o.wN eee.mme.F ngNcmeFeueeu eem.emm.e eeN.FNe.N me.eFF.e FNNeN FFNLm>o omN.NFF.e mNe.FNe.N FeN.FNN.m Nfiee Nye--cmguo e.¢N NN...NN.N e.NN N.N..NN.. e.eN em...eN.N m.;m .mee..=m>eoe .NLNmN .mbNFm. N.o mmm.eN e.o wwe.ON e o Femzemv emcee e.:mmmcem comma ace. c o o o o o Femcecucev ngmmeem N.me NNe.eNN.e m.me eee.mmm.F e.mN NeF.eeN.F ngmcmeFeueee o.ooF eoe.eee.e o.eoF Nee.mNm.m e.oeF FNN.NNm.¢ FeueF FFecm>o ..efio o.eF eoo.eee N.NF FmF.Nme N.eN NNm.mmm chm FeeeFucm>ceu ecNero o.F ooo.om m.o coo.Fe Femzeuv magma ngNmmLem Aemcegucev ngmmmcem o.mm eee.emm.e e.Nw Fme.NNm.e N.mN woe.Nmm.N ngmcwcFeeeeu .Fe> .emu .emw Neepumeem .Fe> .eou .cow Neehumcee .Fe> .eeu .eme Neepumeem eeumxm FoNNm> FNu_Fm Nezgoue: vechFv ilFeueF Ne N FmNeN Neiml. 1FeueN Ne N Nm NNmF Nme=Fe> NNmF NmeeFe> FNmF Naomem use emceguee mcFeeFuxme ooo.eom.mm ooo.oeN.oN ooo.FmF.Ne eFeNeN FFece>o oeo.emm.m ooo.emo.m coo.NNN.N Ncezeo m.em ooo.eON.om N.No coo.Noo.me m.mo ooo.ooo.oe chm FeceFuee>ceu NNo coo.mNN.m ooo.mom.e ooo.NFo.N Ncezuo m.oe ooo.mmo.FF e.om ooo.mee.oF o.mm ooo.meF.oF ngm FeceFece>ceu NeFFE mNm.N N.o eoe..N N. eoe..e e e .mmzoev meemm g.cwmmemm .Nmee FNN: N.N eoo.mem ..N eoe.oNN v.0 coo.NN .emcoemem. m.:NmN.mN N.mm ooo.meN.mF N.Ne ooo.mNm.m N.me ooo.me.m ermcecFeeeeu ooo.oFm.NF ooo.mwe.eF ooo.omF.eF eFeNeF FFeLe>o ooo.oo ooo.Fm ooo.oe Nceceo o.mo ooo.emF.NF m.oN ooo.mON.FF m.em ooo.mmm.FF erm FeeeFNce>ceu NeFFs Nwm.eF e.e ooo.moN F.N ooo.moo m.o ooo.Nmm Fee3euv emcee chmemcem Fmo ooo.mNF ooo.oFF ooo.oFF Nceceo F.No ooo.oom.NN F.0m ooo.omN.oN m.mo coo.eow.NN erm FeceFuce>ceu NeFFE Noo.N N.o ooo.mw F.o ooo.ee Foo.o ooo.F Feezeev emcee erNemLem Fm .emu .cew NceF-m:em .Fe> .emu .ceo Nceh-m:e4 .Fe> .emu .cew NeeF-oce. seemxm FeNNe> NeFFz Nazceuez ecchH FeueF we N FeNeN Ne N FeueF Ne N NegeFe> NNmF NegeFe> NNmF mesaFe> FNmF Nmm 4mmmm> >m mmz=40> hmm¢tt=m oN m4mew ”.u.o :eumchmezv FNmF Leeseueo "NNLeAEF ecu NuceaxN Ne Nusmszmwm .Namceu we eeecem .eugeeseo Ne uceEuLeeeo FWNMF "euw”MMe Fa . a N.0N N.0. 0.0N 0 0.0N 0.0N 0.00 00N.N 0.N. 000 0.0N 00... 000.000.. 000 0.0N 0 0.0N 0.00 0.00 000 0.0. 00. 0.00 000 00000F 0.00 0.0 0 0.0N 0.0N 0N... 0 0 0.0N 00N 000.0000 0.0 0:00.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 000 0 0 0.0N 000.. 0.00000 "00000 F00: N.00 ..NN 0.N. N.NN 0.0. N.0. 00< ..e NNN.0.-- FN<00 .000 0.N0 0 0.0N 0.0. 0.00 00... 0.0N 000 0.N 00 N0000>.00 0.00 0.0N 0.00 0 0.0N 0.0N 0.00 000.0 0..N 00N.. 0..N 00N.. 000000: 0.N0 0.0. 0 0 0.00 0N... 0.0. 0N. 0 0 00.0000 0.00 N.N0 0.N0 0.00 0.0 0.0N 0.0N 0.00 00N.0 0.0N 000.. 0.0 000 0000.00 :02 0.00 0.0N 0 0.0. 0..0 .00 0.0 0 0.0 0N 00000.00 0.00 0.0. 0.0 0.0. 0.00 00... 0 0 0 0 0000. ”F080 0000 00.N0 00.0. 0..00 00.00 0.N 0.0N 00< ..e N00.N--0FN¢00 FN0 0000 0.0N 0.0 0 0.0N 0.0N 0.0 0.0N 0...):000000 0.0N 0 0.0N 0.00 0.00 00N.. 0.0N 000 0.0N 00N 00000000 0.0. 0.00 0 0.00 ...0 00N.. 0.N 00 0.0 00. 00000.0..: 0.N0 0.N 0.N 0.N0 0.N0 000 0.0 0. 0.00 N00 00000.0000 0.NN 0 0.N 0.00 0.NN 0.. 0.00 0.0.00.> 0.NN 0.0. 0.N0 0 0.N 0.00 0.00 000.N ..N 0.NN 0NN.. 0002.0.00 0.00 0.. 0.0 0.0. ..00 000.0 0 0 0.0. 0N0 0.00.000..00 N.00 N... «\z <\z <\z <\z N..0 00N.0 0.. 00N 0.00 000.N ..000 .0000. 000. :02 0.00 0.0 0.0N 0.N 0.0 0.00 N..0 000 ... N. N.00 000 000000 "F0<00 FN LeFFeo Faye» Ne NV eexF . hm000 00:0. 0000000< 000.00000 0.00 0.0000000 0.00.00.00000 Nermemcem FeceFuce>eeu 0.000 ms=.0> 000000000 NNN. 00000 000.0> FNNO.. 000.000 Feem<00 mu4~t ><3¢mh<3 oz<42~ oz< mum>h :04; Qw¢ mmz=4o> 4 hmec ..u.o .eeumchmezv FNmF Lenseeeo ”mucemeF ece Nucemxm we NuchFzmMm .Nemeeu Ne seecem .euceEEeu we useEuLeeeo .m.: “euceeme o.oF 0.0 o o.oF 0.0F com 0.N on o o .000: .ce>eeuce> o.oF o.oF o o o o o o o o .000: .eFesxFo <\z <\z <\z <\z o.mF-oF N.o N o.0N <\z .000: .ze0>00e0 “Fm0:3eLm 0.00 0.N o 0.N 0.00 oNF o.F N o o NNxeF .0:00.< 00e0 0.00 o 0.00 o 0.00 oNF 0.NN em 0 o .0F0 .N0Fu 050000 <\z <\z <\z <\z 0.N0 00N N.o 0 o o .0F0 .eFe0000e0 0Hw<00 0000 0.0m o.oF o 0.0. o.ooF mNF o o o o .e> .e0e50eFa 0.0N o.F o o 0.0N o F.o F o 0 >2 .0000F< 0.00 o.0F o o o.ooF 0N o o o o .000: .ce>F¢ FF00 o.ooF o o o o.ooF 00 o o o o .0009 .0eece0 zez HF28 Nm< .m.= 0< .Fe 000.m--eFm LaFFeo FeueF Ne NV e000 erm NemLem Nngm 00:0 NeeF-a:e0 mcanmceJ Nee»-m0e0 NeFF: aezceue: ecchF :eFN emcee NeFLNNFo 05e00eueFNmF FeeeFuce>eou eezph necegee< -LecFeuceu 000m ngmeaLem ngmgeeFeueeu 000:0eauem Face000e>ceu ecegm essFe> eeueenec0 mNoF esezm eseFe> FNNmFF aceuceu ueechceu-smN u4mo m.mm mmF o.o~ Fe e.mF 0N e on FeeeFuce>=ee--Le;0o .e eueN:e ¢.No mmN N.mN 00N 0.0m moF ngN FeceFuee>ceu 00 F 0 0.0 0 0.0 N 0.. N 30.50. 00...... 0.0000000 uF28 003m c.FoN.NN mom.F mom.wm m FeueF FFeLe>o FNF mNF N.oNN e Lee FeeeFuee>0eu-- e>FuewceNeo . e>FuchuNem e>FueNcumeo . .. moo Nm 00N 0N0 mm Ncchcee xFee 0e000 1:0: mFm -cez Fem -cez N.NNN chm FeceF0=e>ceu m0=eu 00 .euLeF0 0000 (\2 <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z (m .300300ecm o.ooF N.mNF o.ooF F.NNF o.ooF m.moF 0.00 FeeeF00e>=eu <> .e002000x NmN.F mmm N00 Fe0eN FFece>o F.o F F.o F o.N Nm emcee FeceFace>meuuu 0.0m moo.F 0.0m 00N o.om mmm NLchcee NFee ceuagezuo .0 ”0.0N 00N ”0.0N N0. “0.0N 0.. 0.00 28.00008 .2 000.0 F.o F o o Feezeuv emcee erNemgem o.ooF me o.ooF 0N o.ooF mm 000m FeeeF00e>eeu Nu .eeeeea :ez NoN.w FeueF FFece>o o.mm mNN.N FFe xFan--ceguo (I .Le>F¢ FF00 o.Fv oF o.Fv NF m.o 0N 0000 FeceF00e>ceu 000.0N Feueh FF00e>o o.mm moo.FN <\z <\z o.mm NNN.mN NLexceu FFe--Le00o u: .eceFuce0 m.o 0N <\z <\z o.o mF 0F00 FeeeF00e>ceu ooF FeNOF FFece>o o.mm NoF <\z <\z <\z <\z 0000 FeceFNce>ceu m: .wceemgeem 0.0 0.0 <2 <2 <2 <2 30000003 0.200900 HFm Fooov eseFe> Ammo. essFe> Fooov EeNNNN FeNNe> “NeFF: mezceaex.veerc~v queF me N 00°F-m0e4 Feuep we N Ncehumceg Feueh Ne N NceF-mee0 Fm mNmF 0e532. NNmF NeesFe> FNmF Naomm gummm> >m mmx=40> omh econ ecchF eem .lr 0 0 000.. 0 NNN.F 0 N.0.0.F 000000 F000F00m>000-- 00.0 F00000 000.00 00.0 .00000 000.0N 00.0 F00000 N0N.00 000.0000 0.00--00000 00: 0.0.0.. -000 .000.. -002 0..0..N 0.00 .000F0000000 000.0. .0000 0000 m.moF N.NN N.N Feezeuv emcee ngmemcem 0 0 0 0.00cm0F00000 0 00. 000.FN 0.00. 0N..0. 0.00. 0.0..N 0L0Fcc00 0.00--c0000 x. .0000 0000. 000.0 0N0.N 000.0 .000. F.00000 0.00 000.0 0.00 N0N.N 0.00 0.0.N 000.cc00 0.00-- 0.0N 000.. 0.00 N0N.F 0.0N N.... 00000 .000.000>000--c0000 x. .m.FF>002000 0.0. 000 0.0. N00 0.0. 000 0.00 F000F00m>000 «\z <\z <\z «\z <\z <\z F00300. 00000 0.0000000 00N.N N00.N 000.N .000. .F0cm>0 0.00 000.N 0.00 00N.N 0.00 00..N 0c0.cc00 0.00 000--0m000 0. .00000000 0.0. 0.0 0.0. 000 0.0. 000 0.00 F000F000>000 NF.o 0 No.0 N Feezeuv emcee 0000emcem N0. 00. 000 .000. ..00000 0.00 00. 0.00 N0. 0.00 N00 0.00 F000F000>000 0. .000000 0c00 F.F m.F F.F 0.F N.0 0.F Feezeuv emcee 0000emcem 00. 0 N0. . 0N. .000. ..00000 N..0 00. 0.00 F.NNF 0.00 0.NN. 0.00 F000F00m>000 00 .000000 0.0 N. N.N N.0 0.N N.0 F002000 00000 0.0000000 <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z m: .eFeem000e0 00N 0.00N N0N 0 F000. F.00000 0.0N om m.mN m0 N.FN 00 e cee Fece000e>cee--ceeuo . 0.00 0.. 0..0 0.00N N.00 00N 0.00 F000F000>000 00 .00.0 000000 0.NN 00 F.0 0.0. 0 0 F00300. 00000 0.0000000 000.00 0000. 000.00 .0000 000.00 00000 000000 .00000 F00FleN0300000 00000.. .000F 00 N 000F-0000 .000F 00 N 0000-0000 .000. 00 N 000F-0000 F0000<00 0000.00 N00. 0000.00 N.0. 0000.00 F00. F000<00 vechucounsmm m4m

.00.00000 +.m0.~ 0>.00.00000 +~mm.~ 0>.00.00000 «mm 0 0.0.0000 0.00--00:0o -J||a -000 <.z -000 0.0 .000 000 0.00 .000.0000000 000.0. .0000 .00. .0 ..00 ... .000000 00000 0.0000000 on o o .uosogucov 0.0000000 00.0 0000 0000 0.00.00.00000 0.. .0 .000. ..00000 0.00 00 0.00 00 0.00. 00 0000000-00000 0: .000000 0.000 0.. «.0 0.. 0.0 0.00 .0:0.000>000 0.00. 00. 0.00. 00. 0 00. 00. 000.0000 0.00--00000 0: .000000 000...: 0.00. 0.0 0.00. 0.0 0.00. 0.0 000.0000 0.000-00000 0: .0..0a 0..0: 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.: 000.0000 0000-.00000 0. .0000000 000.0 00..0 000.0 .000. ..00000 . . 0.. . 0.0 0.0. 000.. 000.0000 0.00 .00-00000 . 000.0000 .000 0. 0 0. 0.0 0 00 0.0 0.0. 000 0.00 .000.0000000 0000000 000 0000.00 N.0 . Acute». mason 0.0000000 .cou .0 “cm 00.02. 0.00 0.0 0.00 000 0.0. 000 0.00000.00000 0: 00..0000 0.00. 00. 0.00. 0.. 0 00. 000 000.0000 0000--00000 0x .0.0-..0 000 .00 000 000 .000. ..00000 0.00 00 0.00 .. 0.0. 00 0 00 .000.0000000- . 0.. .. 0.0 0. 0.0 0. 0000.00000-.000- 0x 00000...00 0... 0.. 0.0. 000 0.00 0.0 000.0000 0.00 0.0--00000 000.0 . $0.0 . 2.0.4 .SM ..00000 0.00 00... < z 0 z < z 0 2 000.0000 0.00 0-00000 . 0.0. 000 <\z <\z <.z <\z 0.00 .000.000>0ou <2 00.00000. 0.0 00 .0030.. 00000 0.0000000 000 000 000 .000. ..00000 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000 .000.0000000- 0x .00000000< 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.: 000.0000 0000--00000 000 0.0.. 0.0.. .000. ..000.0 .000000 0. 00.000000 0.00 000 0.00. 0.0.. 0.00. 0.... 000.0000 0000--00000 000 0.0000000. 0.0 on Av¢Logucov 0.0000000 ac .0.0ou0< 0.. 0.0 0.. 0.0 0.. .00 00000 0000- 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.. 000.0000 0000--00000 00 ..00 0000 000.0. .000. 000.0. .0000 000.0. .0000 0000.0 .0000. .000. .0 a 0:0.-0000 .000. .0 a 000.-0000 .000. .0 a 000.-0000 0000.0. 0.0. 0000.0. 0.0. 0000.0. ..0. 0000.0000-00 0000. 217 given in the final section of this chapter. Rather, according to the author's original scientific intention, they were included in the inland port hypothesis test as functional inland ports, because their inher- ently small relevant volume potentials made them more akin to inland ports than to major seaports. This decision was reaffirmed, as will be pointed out in the next section, by the fact that bargeship operators do view many of these ports as possessors of some, non-mothership, limited volume potentials for their system, as indicated by volume data which was comparable to that of geographic inland ports. Before going to the next section, let us examine Tables 22 (page 185), 23 (page 186), 27 (pages 202-203), 28 (page 2l3), and 29 (pages 2l4-2l6) in order to determine any similarities in the data of major and minor seaports. These tables will indicate another way in which minor seaports are in general more akin to inland ports than major seaports, namely in non-availability of data, because of a lack of research capacity. Table 22 (page l85) shows us that, similar to major seaports, Orange, Texas and Panama City, Florida, also commonly use conventional ship facilities to discharge the bargeship barges which are towed to them. Table 23 (page l86) shows that many minor seaports tend to use "old, already existing facilities" to discharge bargeship barges, some use new conventional ship facilities, and three of them, Port Arthur and Beaumont, Texas, and Panama City, Florida, plan to construct specialized bargeship system facilities. Panama City, more- over, may achieve major seaport status in the future after its channel is dredged to a depth deep enough to accommodate full-sized bargeships. 218 Table 27 (pages 202-203) indicates the bargeship system percentage shares of total port general cargo volume of nine of these ports. Significant percentage shares exist in Panama City and Orange, and are expected at Olympia, Washington; Beaumont, Texas; Fall River, Massachusetts; and Richmond, Virginia. Table 28 (page 213) indicates no containership system investments by any minor seaports, small barge- ship system investments by Panama City and Vancouver, Washington, and a few significant conventional ship and overall facilities investments made and/or planned by some ports. The table's totals by vessel system indicate that responding minor seaports conventional ship investments are considerably more significant than bargeship system investments and that containership investments are non-existent. Table 29 (pages 214-2l6) indicates a general lack of data on the part of minor seaports, but despite this, certain basic characteristics of these ports are evident. One of these characteristics is a predom- inance of bulk carriers, liquid and dry, at most of these ports and for all three coastlines. Another is a somewhat small share of each coast's volume being equally divided by conventional ships and conventional barges. A third is an even smaller but growing volume of towed barge- ship barges on each coastline, and at a growing number of these ports. Some individual minor seaport situations merit special attention. Both Searsport, Maine and Astoria, Oregon did have a full-sized barge- ship call on their port, but both of these may have been one-time events. This is almost certainly true at Astoria, where the port indicated in its questionnaire that rather than dock in any port at the Columbia 219 River mouth, bargeships are now anchoring "in the stream" and discharging barges which.are towed to and from various ports along the river. Similarly, Pascagoula, Mississippi and Richmond, Virginia have had towed bargeship barge traffic in the past, but both indicate that they are now no longer receiving such traffic. So there is no certainty that this traffic will continue and grow at an individual port. On the other hand, the minor seaports which have experienced substantial amounts of this traffic have even larger expectations for the future, as cited earlier. On an overall basis for the 39 of 45 minor seaports (see Appendix C) responding, the above tables indicate patterns of common facilities usage similar to those of major seaports where bargeship system traffic exists; an overall pattern of small but growing amounts of such traffic at growing numbers of these ports; expectations of either the inception of such traffic or continued growth of such traffic in the future; virtually no containership traffic or expec- tations thereof; a steady past and future conventional ship and barge traffic; and a predominance of specialized, bulk carrier traffic. These ports, which bargeship operators obviously consider to be not potential ports-of-call for their motherships, but rather potential receivers or senders of their barges from or to their motherships' ports-of-call, are therefore viewed by these operators in much the same category as geographic inland ports. This is why they are considered as the functional members of the nation's inland port population for the test of the second hypothesis, in the section which follows. 220 Inland Port Results Hypothesis 2 At the outset of this section the reader is reminded that since public inland terminal companies operate and keep separate traffic records often not possessed by the public inland port authority at their port, they were included in the total population of inland ports. Another reason for this inclusion is that at many locations there is no public port authority, and these terminal companies basically act as private ports.1 Moreover, in all of the following comparisons which state percentages of the inland port population, each potential respond- ent is treated as one port, even though as many as four are sometimes located in the same port area. Bargeship systems have not had an effect on the international traffic expectations of the majority of U.S. geographic and functional inland ports and terminal companies. The majority (68) of the ll2 respondents from this population of 221 separate locations (see Appendix B) do not have or expect such traffic for at least the next three and often five years, as per Table 30. The functional members of this population are defined and explained both at the end of the preceding section and in the next sub-section. Table 30 also shows, however, that l9 of these responding inland ports (terminals) answered "yes" to the (question asking whether they expected their port to experience a sig- trificant effect on their port's (terminal's) international cargo traffic because of LASH/SEABEE barges. This indicates that there has been an —_—— 1See pp. l67, 172, l73, supra. £221 .mv—uu .couxuoum "hm.z .aean_< ”hmcwmgo .mmwz .msanm¥u_> .mmw: nmwguumz unhm .: .m=__oagz co. .m.z .xam camca 2 do: .35 3.339. ca .==.z .aeo:_3 co. .a» .3 .umto;s< atom <\z o_go .osocw ..ou 8 is .8253 <2 ..E: .83me oo_ .umvz .caaxoaogm cop .gu,s .coatox u=a__a= om .mv: .aaxaaz_vx 2 is £358 <\z ._—~ .caomuxaa: ma ._P~ .toataz uaaaceou co, .u=_ .eomwaax <\z .~_< .ap__>mtau==w <\z ..Fu .ua_Poe <\z .FFH .cvxaa (\z .a_< .tauauoa <\z .ap< .v_a,ccagm <\z .we“ .a___>m=~>u 2: .E .ESBEEW cm .¥t< .o__a=au.ao cop .o4 .xm>cam uupma_u oo_ .>.z .taumaguam (\z .>.z .o_~cc=m as .>.z .ocaamcmump n.hmnpm Ewe“ mhmoa oz m =_g»p:---- .gmo: .moucouacn H~28 emu: .mmwx .mpzoA .um xam Hhimm:04 .gmo: .gu>:ouco> .95 .3532 .vppau .oucaeacuom .uppcu .couxuoum hm.z .»=~n_< ogpu: .ucoamgoom "~m:moz .ox .m_=OJ .um .——~ .auwu mu_=ocw .opxo .amoouou-umpap .cpxo .uumoxmax .xc< .zuwsm atom .ccmh .mwzaeo: .xL< .xuom uFuuvd .xc< «co—u: .xc< .wmapm o:_a .mmw: .u_—_>cwmgw .mmwx .mcaamxup> .mmwx .~ucuumz mnpm omaogocm u_mmacp pacowuucgoacn acnu_m_:m_m m:_uuoqxu mason vca_:~ any meow» m =.;u*= u_ccath mum_uu om .gmaz .a_as»_o am .gma: .Emcmcw_pwm mm .gmu: .a_pa: oppn: <\z .zmc: .uuogm>m oo_ .gma: ..oataz aaa__,z cop .zmmz .Loacm: mxagw oo_ .mco .xmm moou «\z .c__au .ma_am=< atom <\z .ewpuu .mcoszuwm ”»mo4 ago; <\z .mmw: .mpaommumma H#28 mbzu (\z .apm .zumwm e_m¢ om .apg .wocmwm atom mm .m> .ucoscu_¢ cop .a> .2355: $2 6: .wmuzfimu <\z .uz .mmpoao::< (\z .zcou .coucob :02 (\z .mmuz .Lm>_m P_am <\z .:.z .gusoEmucoa «\z «are: .ucapucoa .lnuuauuiiiphmnppnkmnmsi mpmom oz<42~ 4wm __~u uhmm:m>m (\z .ccwz .gu:_:o .xg< .m—chmucuo mm .mw: .ucm_;m< Hp28 dang mm .mm .cowgm: u:_oa mm .mm .ucocoo .».z .mczamcocmo oop .ma .zmgznmuu_a Hem omamcuc_ uwmeoc» Foco_uccgmu:~ acuu_w_cm_m mc_uomaxm wagon uco_c~ u_ccacp mmm_m wen muwmwu oz» ume” may on czov mogaopm mews: uamuxo mmums_umm .pacwsgwh aconucoz u 2 tea “ago; pocovmmm-nam n m mecca pacopmmm u m .muou acoa —~ucm>ou .aumv zuwgocusa «Lon gypnaau a c. a. coat “can _a=u*>Pu=_. (\z <\z <\z ooo.m-._ ~.— coo.m— ~o_.mmo._ o o Numpuuwz .uw .xuwzmcacm ooo.wm~.p m.o coo.m coo.mmm o o ooo.~em o o num_ Agnew .>.z .acan_< <\z <\z <\z ooo.oo_ o.e ooe.¢ <\z o o ~sm—uuw: ween: .ugoamgaom u~28 pmgmuz ooo.m~m o.m_ ooo.omp ooo.ooo.p m.~ coo.m~ <\z <\z <\z cum—-u_z m mmo._ .o: .mwzoa .um ooo.oom o.m— ooo.e¢ <\z <\z <\z (\z o o «no. one; m omo.P ._—_ .xu_u cupcacw (\z <\z ooo.m~ ooo.omm m.m ooo.o~ ooo.~m o o Neop xpgom m oPm .o_xo .amoouau-~m_:p ooo.om o.o~ coo.m_ emo.~e o.- ew~.m oem.¢o o o Nnmp xpcmm 2 com .o_xo .ammoxmzx coo.o¢ o.m coo.~ ooo.om o.m oom.~ ooo.om o.m oom.— cum— own; m was .xc< .gupsm «so; ooo.oom o.m coo.0m ooo.omo m.o oo~.m ooo.ooo m.o oom.m —~mp A—Lom m ume .ccoh .m_ggsoz <\z o.op coo.m coo._m o.o_ ooo.m coo.mop o.~ ooo.m .Nm—-urz m mam .xg< .xuom opuu_4 <\z <\z ooo.mp <\z (\z coo.m_ <\z <\z coo.m_ cum. m «cm .xg< .cco_m: “VT u_wmach FPmEm agm> 1v <\z z omm .xc< .ema—m a:_a ooo.oop.~ m._ coo.0mm.F 0., m~m.mm~._ o.p v.mmwz .m_pw>:oogm ooo.oom o.mm ooo.om Nxm.vm~ 0.N coo.o~ www.0mp o.o coo.—_ ommp a_gom m mmv u.mm_z .u_FP>:oogw ooo.vom o.mm ooo.omm coo.mmm N.Nm ooo.o—m <\z o.oo ooo.oem sea. xpgmm m omm .mmwz .mganmxuv> amm.~_m o.o¢ ooo.mo~ moe.oem m.mm w_e.mm— en¢.mo~ o.m~ omm.me~ mom. can; m mom .mmw: .nguuaz "hm(cu mgaw memo; oz .Fe> mcoh oss_o> .Fe> mach us:_o> ._o> mach :aumm ugom ucoammm zonomm 4m mmmo mow.F.m eoo.omp mm~.m_ umb<~o» zopluzo; mmmm:04 ooo.ooo.~ m.~ ooo.om <\z o o <\z o o msmp x—Lum .nmu: .Lm>:oucm> Q¢F.mm~ o.m ooo._P “mo.~ow.p o o eao.m-.p o o mum, .mgo .o_coum< <\z <\z ooo.om ooo.oop.P N.m o_~.mm <\z <\z may.“ Pump mung .wv_~u .oucmsagucm <\z <\z ooo.wm ooo.o- 0.NN ooo.<~ (\z <\z <\z Fum— Ax—co u_ewmcu mmgomv .m_p~u .couxuo»m u55... emu: ooo.-~ P._ mmm._ nmm.mqp F.F Noo._ ooo.-c m.o cmv.— Fsmpivw: AxF=o .omu .cmov wmxoh .L:gug< ucoa coo.P mmxmp .ugoammgu ooo.~oo.m o.o ooo.~ omm.~mw.m No.o coo.F moo.wmm.¢ o o -m~ xpcom mmxmh .o—_v>m:zccm ooo.oo~.m F.0 ooo.m ooo.~ow.~ noo.o ooo.~ ooo.oom.~ o o -m_-vez maxmh .uco52amm ooo.ooo.om p.o ooo.~ <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z muo—uu_z mmxoh .pumwgsu msqcou ooo.omp ~.m coo.m_ mok.me_ m.m Noe.e mmp.mm_ ¢.m con.e oump »_Lam Axpco .oou .coov mmxmh .mmcaco ooo.oem m.m~ ooo.om com.mmm _.m cmm.vp coo.mom o o cum, »_Lou .apm .aupu usage; poo.mo¢ N.0 oem.m mmn.mom m.o vm~.m oam.wmp m._ mmm.~ asap a—me .a—u .apouamcoa "a wE=_o> ._o> mcoh mazpo> .Fe> mcoe mE=_o> ._o> «co» comma onomx 4<~m_gau .muoepumm os:_o> monumo op cowuosgoec_ umw_aa:m-ugoa van: Locua .ecoe;ucm o.m~ o.om ooo.o¢ ooo.o~ o.p mum. xpcau .>.z .»=~n_< were: .ta>_m .paa o.oop »_n_mmoa <\z <\z <\z Nem_-u_z aceax .utoamcmam ”pm;maz o.mm «\z oo.ooe ooo.oom o.mN on_ xptam mmo.~ a .0: .mwaos .um < z o.mN oooo.oo~ uooo.oop <\z Nem_ ages omo._ m ...H .xuwu ao_=mco o.oo o.m ooo.o_p coo.mm 0.0m Nfim_ »_tam o_m m .n_xo .amoouau-am_ae o.m~ 0.0. oooo.om uooo.o~ o.o, Nem_ a_eam «em 2 .awxo .aamoxmaz o.m o.m ooo.m_ ooo.o~ o.m o~o_ apes mm“ m .xt< .SBPEm “cod o.o_ 0.0. 000.com coo.m~F o.o_ _~m_ »_tam Nmo m .ccap .mwcaemz o.om o.o~ «\z uoo¢.om <\z P~m_-uwz mam m .xt< .xuom afiuu_s <\z «\z «\z +ooo.o~ oem_ com m .xt< .a=m_o: +1 Beccacb __mem 1:» <\z own 2 .xt< .cc:_m a:_a o.om +o.o_ ooo.om_ ooo.oo_ czocxca cem— »_me mme x p.mm,z .a~__>=macu o.oo o.N_ ooo.oom ooo.o~e o.om onP xpcam omm m .msz .atzpmxu_> o.oe o.m ooo.omN ooo.¢- o.o¢ mom_ mums mom m .mm_z .Nacuumz ”quou 242w memoa oz ammaeacfi ..o> ._o> :oe-m=oo ._o> copemcoo as=_o> caaam otoaaam atom Hmoa az mumqmm\xm<4 mmmm moauou on coequLoece tweeqasm-uuoa can: Locua m zHIe~z mum mmmm:o4 <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z meme mecmm .gmm: .go>=ouc~> <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 22 Euro .2232 <\z <\z <\z «\z <\z eeme mum; .eeemu .OHcoeaLuam o.em o.ee me. <\z <\z <\z .Nme e.eeeuu .couxuoum ue98 emu: 0.N <\z ooo.o~ ooo.o— o.~ eeme-uez amuxue .L==HL< use; maxoe .ugonamgm o.m o.P ooo.om ooo.oe o.m ~em. xecam maxoe .meee>mcxogm <\z <\z (\z <\z o.oe -m_-u_z moxoe .uco53oom m.o o ooo.m ooo.m m.o memelcez mmxoe .eumegcu mangou o.o~ <\z ooo.om ooo.oe o.o~ aka. xecmu maxoe .mmeago <\z <\z <\z <\z o.om oewe xeeom .we“ .aueu «ance; exocxca o.a ooo.om ooo.o¢ zocxca oeae megam .we; .aeouamcma ”a mmm mmomcucm ._o> .Fe> coeiucog .—o> coeumcog usaeo> gamma ugoaaam ago; econ oz<42H menoaaegm .Fe> mmm.z .ataamcaaao nem m z_ze_z mmmo +ooo.om +ooo.o~ ”m4 amaatucH ._o> .Fe> coe-m=os .Fe> coe-m=o4 as=_o> comma “toaaam “to; emoa cz wum can u \=m<4 mem_ \=m<4 mama xuztaaa: * a~_m oz< mae 6:055; O.OO_. III! I!!! Illl III! III! llll .ECOU aCOUp—Ou— 302 o; -..: ..-..- in- ..-: E.-- -..: ween: 6.533.. Hema_u 0.0m Ill! IIII IIII IIII IIII 00¢ m .>.z «LmHmwzuoz Hem amaatucx ._o> ._o> =oe-a:o4 ._o> coe-m=oA ae=_o> camam “toaaam whoa emoa oz mmmegav .»_=o ma.=mu .ma_gmta=_.ucou-.=.za ..ucesuoe «Lounge: u 2 can wagon eacoemoaunam n m mason eacoeuax u «a +mmo.om~ +ooc.mmm.v +ooc.oo~ +eme.¢¢m.e +eem.~m~ +¢cw.~mo.m "mmxaqo> zoeumzog 4:moz <\z =~mgw o o.m o coo.me o o.m o coo.me o o.m o ooo.o~ m m .mg .xo>ga: uem<8 “42w o mo.o o coo.me o ~o.oo o ooo.oe o <\z o oom.¢ omo m .39e: .aueu sum o.m ooo.o~ ooo.o~m o.m coo.mow o.m ooo.eme ace 2 uoego .ucoeosoeu o.o_ o.oe ooo.ooe coo.ooe (\z <\z (\z <\z o.c_ o.o_ ooo.oo ooo.oo oov m n.>.z .o_oee:m ue28 em “can euuoe mas—o> ._o> ucoa emuoe waseo> .Fe> “so; empoe me=Fo> sage mmeez mo eo u cacao coeim=04 omgou we a omgmu =oe-mco4 omgmu we a cocoa coeimcoa omgou xaxgmumz ‘ ow~em ...:uc~ meme emcoeumccwucu meme ._.:p=~ meme eocoeuoccoucfi meme .e.:u=_ eem— em:o_uocgou:~ eeme exam ozm me owmzou ego; az<42~ .m.= mm m4m zoenszJ 4o +coo.em +ooo.—m— ee_.o_ +e~m.mee +omm.~ +vme.¢w— "mm:=40> zoeuwzod 4.z .Aeua—< uem¢8 em .ugoa peace usaeo> .Fe> «com ecuoe msseo> .eo> use; eauoe mazeo> soc; mo—ex we we a oogao coeumcog omguu we a cacao coeumcod omgau we a cause :oeumcod oogou xaxgmum: ‘ m~em .—.=u=H mem— eacoeuaecwpc_ meme .e.:u=H Neme emcoeumcgmuca meme .e.:ucH eeme eacowumcgmucm eeme ego; oz<42_ vwzceu:OUunmm m4m.m =o_uaeLoe=. »_=o--mummcau==u emm cm cmm o ON u. o om coco.mm <\z <\z ¢o_.e .ecae .a__,>;maz mm on mm «\z <\z up (\2 <\z ooo.omp <\z <\z mmo._ .oz .m_=o3 .um cop o o, o o o o o o o o «mo._ ._P_ .m_=os .um ”no“ 0mm 0 0mm o me m. o me ooo.e¢ o ooo.oo_ owe.” .P_~ .2328 «Hecate on o_ on De cm (\2 o (\z o+ooo.o~ o ooo.op m_m .upxo .amo03a8-~meae cap 0 op o me mm o o2 coo.m_ o coo.o~ «mm .a_xo .mamoxmaz A. _F op o o o o o o o 0 New .22 .eoaauaa m o m o o m o o ooo.~ o o Nme .xe< .;»_sm “Lea cop cop o o o o o o o o 0 one .xe< .a__a=aUL~o op o o_ m e m o m ooo.om o coo.mm “no .eeae .m_;asax om «\z <\z «\z <\z o_ m.o «\z ooc.m mm <\z mam .xt< .2602 «.3324 <\z «\z «\z (\z <\z «\z <\z <\z coo.mp <\z <\z com .xt< .aea_ax <\z «\z «\z <\z «\z (\z (\z <\z <\z «\z (\2 0mm .xL< .eca_m a=_a com com (\2 <\z <\z um.w <\z <\z ooo.om (\z (\z wme .mm_z .a__w>=aatu co m om m <\z mm o (\z ooo.omm o (\z omm .mmwx .utaamxaw> oe o oe o o 04 o o coo.mo~ o o mew .mme .~a;auaz o o o o m o o m o o coo.m_ m .ug .»a>L~= nema_u m o, o N_ a o o_ o, o ooo.oo_ ooo.ooe cow .>.z .o_occ=m on m o o o o o o o o o own .».2 .Laumagaoz on oo o_ o_ o, o o o o o o ow, .>.z .acanmcaumo #28 55 meaoa oz a_aaqaegm agape) _auoe co a ae=_o> Fauoe co u wae=_o> cownmeoa saga ma__: mas—o, .auoe co m .mcoeuacaapc_ weop .aeoruactaucu meop _acowuaetaucm meap agztauaz . ego; oz<3xmem 4 oomzou .m> mmmecme .coeuusgoe:_ vo—enaam econ ease uo>egmu oposeumu Losu==ou=o> <\z <\z <\z <\z «\z ~.o amm <\z coo.e <\z <\z .gmo: .xme>mco4 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 o <2 <2 o <2 <2 .52.. £3,835 oe oe o oe e o m <\z o ooom.m_ <\z .cma: .sogo=e__mm <\z <\z o o o m o o ooo.om o o :omeo .o_coum< <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z ooo.om ooo.om <\z .we—mu .oucmsoeuum <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z ooo.mw <\z <\z .eeeou .couxuoum uem<8 emu: <\z <\z N mm «mm e.e o am.mm mum._ o oooo.oe— muxoe .Lagug< «to; o e o o o o o oo o o o maxme .xueu maxme <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z \z <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z maxwe .uLoammgm m o m o <\z No.o o <\z coo.e o <\z maxoe .we—e>m=xoLm <\z <\z oe c we we.o o om.m_ coo.m o eooo.o_m mexoe .ucoesaom <\z <\z m.o o «\z e.o o o ooo.~ o <\z mence .eumecsu maacou <\z <\z cm 0 com e.m o mm.em coo.me o coco.em_ moxwe .umcato <\z <\z com o om m.m~ o <.me ooo.om o m0868 .e_< .mueu usage; <\z <\z mm o o e.o o o oem.m o c .aeu .aeouamema Hem<8 u4=o om oe <\z <\z <\z o o oo. o o ooo.om— .we: .muto_< «so: <\z <\z <\z <\z <\z _ o o ooo.0m o <\z .ao .xu_xmcagm me om oe oe o_ o o ace 0 o ooo.m~e .u> .ueoseu.¢ mm mm e P _ m.o e.o e.o ooo.m ooo.~ coo.e .>.z .xenn_< ooe mm o o ooe o o oo— o o aooo.mm .ccou .coucoA 3m: <\z <\z oe o <\z o 0 a8— o o emcee .mma: .Lo>e< Peel _ e <\z <\z <\z o o e o o <\z ac_~x .ueoeugom ooe ooe <\z <\z <\z < o mom oo<.< o coco.~ce ween: .ueoamsemm Hem<8 em meooaqwcm oaseo> emuoe ya a osseo> Peace eo a musseo> :oeumcoJ soc: moee: was~o> emuoe eo m _m:o.uaecmu:H meme eacoeuaccmucg meme eacoeuacgmu=~ Mum. Angmum: ‘ exam oz<42~ vmaceucousimm m4mmxgo_u ouuoaou mononmom ocom mo» N o o co .oe< .oeaoeou o>ogo no can .muooooso --- . . .o—< .m_oo;m o—umox ease—osmoo moxou oco eoou czocxca oz o_ m e coo can N A .o—oeueogm a ouoogoeg ueeeocu o: (Iv .oem .o—oueguo—oo< .opa .o_PoooLLoo .o_a .oztoz .om ueemogu c: [To .oeu .msanmgouoo .um oeeeosu o: )0 .we: .Lonco: ouuoegogu ocom .ucoEneooo .eeo mo» oz \ x c coN.— ooc.ooo._ .o—u .mco:x anon mooooxom oz oz N o o on.o~ oom._ .o_u .oou—e: .o_o .zoooo o_oo omoz .opu .oooooooo< .om ueeeogu o: ,4 .u: .ocoegoaisu .oo .ooooooo.z o_oooe ooooowtooe oz oz \ o o <oz oLo .oeoooeozo ._ooo oz oz _ o o ooo._. ooo.oN_.o_ .oo .oooL.o_o .2 333033: .om .ugoommo—m .oo .o__e>mezogm 12115 ueeeocu o: .b .om .xoogm «mom .oa .ugonoocu eooo .eooum oz oz moogoeso o o --- coo.oom .oo .commooo: _ooo .eooom oz oz mootosoo o o --- ooo.om_ .oo .otoooo__< .oo .omoegcoxuogm ueeeogu o: 1+ .>.z .we—om ogomoez czocxca Ii .>.z .omooocam .>.z .mgonmuuo_m oeeeoeu o: I. .>.z .xoouuooocom .>.z .AOLH .ccou .ugoaoaoecm .coou .=m>o: 3oz 4.: $3982 aoosso> .ooum=e_som oeeeocu o: (III mgezmoso: 3m: .vgoucoo oeeeocu o: .+ ween: .zuom oceoz .umom:< ueemogu o: .+ ween: .umoe—mm ,_o oz oz \ mNm .o_o .Ppoo mNN ooooz .Looooo meoum omgou some: meow» m acmggzu Lem: moecoqsou oeeooa goo» Loo mcoeimood :oeuouoz oezue: oouoooxm opo>ega eocesgoe moooeomcom o_ecooe moo .: 539.55.: .2. .: J5EE. .o> .: 600320;: ego; 6:8 ..000 oz oz m o o --- 0Nm68 .2. .: £33530... 3.5.6 .23 oz oz m N o 08.— o8.oom .2. .3 .0...>m..0...oo 5:30.52. $339.30 .200 oz oz 3 o o 98.... 80.00e.e .5. .2 5:83... “50.. .2. ... £387.25 .2. .z .95.... .000 oz oz \ o c 505...: 535...: .2. ... 62.30.50: .3. .0522 .3. 3.83.00: 3:2... 0.. .3. .02.?323 .3. .2953... .3. 53:00.... 246 “veto...— oc .3. 500.5 9.210.. .000 oz oz o N o .5053: 505.... 3. £820.23 .3. ..nocofioEm . o. 6 0:3. :00 .333 .05.». oz oz N o o 8m.N 80.03 .3. .02.;sz .3. £32.25 .3. 503......8 mom 2:30: .20 82350.... oz oz m o a 8m --- .3. :35 foZou .3 .otooofiozoo ..Ewe €005.03. 5.003 .5950 .0553; .300 mw> oz ... o o 8m.~ wands...” .::oe 6:303:50“. .ccoe .coETCo: .ccoe .5053 .ccme ...—3;..me .03.... .003 woe oz N o o oo— 1- .....0e .coooo. <2 \.3.32. oz <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 .55. £82.25 was: 09.3 Lone: 9.2; m 20.25 com... 3.02.50... 9:03.. coo» .3.. 2079.0. .3530. 55:. 03033 32...... .ofiEoe moooeomoom oieoge mwmfimEmS 3.08 “.0 Locos: o—toce 09oz 13:359-...“ 32. 0.0.0 0.0.0 000500 ..000 .0000 ...0 ..000 0.00.0000 .00000000 .0.00 <\z oz oz oz oz oz oz 00> 00» 00» oz <\z <\z 0.00 000. .000000000 .000 oz oz oz oz 00.0 ..0>0.0 .0000 ..o .00. .00..o000 .0.0 00.. oz oz 02 oz .000 .300.30 0.30.. .00.. ...o .03. .00.0 .0000 ..000 oz oz 02 oz oz oz 0.0.0.0 00 0.0.0.0 00 0.0.0.0 00 0...0.0 00 0.0.0.0 00 0 030.0500 0 o N <\z m o N N o <\z mo. co. O00 cmN <\z com 00. m0 0N0 coo .— .. .0 000.00 <\z ooo.o. w—m.0o~.v. ooo.ovm 000.00. coo.omm.¢ .... .000.0.0 .... .0000>0m .... .0.0.0z .... .0.=0000.00 . 2. 030000.000 .... .0030000 .... .000>0z .... .00000 .... .00050. .... .o.00 .... .0..00 0. .... ..0..0> 00.000 .... .030000 .... ...:0: .... .0...o: .... .000000.x .... .0...>00E0x .00.: ..0003_..00 .00.: .0.00 00 .00.: .00.00 00 0..0.0 .00.: .0...>0000 .00.: .00000 .00.: .0000.00< .00. ..00.0: 00.00 .00. .0000 .00. .0000000.> .00. .00.0 ..0. .00. .0000.< :0z .00. ..00.0: 000.00. .00. .000.0> .0: .00. .0000: 0..0. .00. .0.:00000.z00 .00.: .00000000 .00.: .00.0 00.0>0.. .00.: ..00.0z 000000 0.00 .0...>0..0z 0.00 .0...>000:000 0500. 00.00 .000: 0.00. m 0.00.3 000000xm 000..=u 0...0.h mmm..0 .00.E.0. 0.000 .0 .00E=z .00» 0000. .00 00.00 0000-000. 0...... 00.00 00.0000. 0000.0000--00 000<. 0.000.. 00000.0.0 ....2 .0230... 000.. .0: .50000.00.0z 0.0.0 .000 ...0 oz oz . . o 0.. .0: .0000.0..0 0000 0‘. 0.000.0 00 .0: .00..000 .00 .0: .00.0 000.00000 .0: .0.05.00 .0~...0.00 oz oz 00> 00. 0 0 --- .o: .0...>0oo0 .000 0 oz 0 o . 0N0 000.0.0 .0: .0..00: 30: .0: ..00.000z .0: .0>0.>0000 .00 000000.0 500.0.000 .0.0.0 ..000 3000 0.000 oz 00.000 0 0 000.0 000.000.m. 030. .0.00000000 00.00 .0005 .0000 .0.0.0 oz oz 0 0 0 <\z <\z 030. .0.o000>00 020. .00.00000: 01.. 00.005.000. 00 030. .000.00: .0. .0000 .0.00 ..000 00» oz . . 0 00N --- 010. .000000 .08 oz 2. . o o oo. --- as. 00.20.. 00....0000 ..000... oz 2. 0 o. .. .. .. 000.000 02 oz . 0 00N.. 030. .0000.0 ..00000 .00.: .000000... .. 0.000.0 00 .00.: .000000: 00000000 .0.00 oz oz 0 o . 0N0 0N0..0¢ .00.: .00.: 000 .ww. 0.000.0 00 .00.: .00.0 0000 .00.: .000.000: 41‘ 0.000.0 00 .00.: .0000.0 .00 4. 0.000.0 00 00.: .0000000 41. 0.000.0 00 .00.: .0.000000 0000: .00000000 oz 02 . 0 0 --- 000.00 .00.: .0003000.0 000000.0 000: ..0000 ..000 oz oz 0. 0 o --- 000.00. .00.: ..xo..0 .... .0.0o00.0: 4“. 00.005.000. 00 .... .00..0: .... ..000000 0.0.0 ..000 ...o 00> 00> 0 0 0 --- 000.00 .... .000.< 0500. 00.00 .000: 0.00. 0 000..00 .000 00.000500 0..000 000.-00o. 00.0000. 0.00.: 000000x0 000>..0 .00.5.0. 0000.00.00 0000.0000uumm m0m<~ 2119 v.80 0..000 50.0 000......0 ...—0;. ..o..00 003.0 000.0 ..00.0 .0.5 ...0 000.0 .0000 ..00...0.0. .00.0 0000000 0...0.0 o0 0...0.0 o0 ....\o~-0.0 00> oz 00> 00> ...0.0mo00 00> oz .0. o _ . 0 oz 0 o 0 oz 0 o o 0...0.0 o0 0...0.0 o0 0...0.0 o0 0...0.0 00 0...0.0 o0 coo.m ooo.ooe.n co. nun an- .No..~m.. 00» 0...0.0 00 oz +00. 0 0 oz . o o 0...0.0 00 0...0.0 o0 0...0.0 00 oz N o o --- ooo.oom.v --- 000.0. 000 --- 00x0. .00..00 00x0. .00000z 0.00 0:03 $000.30.. 0000. .0..om .00 .00.00.00 .00 .030000..0 .00 .x000000.0. .00 .00.0500 .00 .0100. 30z .00 .0...>000< .00 .0000»0.00 .00 .0..000xo.< .00 ..=;0_=0 0.0. .00 .0.o.0000 .00 ..000.< 0000 .00 .0.o000i..0 .00 .00000.>0.0 0.00 .0._ .0.o00>0.00 .00 .000..00 ~0o.z .00 ...00..0 .00 .0...>.0: .00 .0.o00< .00 .000000 .00 .00.00: ..000--0000V .00 .0500: .00 .00.50000.0 .00 .0...>0.000.. .00 000000. .3200.) 00005. .5.0300>000 ..000 ..0.0 ...0. ..00: .000000000.0 0.0 .0803. .0.0 ...... xao.0 .x.< .00.:0 00> ...: .20....00 ....0 .0.ouo.o 0500. 00.00 .000: 0.00> m 0.00.3 000000xm 000..=0 .000 00.000500 0..0=0 000>..0 .00.5.0. 0...0.. umm .00 0000.00.00 000.-0000 0...0.. 00.00 00.00000 0000.00ouunmm 000<. 250 .mmouosn c~o uwmwngh uwmwua_summo-=oz m4mxgax commgo .mzmpm: .um uwwwogu a: xiv :omagc .xcan—< Sea oz oz \. o o 3-8 --- .535 :83 .gmo: .coum_xm4 u_muugu o: x» .zma: .umzuuocoz 33:23 .523 £32952. 3» oz . F N 33 8°.8o.~ A E; Shuausxwfinuwm upwuagu o: 1+ mmxmh .Omaq .m maxah .u_m_$mcaz use; uwwuugu o: xiv moxm» .cwum:< u_wwngu o: to maxoh .Louuzuoozm moxwh .xgomwgw maxmh .apgouuw> u_wwagu o: 1» moxmp .u$pgummm moxoh .ugoweou unvoa upwwogu o: 4‘ mmxw» .xmcwwzm mmxm» .mmmcoxg< «Log m__m;m .Lm~_fiwugmw xp_:$wqox oz N o a.. --- ooo.oo_ moxmh .xugon_4 waxy» .cxo»aam u_»»ogu 0: xxx» moxmh .Loccou.o use; mmxm» .mmoa oc_nom u_;mmgu o: A» mcxwh .gugo: ugom memuH omgcu gown: mgmm> m ucwggsu me: mmwcmqsoU uwpoam Lam» gma mcoh-m:og cowuuqu cw;u_: umuumaxm ouo>_gm Fnc_sgmh mvaopomgom u_w$ugh wagon umacwucouusom m4mos use neon mmeataa o» momeen nwzmmmena mo auvppn< A_v_ A_VP Amy“ 5 ANve aePHEPFUec e_emeee_eeeoa beseeaeea on pace APV m Amvo Amve A_vp mmwuwpwuew Emumxm awzmmmeen uozeumcou cu umou o Avvp m AmVFF Amvv ugoa :_ ummgmucw Loumemao awzmmmgem o ape Apvm Amvmp Amvm eeoa so e_ecaee aeeaemeee e_ amateuea o m Amvm Amvpp p memaawgm m.usoa »a once aegmmmcmn cw ummemucfi _ Apve Amve AFVm fipvm neon mcp>emm mxmzemumz ccmpcw mo pesos< A_V_ Ame “Nye Apvm Aevm oeoa eusoeee agape enema eeoexe co hue._eep_=m A_V_ ANVF Amve Amvm Amvm eeoe emsoee» mzo_e omeee atone? co apep_eee_=m F P Amvm Amvn Amvm neon acr>emm moves ueoamcee» taupe” o o Amvm APVNP Amve e_eep_a>e me_oe__eee me_¥eez emcee e_emameem o Apvm Apvo apvop mfimve mpam—Pm>a mmwuwp_umw n_;mmmgom m~nego>me== mpameo>mwcn powwow oz mpnmgo>em m—nmco>em mEmuH acmucoapecm xpmeoguxm spasmsuxu mmmuzngmzH u~mmhH4Hmm cm~m~mm<4uzav mhmo¢os oco ueoo mmoouxo op momgoo onmomLoo mo AFFFFo< o F N N AFVN monFFFooF oFgmLocFouoou uuogumoou on umou o N e F o moFuFFFooF EonAm ochomLoo Honeymooo o» umou o o N FFVo F usoo :F umechF Louoemoo ochomLom o o A_VN AFVe N econ Ne oweeeeo e_emaoeee e, emoeooee o N N o o meoooFgm m.ueoo xo woos oFgmomgoo :F «mogoucH F N F o o «Loo mcF>gom mxozeouoz oooFoF Fo pesos< o o N F FFVo ugoo omooggu ozoFF omeou ugooxo Fo FuFFFoouFom o o m AFVN m been eosoeeo mzoFe ooeeo «Loose eo NHFFFeeHF=m o o oFFvN m m peoo moF>Lom mooos ueoomooeu oooFcF o o m N N oFooFFo>o moFuFFFooF moFxgoz mason onmomLom o o o m F oFooFFo>o mmFuFFFuom oFgmomgom oFooeo>oFo= oFooLo>oF:= Hoowwu oz mFooLo>om oFooLo>ou sou" moFucoonoF xFoEmLuxm meEoguxu mmmuzuzosz uquFF4Fmoe oeo ugoo mmoouzo op momgoo onmmmeoo Fo zuFFFo< z.v AFV ANVN F N ooFNFFNooF o_eaeoe_ooeoo oooeooeoo oo oooo AFV AFVN AFVN AFVN o ao_o___ooc soooxm oeeaooeoo oooeooeoo oo oooo o Fmv N FFVF FFVN ugoo :F umoeoqu Lopogooo onmomgom o o FFVF FNVN FFVN pcoo ho uFFFoLF onmomLoo :F amoeoqu o o FFV Fmvo F meooonm m.ugoo No moos onmomeoo :F umoeoucF o AFVF AFN “Fem z_vN oeoo oe_>eoo maozeooo; oeoFe_ oo oesoe< o AFV sz AFVN ANVN oeoe eoooeeo ozo_o ooeeo oeooxo Co NoFF_oooF=m AFV _ ANV AFVN zNVN oeoo eosoeeo ozoFe ooeoo oeooe_ Co aoF._oooF=m o F FFV Fva FNVN Neon moF>Lom moooe “Loomcoeu ocoF=_ o o FNV FFVm FFVF oFooFFo>o moFuFFFoow mchLoz wagon onmomeom o N AFN AFVN ozNVF o_ooFFo>o oo_o_F_ooo o_eoooeom oFooeo>oFo= oFoogo>oFo= uooewm oz oFooeo>om oFooeo>ou souF moFooooFFom aFosoguxu xFosoguxN mxmuzmzzuzF uquFF4Hmos oeo usoo mmooixo op momeoo onmomLoo mo quFFo< F o m m FFV moFuFFFooF onmeocFoucou uuoeumcoo on “moo o N N N AFVF moFuFFFooF soumzm onmomLoo uuosumcou on umoo o FFVF F Fva F “Loo oF “mogoqu sopogmoo onmmmeom o o N m AFVF oeoo No oaeooeo oFeoooeeo e_ oooeooez o F FFVN o o mgooonm m.peoo No woos onmomgoo oF umoLoqu o FFVF m N F ugoo moF>zom mxozeouoz ocoFoF Fo acoos< z_v_ z_v AFVN e AFVN oeoo eosoeeo ozoFc ooeoo oeooxo No NNFFFoooF=m _ z_v _ “Fee N oeoo eosoteo azoFL ooeoo oeooe_ No Nu.F_oooeom F o F N FFVm ugoo m=F>me mooos psoomcogu ocoFcF o o N o FFVF oFooFFo>o moFuFFFooF moFxgo: omgoo onmomgom o oFFV N m F oFooFFo>o moFuFFFqu onmmmLom oFooeo>oF:= oFooLo>oeoz uooemu oz oFooeo>oz oFooLo>oJ sou“ moFuoooFFoa aFosoeuxm zFoEoguxu mmmuzmazuzF qumhF4Fmoe oco peoo mmoouxo ou momeoo onmmmeoo mo quFFo< FFVF FFV FFVo N FFVa aoFoFFFooF oFeaeoeFeoeoo oooeooeoo oo oaoo FFV a FNvm FFvo F ooFoFFFooF eoooxo oFemooeoo Fooeooeoo oo oooo o Fmv m FFVm FFvo ueoo oF amoewucF Louogmoo onmomLom o FFV m FNvm Fva FLoo an oFFFoFF onmomFoo :F umosoqu o N AFVF FNVFF F oeoooFea a.oeoo No oooa oFeaooeoo eF oooeooeF o o FNvo FFVm FFVN Feoo mcF>me mxoZLoFoz ocoFcF mo acoos< F FFV FFVN F FNVF oeoo eoooeeo ozoFF ooeoo oeooxo Fo NFFFFoooFom FFVF FFVF FFVF FFVN FNVF oeoo eoooeeo azoFF ooeoo oeooeF Fo NFFFFoooFom F F FNVF Fva FNVF ugoo mcF>Lom mmooe ugoomooeu ocoFcF o o FNve FFVN FFVN oFooFFoso moFoFFFooe oeFNeoz ooeoo oFeaooeom o F Fva szo oFNvm oFooFFoso ooFoFFFooF oFeoooeom oFooeo>oF:= oFooLo>oFoz uooeem oz oFooFo>oz oFooeo>oz EmuF moFoooochF xFoeogpxm xFosoLuxN mmwuzmazuzF umem onmmcmFF4Fmos oco FLoo mmoouzo op momeoo onmomgoo Fo FFFFFo< o F o m FFV moFFFFFooF onmLocFoucoo Fooepmcou on umou o N F F FFV mmFFFFFooF sopmxm onmomeoo Fooeumcou o» umou o FFVF N FFVF FFV Feoo :F FmoeoucF Lopoeooo onmomcom o o FFVN FFVN FFV oeoo No oFFFoeo oFemooeoo eF oaoeooeF o o Fva F o meooonm m.Feoo Fo woos onmomLoo :F FmoFoF:F F FFV F F F Feoo mcF>Lom mxozzouoz oooFoF Fo Fcoos< FFV FFV F F FFVN oeoo eoooeeo ozoFF ooeoo oeooxo Fo FoFFFooFFom o FFV N FFV N oeoo eoooeeo azoFF ooeoo oeooeF Fo NFFFFooFFsm o o FFVF F FFVN peoo mcF>Fom moves FFoomcoLu ocoFcF o o F N FFVF oFooFFo>o aoFoFFFooF oeeroz ooeoo oFeaooeom o oFFVF F N o oFooFFo>o ooFoFFFooF oFeaooeom oFooFo>oF== oFooLo>oFo= FooFFm oz oFooLo>oz oFooeo>oz mEoFF mcFooooFFoF FFosoeoxN NFoEoeoxm mzmuzmazuzF umeFF4Fm Fmv muzzF zeth umem szmuuzos oco pgoo mmootzo o» nausea onmomgoo Fo zuFFFo< F moFFFFFqu onmgooFouooo Fungumoou o» umou F moFFFFFooF EoFNAm onmomLoo guacamoou o» Fmou FFVF “Loo :F amoeoucF Louogooo onmomLom F usoo ao uFFFoLF onmomFoo :F umosoqu F meooonm m.peoo No moos onmomFoo oF FmoLoFoF F usoo moF>Lom ozozeopo: ocoFoF Fo Fooos< FFVF oeoo eosoeeo ozoFF ooeoo Feooxo Fo FFFFFoooFom F oFFV oeoo eoooeeo oonF ooeoo oeooeF Fo NFFFFoooFom F ugoo mcF>som moooe ugoomooeu oooFoF F oFooFFo>o moFuFFFqu moeroz mason onmoagom F oFooFFo>o moFuFFFqu onmomeom oFooLo>oFoz oFooeo>oFoz FooFFu oz oFoogo>om oFooLo>oz mEoFF mcFuoooFF:F FFoeoFFxm FFmsoguxN mzuuzmzzsz uqum m~=mm¢¢FF4Fm< unFMFmF uzeao Foz hazy mz FmV mmxzh zehF: umem szmmm¢oe ooo «Foo mmoo-ao op momooo onmomLoo Fo NuFFFo< F F N o N 8.52.83 3:22:28 6:528 3 :8 F o N N F moFFFFFooF soumzm onmomFoo Fuogumoou on umoo o o o m N noon oF FNoLoFoF Louogooo onmomLom o F F m N Fooo No oFFFoFF onmomooo oF umoooqu o o N m o meooonm N.Fooo No moos onmoaooo :F unoccqu o F N F F «Loo acF>gmm mxozgoao: oooFoF Fo Fooos< o N N F o «Lon smoogzp mzoFF omoou Foooxm Fo zuFFFoouFom F N N N N too .3325 ea: 2.53 28E Fo NFFFBSSN F o m m m aooo moF>Lom mmoos.uooom:ogu oeoFoF o o N F N oFooFFo>o moFuFFFqu monooz wagon onmomoom o F F F N 22:22.. 8.52.53 35.523 oFooFo>oFo= oFoooo>oFo= FooFFu oz oFoogo>ou «Foooo>om msouF moFuomoFF:F NFosoguxm zFoEoFFxN mzuuzmzzsz umem szmmwzm szmuwm mooom Noo .ouooooa .oooooeoooo muoo: Fooum ooocu oFoFmLF> ooo coeF oooxxFo zeouFFFz szxeoF ooo Loooo .muuooooo coo :oLF .Loooo> .ouuooo» .ucFooNxoo .FoFu zFom .moooa .Nuuzooco oFFuon ..mFsoo ooox FooF .mFsoz oeooooum .Fooum oooum oFozomooz oFFuon .mFouFEozu ouooooF a oooszo oouoooo mommom szxooF Nommom oco .mzoooF omeou .mom ooooou LooNFLooon .mxuaeF .meou .oFoou mouo< .oom .osz .Foumoo . FAEL ququoo .ooozuooz NuFumoFo .aoos muFumoFo ooo you: eoumom .oFoo too: muuaooso .oumoz uFLoou oogooogo .oumoz quooz .moFoouoam> .Lozuooz canoe; .Lozuooz .Loozuoou .mFouFEozu .FFFE Fooum .goooo memo: .somzuoou .ooooo oumo: oosooogo ..oogo swoon .Looxuoou ..oooo eoooo ..vooo Fooum "chcu Fmeou Lono: wagon onmomLoN Leno: onmoasoN scoot oFgmooeFouooo Leno: FFoLo>c Leno: onam zummm> >m nz< 44<¢m>outmszF ow¢oo ..FFueoo .ooo cooF oz .32: £95 ..ooeo F83. .8: 883 .FoooN .8: oooooo :95 at: 32582 Joe... .68.. Fooom onog ozou Fxoov oxou axoov oxou .EsoFoouoo FFo .mo> .sooFoouoo woo: .eooFoouoo .wooooooer .Fooum .ouFo wommom moo: .ouFo wommom moFoozu oxoz .quo wommom .Nouo< .woooooooFo .woooooooFN ouomoou Foos muoozo woo oooFF Fooam woomFFo woo oooF mFoquozu Nuuowooo oFFF quowiooz moeocom NoooFoo 3oz uooz: .FFo FooF toouoo oooooz NooNFFFuooo .muooo .oouuou .ooFFoo .moooozom FoowFNoz .xooFo :oooou .aooonooz .mFooumwooo woeruox .wooooooooo ..wooo Fooum .coou .oomom .wooo ooooo .Fooum . .ooaaou .oossz woo ooooo woo oooF mooonnwwww u o oz momoouFu :Fo m: woo: .moonFFFuooF quoomzoz wmmmom .ooosoz moo: (\z wommom .oonssa oosoF .Fouoe oooum .muoox .Fouos oooum .muoo: "szcu ozzw .womvaooum muoowooo. .wooo Fooum woo Fooum gonzo; .uooooco: NooFF moFFooom .woo Fooum £323! :3... Foo: <2 <2 .3233 23 32o 9:22;. .5388“. ....on monFFam woo Fooum wFooomooz .moooumwooo .moFquo> \uoo: .mFooumwooo .quoomzoz .NFooumwooo uoo: .mFmoumwooo .quoomzoz Fooum Fooum ouooo memo: .ooosoz woo: woo: woo: ooooo mono: .oooasa mowoFmoosu ugoo .Fouoa oooum .uoosou .Fouos oooum .uoosou .oNF: .umF: <\z =omxooo .ooooo .Fooum N83... .0328: .F.:om .umF: mono: Fo>oz woozaFo maaoooo .moooon .moooum moooFo Fo>oz wooxaFo ..wooo ouooo .ouoo .AoFu .Fooum Fo>oz .agoeroo: ..wooo ooooo .uuom soceo>om .aoFu .Fooum .wooo ooooo woo cooF .noFu .mooaan .aoFu .Fouum 225 too: £25 28.: teen. to! 285.. to! tax... 28.: 583 no: was ....qu owes 23F omooo $3 ...-3— ofloo onm FoeoFuoo>eou Leno: omoom onmomsom Leno: onmomLom homo: oFgmLoeFoucou Leno: FFoooso Leno: Fuooom .mFouFeoou .wooo moFomo< No4 .oouuoo .moFozuoouo: .oouuou ..wooo aooo .wooo .wooF .mF: 3238 2235: ll quoomxoz .ouooo woo oouuou .ooooo NFFoumwooo .ooosoz omoou ooooo zgooFouo: .oFoom .ooosoo oooom moo; .oooum Fooum ..wooo Fooum zoouFFF: .oouuou ..mFE woo wooo ..wooo Fooum .32.. some.» woo Foopm .595 0.5 .oooum uFumoFo .3:an omoo... woo Fooum oouuou uFooF .oowF: NFooFsoou momooo>oo woooou oouuou Nomooo>oo .moFoouomo> Nomooo>oo wooFxoo .Nuoz oFFooooF< .Nwoom Fooum .Nosz uFFooooF< woo muFooF oFFooouF< .AoooFouo: .Nwooo .oou .uoo: .NuFooF .oou .uFooo .Nuoo woooou .uFooo .oouoou .Nooquu .mwoom moo woo woFoo .wooszo woo woFoo .woozaFo woo: woo uFooF omooo <\z <\z <\z (\z .NFFo mwoomFFo oumFuoooo oom woo :oFFoF .oowoou .zuooFooo: .quoomxoz 3sz flow... .Noo... mmoz .ouoos omoou swoon; oFoow .oooooz oeoqu .oFoow ooNooo oFoo zuouFFF: .oFoo muFooLuqum .mmoz .ooFE=F< mxuooF qu: .Nou:< mwoom Logos; .mxoosF .oooom Foam: .ooo oooF oooo oooo oooo oooo woooou ooo3ooouoom .mFs .Nou:< wooFoooo .mmoz .wooo Fomum .mowF: .ooF: woo ooooo ..wooo Fooum .uooo: woo oosF .woom .moFooouooFN .oooum Foam: woo oooF llwuuoz mosz moozooouoou mosz m>F .monoz .oFoowoo: Nouo< wooo oooo oooo oooo .oFoowoos .moFoaooouo: .oFoowoo: .mouo< oFuuoom .oooFF nous: .mooooom .uoooz .oaoFo .N>F .monoa .uooo: .oooFo mooooom "Fmooo sono: omooo oFomomoom oooo: onmomoom oono: oFoooooFouooo sono: FFooo>o sonoz onooo oooF oooum zuooFouo: .ooooo oooF oooum zoooFouox . .oooFo .ooFFou .oooooo .oooFo .ooFFou moon uoooooom .oFoom xFom .wooz uFuoouon oooo oooo oooo woo: woo: .oFoom .wooz ow oFooF msouF omoou oono: uooo wooFoF mom .m: .NFooz .um Non muooooo muooooo .Fouos oooum Fooum Nuooooo .Fouos oooum Fooum .oFo .quu osoooo .wooooooon .ooosoo .wooooooon Fooum oooo oooo oooo oooo .wooooooon .oooasz ooooo oFNoo Fooum oooo oooo oooo oooo ooooo FFo .oFo .oFouomooo HF28 ozau ow oFooF msouF omoou oonoz uooo wooFoF oom .oFo .ouooFo «Loo owFooFou uuowooo omoou ostom omoou LE Foou .ow .quzmoEm Fooooom .zuoo somoxw oooo wooo wooo oooo mooo oooo Fooooow .xuoo somoxw .woomuxo .wooorxo Foou .zoo wooooooooo Foou .xoo .o> .wooaoqu ouuoooF oooo oooo oooo woo: woo: oooo ooooo ouuoooF moooooN Nooooom . . .aoo oFoow .mommoFoz oooo .NoFuxuoouo: oooo oooo oooo oooo .oFoow .mommoFo: F 2 oF< .wooo oooom. .wooo ooooo woo oFoo woo oFoo . oooo .oooz woo: woo: mooo oooo oooo oooo oooo .oeo: .woomloouoou .wooo oouuou NFowmuwuw NFowmuwuw .Noo: .eosFo FFeo mooo wFoon oooo oooo oooo mooo oooo oooo oooo wFoon o Foowoo: ooo F o dFoowooz ....o F ... . .quoomzoz .oquooF moo: oooo quoomzoz oooo oooo oooo .quoomzoz .oquooF ooFo: uooomooom .moonoom oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo moonoom FFc. ooFo: .wooFaooo uFmooo sonox omoom oFomomoom oono: oFoNomoom gono: oFomoooFouoou sono: FFooo>o oono: Faoooou oono: omoom oFomomoom oonoz oFoNomooN oofio: oFomoooFouoou oonox FFooo>o oono: Locos; woom woom oooo oooo oooo oooo mooo oooo .oFoo woo: ooumao .oooowmowuwmz oFoo woo: oopmxo .mmoz .oSoFoouoo on z w oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo mmwnuwm .omoz .uuooo>m mFouFEooo «Foo . . oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo woo: woo: woo: .mmoz ooFom omo: EoomoFFFoN oosFoN ooo554 ooeFom . oooo woooou oooo oooo oooo woo: woo: oooo .Nmoz woooou omoz .Nopoouoo< . a no oFooF mooAF omoou Leno: uooo wooFoF oomF Fwwmwouomuwuuwwmm "Fm:ouoo> .oooFo .wooszo ooooo mooo oooo woo: woo: oooo oFoom xFom xFom mwoom Non Nwoom woo: mmoz woooou mwoom -ooouoom .moFou .wooszo .omo: .zoF>mooz wmooou .mwoom woo: xFom .ooFsoFo woo: .woozzFo ooooo woo: woo: woo: ooooo woooou .oFoom xFoN zFom uoooxm uooosF uoooxu uoooeF poooxm uooosF Foooxm uoooEF uoooxm uooosF Fmoouoou oonoz omoom oFomomoom oonoz oFommmoom gonoz oFomoooFoaoou oono: FFooo>o oonoz Fmmooz mmm.F .oo .oFowmuooz .omoz .oo>oouoo> oNF.F .ooF: .NFFooooooF: .omo: .oomoo .ooo .oFoouN< Nwo.F .o> .3 .moFFoooz . .FFFou .ouooEoouom oNo.F .awz .NoN eooeo . .Fmeoo Fm”: .oFFoo .eoooooom emo.F .nwz . FFo oxmooawz mmw F .oo .uFowmummz . oom.F .eer .oeoer oNF.F .eer .NFFooooeer .Fmooo Foo: me.F .o> .3 .umngs< ugoo cow.F .sz .owxaozFFz mome .Lacug< uLoo NNm.F oFoo .o>oou Foou Fem .woF .oFFF>moo>m Noon .uooomooo Nmo.F ozoF .ooooooo owe .xo< .oFFooowooo Noon .oFFF>Nozoom omo.F .oqu .oomoxmox .ulllllllll. Noon .FuNFoou Noooou ome.F .NFz .eoNNoooeN .Fmooo oooo Noon .ooeoeo ooa.F .eon .eooeo: oeoFFoz oNF .F.z .oeoooeoooo .oFo .NoFo oooeoe .FFFoo .ooiooom ooo; .NF: .ooxooxFFz .lllllll .oE .oFoooNooo .Fmooo Fm“: oNN.F .FFF .eooooxooz uNEE oz m chquulu- .>.z .xoonF< . mFN.F .oF< .oFFFsmeooooo oeFoz .oeoomeoom .>.z axconF< NwN.F .FFF .umFFow .zmoz .mmugouwc< .IIIIIIIIII. $135.3. a? .F: at... .3 .28 as . FNN.F .oF< .ozuwowo . NmFmoo oz<42F 4moo>m . mmm.F .FFF .wooFmF zoom mmw.F .oox .XFFU momoox owe .xo< .mFFwowwLoo NmFmoo azso= woF.F .ocmF .mFFF>;mwz mmo.F .oz .NFooz .om ”memwlmmmm omm .oNo: .oomoo mmo.F .FFF .mFooo .um mmo.F .FFF .mFooz .Fm Fmom .HWImmIHmmm omo.F .FFF .quu ouFooow omo.F .FFH .NoFo ooFeoeo ooo .eon .eoomoo .oN . < oFo .oeo .oaooooo-oNF=F oFo .oFxo .oaooooo-oNF=F ooo .oon .oFoeooo ONF.F ozoF .NoFo xsoFN ooo .oFeo .ooooxooz coo .oFeo .ooooxmoz ooF .eon .ooeooz NNN.F .ooz .ooooo NNF .Noo .eoFoN oooo FNo .eeoF .NFeoeoz ONF oFeo .oooFoF NNN.F oFeo .FooeeFoeFo FNo .eeoF .NFeoooz NNN .NNFz .oFFFseooeo ooo oFeo .eoeoz FFN.F .oeF .ooooeoe omN .xeo .oooo oFooFo oNN .NNFz .oeoooonF oNo oFeo .eFoeoo Nmo.F .FFH .NFooo .oN oaoo oom .xeo .oeoFoz NoN .NNFz .Noeoooz ooo oFeo .oeoFo>oFo FFo .Nx .ooooooa oNN .xeo .FooFN oeFe .IIIIIIIIIII cow .>.z .qumwouom .lIlllIIIIIl mmw .msz .wFFF>:mme .Fm.z .oFowmzm .hm oNN .eon .NoFo Noo ONF .F.z .oeoooeoooo oNN .eon .NoFo NoN NoN .NNFz .Noeoooz HFm mmomgqu uFFFoLH ammoowz mmmKMm\zm<4 moFuuwoxm ummgomz uFFFooF mmm FzOo Fmoz usoo .msz .oFoomoumoo nFm .wooeoon .o> .oFowooon< .oz .oooFeoooo .w: .NFFooooo< .ooou .oowooz 3oz .mmoz .oo>Fz FFoo .: .z .ouooemuooo ooFoz .wooFuooo "Fm.w oFouF: uooooom uFFFooF mum omoooooF oFoFooF umooooz NNmKMMFzm<4 moFuuooxm umooooz uFFFooF umm FFoeFoeoov oeoa a N N N N F N N. FF FN N N N N N . . NFFoooF oooeoooo NeooF FoeooFooFeNo-eoe oooeoooF No oNNF N N N N N N FF NN NN N N N N N N . . . . NFFoooF oooeoooo NoooF FoeooFNoFeNo oooeoNoF No oNFF N N N N N N NF FF NF NF N F N N N . . . . . . . . FFeeFoeoov oeoo NeFNeoN NoeFFoNeoo Fo tooooz F o o N N N FF NF FF NF NF N N N N . . . . . . . . FFoeFoeooN oeoo NereoN NoeFFNooeo No Loose: F F F N F F NF FF NF NF NF N N N N . . . . . . . . FFoeFoeooN Neoo NereoN NoooeFFoe Fo tooooz N N N F N o F NF NF NF F N N N N . . . . . . . . . oFFFoeo zoom oooooeo oo Noeoooo oeFFoNeoN N N N N N N N NF N FN NF N F F F . . oFFFoeo ooNN too Noeocoo eoFooooeo Neoooeooo NNNNNNFNNoo N N N o o N F NF NF NF N F N N N . . . . oFFFoeo zoom Loo Noeoooo FoeoFooooeo FFoeFoeoov oeoe F F N N N N N N N NF FF N F N F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . oeooooo FNoou FFou oo .uNo: .uNom umooooo sooF uooo Fo ouoouNFo N N F o o o NF FF NF NF N N N N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . oFooe oNoooo oNeoo NNNoFoz oFoooo>oFoz FooFFN oz oFoooo>oo oFoooo>oo NFoeooNxN NFoEoouxm II I mmuuzmzzozF uFooNF4Fmo Nomooo mumooN NooFFumooo Fo gonzoz . . . . . . FFooFsoouv usoo moF>FoN NooFFxoaou Fo Loose: . . . . . . FFooFsoouF nooo moF>ooN NwoooFFoo No guano: . . . . . . . uFFFoou ouom ouosooo on NuooFFo ooFFomLoN uFFFoou zoom Loo NuooFFo ooFuoeooo moouooooo NNNoFo= NFoeoouxu F F F F F F N o o F F F o o N F N N F F N N F F o o o N N N N N N F F o o o o N N N N N N o o o N F F N N N o o o o o o F o o F N N F N N F F F o o o N N N F N N F F F o F o N N N N F F o o o F F F N N N N F F o o o o o F F N N N F F F F F N F o N F N N N N o o o o o o N N N N N N o o o o o o N N N N N F o o o N N N N N N N N N o o o N N N N N N N N N N F o .N. .N. .N. .N. .o. .N. .N. .o. .N. N.N. .o. .N. mFawLoF’cha Humor; 02 039.25..— 07.0.3.5...— NFosoeoxN ooNF NoFoeooFFoF mzmuzuzgozF uFoo<¢F wu¢<¢ mmmoo oFooFoFFo... 38.955. 38.0be mzuuzuasz gums—h may—(m “mafia—F2.— 3 825.25. :FFFggS—tufixe 9.5.: 748 ....Sw .m.= mm 33... 322 .OLQHSK I :u: UCM mHCOLLDU u :0: mumflm M Ina” PPPF ,— P PPPPF O—l—l-‘F'Nl—N I—MNNNl—r— r-Nr—v—r-r-r-r-F-F-r- l—Nf-l-F- PFFF P—PF NNNN PPPP . . . . . . . . . . . oFooFFo>o Nomooo mum tact—Cm“: use; . . NFFoqu wowoosow NeouF FooouFouFFmouooo wouoooeF Fo ooNF . . . . NFFoqu wowoosow NeouF FooouFouFomo woaoooEF Fo ooNF . . . . . . . . FFooFsoouF «Loo moF>ooN NooFFomooo Fo Fooasz . . . . . . . . FFooFELmuV uooo moF>me mooFquasu to Lwasaz . . . . . . . . FFooFELouF «coo moF>ooN NwoooFFoo Fo goons: . . . . . . . . . uFFFoFu zoom ouoeooo on muooFFo ooFFomooN . . uFFFoou zoom FoF NuFoFFo ooFuoEooo moouooooo mmmoo 2‘8 808 3a: oFoooo>oFo= NFoEoouxu 2“.- :US In: oFoooo>oFo= :m: :0: =m: «umFFm oz 03m: :0: :m: WEGHH O=r0603P&:~ 0—nflbo>flm NFoEoouxu mzuuzmazozF uFoo<¢F mo¢hF4FmFoN zmmwca anwLo>wwcz uumFFm oz anoFo>wo m—nwso>ou .FFmFfiouxu 39.8be mmuzmzzozF uFoo<¢h mwzFF4Fm<¢o>o Nomooo NNN FFooFEoouF uooo NFFoqu wowooENw NoouF FooouFooFomotooo wouooosF Fo ooNF NFFoooF wowooeow NsouF FooouFooFFmo wouooosF Fo ooNF . . . FFooFsoouv «Loo moF>ooN NooFFomooo Fo Foossz . . . FFooFEo: F.Foo moF>ooN $532...» .3 .3052 . . . FFooFELan pooo moF>FoN NwoooFFoo Fo goose: . . . . uFFFoFa zoom ouosooo on NuooFFo ooFFomoom oFtob :25 ...... Soto 8589... 28223 NNNfiNonfi . uFFFoFu ouom FoF NuooFFo FoooFuosooo FFooFEooav «Foo cocoa-ocoouooooooooo“haflmm uNooo FFou oo ume: .umou uNoFooo sooF uooo Fo ouoouNFo . . . . . . . . . . oFuoo amoeow omoou NumhF4Fm Fmv muzzF zeth uFousmm :m<4 ocuusozuo N N N F F F N N N N N N N N N . . . . . . . . . . NFNNFFNNN NNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNN .0 NNNaaz N N N F F F N N N N N N F N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . FNFNNNNNN NNNFNN FFNNFNLNNN NNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N . NFFNNNF NNNNNENN NsNNF FNNNNFNNNNNN-NNN NNNNNNNF No NNNN N N N N N N N NF N NF N N N N N . . . NFFNNNF NNNNNNNN NsNNF FNNNNFNNFNNN NNNNNNEF No NNNN N N N F F F N FF N N N N N N N . . . . . . . FFNNFEN: :8 N523 85383 No 34...... N N N N N F N N N N N F F F F . . . . . . . FFNNFENNNN NNNN NNFNNNN NNNFFNNNNN No Nunez: N N N N N N N N N NF N N F F F . . . . . . . FFNNFELNNN NNNN NNFNNNN NNNNNFFNN No Nunez: N N N N F N N N N N F F N N N . . . . . . . . NFNNNNN NNNN NNNNNNN a» NNNNNNN NNFFNNNNN N N N F F F N N N N F N F N N . NNNNNNN NNNN NNN NNNNNNN NNFNNsoNN NNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNN N N N N N N N FF N N N N F F F . . . uFNNNNN NNNN NNN NNNNNNN FNNNFNNNNNN FFNNFNNNNN NNNN 00m VMN #0? ”MN POO ......ouooo.oo..ooouoooo“L800” N38 .23 .8 ....me .33 7.23: so: :8 No 3.335 N N N N N N N N N N F F N N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NFNNN NNNNNN NNNNN NNNNNNNNNNN N N F N N N N FF N N N N N N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . NNNNNNNNN NNNN NNNNN NNNNNNN=Nmwca anmLo>mwcz uumwwm oz wpomgo>mu m—nogo>am 32555 59553 mam—2:5 3:5: ”.558 mmmfiflzmfi. no 82325. II. >de§o> Fmv H31... 2:3; “FFN—“.5: H55 ummN Nwmgan NNN AFNNFELNNV uNoN NFFNqu cmvcaEwu NsouF FmgauFaqumo-co: umuNoNEF mo «NNF . . NFFNqu umeNLu uaucmewu NemuF FNNNNFauFNma vaNoNsF mo maNF FFocFELmuV ugoa NNF>NNN NNNFFNNNNN No guess: FFucFELouv ugoa mcF>NmN mmcFquagu mo Logan: FFNNFENouF ago; mcF>NoN muooNFFNN No Logan: . uFNmNNu guam muoeogg ow mugouyu ucFmeNum guam so» Nugomum coFuoEoNN Ngouogmao mmmchz NFNNNo>NNN= NumNum oz mFNNNo>NN NFNNNo>NN NFwemNuxm NFwswLuxm Emu” acmucmaFuc~ mmmuzm24sz UFNNHF4Fm<¢o>o NF vousFocF Numcoamog «Non ucaFcF FacoFuucam use F F NoNogucoNoN NF Nunez: a .anoso>um «was NNN u NNN use NmFaaNo>au ume: ch u ucN NoFaNNo>NN «Nos NNF u NNFN N N N N N N F N N N N N F N, N N N N FFFN N N . . . NFNNFFNNN NNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNN No amass: N N N F N N N F N N N N F F F F N N N FFNN F . . . . . . FNFNNNNNN NNNFNN FFNNFNNNNN “NNN F N F F N N N F N N N N N N N N F N N N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . NFFNNNF NNNNNNNN NeuuF FugauFauFFmaucoc nougoneF No «NNN FFFNN N N F N N N N N N N N N N FF: N FFFNN N .............NFF.8FNN228 Nsan FagauFaquao cousoasF mo waxy N N N N N F N F N N N N F F F N N N N F F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FFNNFENNNF Neon mcF>NoN mocFFomNNn me guess: F N N F N N N N N N N N N F N N F N N N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FFNNFNFNNN «NNN mcF>NmN NocFquasu No Nunez: N N N N F N N N N N N N N F F N N F N F N FFNNFENNNF NFNN NNFNNNN NNNNFFFNN No Loans: N N F N F N N N N N F N N N N N N N N F N . NFNNNNN Noam NNNNNNN NF NNNNNNN NNFFNNNNN N N N N N F F F N N N F F F N N N N F F N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NFNNNFF Noam NNN muNoNuu :oFuNeoNN Neouauono ummm uFmN<¢F mzmhm>m m~zmm¢¢o NF NoNNFucF Noncoamos use: NNNFNF FocoFuucam «LN F v mononucogoa NF Nun-szn .NFNNFo>NN FNNE NNN a NNN NNN NanoNosau NNN. NNN a NNN NuFaagost NNN- NNF . «NFN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N . . . . . . . . . .NsLoNN NNNNF NNNNN--No;»N N N F N N N N N N N N N N N F N N N N N F . .Noe co» uFNFNFasuFuca Noon umogwlugoguo N N N N N N N N F N N N N N F N N F N N F . . . . . . . . . . . . mmuFNN NFNozluuocuN N N F N N N N N N N N N N F N N N F N F F . . . NNNNN NNNNN :0 ouF>NNN :NN NNNNNN NNNNNNNNNsoN NocFquasu No Fonts: N N N N F N F N N F N N F N N N N N N N N FFNNFENNNV Neon NNF>NNN NuNanFNN No Luann: N N N F N F N N N N N N F F N N EN N N N N . 3th 5.; 38g 8 storm NNFFNENN F N N N N N N F N N N N N N N F F N F N N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . uFumaNu Noam Low musowwo :oFuNEoNN «Loansono mmmN uFNmm NFxmm¢xFNN -FouNFx F NNN .xN< .ocoFo: NoFuFFFuNN ugouyu FNcFeLou NNFNN NNFNFFFuNN NuFNocuaa .NcmsnFaao .NNFx -- -- NoNNoNucF NNF: NNNNNNNN FNNFENNF +NNN.N ”NNN NNFFNNN: NNN NNN .NFFF>NNNNN .NNF: .NNNNNN NNFNFFFuNN -- -- -- NNF: -- -- N Nougu: FFNNN>N NNN NNN .NNF: .NNNNNNNF> achuNE NNNN NNN NNFNNNN NFFNFNNNN ouc>FNN .NquFNN NNFNNNNNN NNFNFFFoNN .NNFNNNNNN .quasu -- l- -- NNF: NNNN Navcmaxu NNN uNoN .NNNFF xNoN NNFv NNN .NNFz .Noguuoz Naeoumau FNNNNFN chcogu NwFuFFFuNN -- NNNLNNNN NNFNNNNN NNF: NNFNNNNN NNFNN NNN -- -- -- -- .NFN .NNFN NNNNNN HFN.z .NNNNFN NNNNNFNNF ”FNNNN FNNN FNNNV NNFNu< NmFuF>Fuu< NNNNNN NNNNNNN NENFF FNNNNV qugaom Nsqu FNNNNV «Noamam wsaFo> NNNNN NFFNNNF NNNFFNN NFNFFNN ummcuoz NNFumcoN NNNNN ENNN NNFF: FNNNN< NNNNNNNNNzF F4:ouco> n.FNFuu< NNNNHN NNUNNNN NENNF FNNNNV Noueaom manF FNNNNF uNoNNmN ossFo> NNNNN oFNNNNF NNNFFoN NLNFFNN NNNNNmz :oFuNNNF NNNNN scum NNFF: FNNNN< NNNou NF NN N NNNNNNN Fomum <\z NNNNEF Fwoum NFN .NFNN .NNoouNN-oNFNF N>FuuNNF FF N .EoN ..NEF FouFFFuNNN o>Fuua NN .eoN ..NEF uchamxmz :NNN .NNNN>NN N N F NFNNNNN Fuoum a NNNF NF .soN..NsF FomuN N NNNF NNN .NFNN .NNNNNNN: <\z NN NF NN N NoNNoN meum NN .eoN..NEF Fmoum NNN .ccmF .Nansmx muFm Nogo>ou oN NF NN N NNNENF meum NN uNoNEF ago mquNNN NNN .xg< .xuoa mFuuFN ou +N +NF F couuou FmauN N.N NNNNEF Fooum NNN .NNF: .aFFF>:omNN NNNNNN NNN; NNF: NF oFNNwEoN NNNENN xuaFn NNNNNN ucFN NN ugoaxu NNNNN NNNNNN .NNFNNNN NF N F NNNNN FNNNN NN FaoNsF FNNNN NNN .NNFz .NNNNNNNFN N FNoNsF umFNIm,FmoNN .NNNENF NoozNFN NNFFF N NFNNNENN N NNNNNFN NFNNNNNNFN NcFucmN .NFNN NNNNNNN N N F NFNN NNN: FNNNN NN FLNNNN NNN: NNFNN NNN .NNFz .NNNNNN: HFN NNNF msqu NNNNNNN zNFNNm NN Nona: ENLN NNFF: N>FuFuoNEoN NNN: NcF>NmN No swasaz NNN< moo: hzoamz mzmhF oom 44c mowou N <\z au N NF F oN N N N (\z Fmoum NN gNaz N NNF: NF uFuNaaaN NNN NNNN uumccou NN «Noaxu NNNFFFNNNN Foxcma .ngo>oN N Lona: ENNN NNFFx £33328 F3: NNFENN No 325: NNNNNNNNNS .83.. F F3232. N :8 N255 umacFucouuumo m4mNz NoFFuqu NN uFuNNaoN FNoN .523 .3238 N <2 N 68955 68922”. FN 3:28 28mg: NNN :82qu .35 NNN Fataé ”a "NFFNN NNNFMF chNNNmNoN aNNNN» N :Fgqu NNNmuoN NN uFNNF .moNNH omgou Nusonoam Noch mom .NNN: .No>=ooco> c895 3232 N ugoaxu NNFNNF< 53.... NN toes 8:. Nago>ou .xuoN F (N: N ooFm NN agonxu NNFgu coo: .NFFNN .oucosoNuNN NFaniuomN NmoN 83 NF 295 .9558 NozonNNN NF usaaxm :FNNN FNFNN NNNNNF Nugo>ou oN NF N N couuou NN NNNNEF FFN NNon .NFFF>N:3oLN Noqu .oFFF>choLN mome .mNNNNN Nuon .ucosaoom .NFN .NNFN Naucoa NN NFNN» .NNNNF NNNNN NNNNNNNN Noch mom NF NNNNXN gonna NF NNNNEF FFo FNNN N NF N N.FNNN FNNFN NN 9.5328 .5223. 23: .N: .3885; "FNN Lona: EoFN NmFF: N>FNFNNNENN “No: NNF>NNN No Nmaeaz NNNou .gmxcoh N N F mqucFF\mNoN .gume .Fsm< mm uFummaoa ssoFogumN NNN coumchmN: .oumua Fumuuonxuv "hmou m NF F maoggou <\z oN uFummeoa LaNFFFuLuu NNN.F aroF .quu xNoFm oF ugqum Fmoum Fvouumaxov om uFummEoo uFum guano: .vogm>ou v N F exocxca on uFumusaa gmnFFFuLou NNN.F uxmognoz .ogusc N uFummeoa Fw>mmm a «scam NF uFummeoo Foou muuauogn oF NF o (\z <\z oe uFummeoo ssmFoLumN NNN.F ono .FuuchucFu FBNNNNmmV NN <2 5323.8“. 8.; NN <2 :3 guano: <\z <\z F LmaENN Fmoum om <\z m..5 Nmo.F .FFF .NFNN4 .um Fmom Fumuumaxmv .uogqumumE mF uFummeon use Fouoz monoguqum mw uFummsoo mFuquocu LoNNN congau muuavosa LmNNog .vmgm>ou m oF N mFNquozu mFNquozu om uFummsoo EsoFoguoa NFN .xx .cauauoa “Fm «NNF mauFF uLoNNom zoFuum 4o Lana: Eon; mmFF: m>FuFuoasou ume: mcF>Lom Fe gunssz mmm NFNNNNFNN ”NNNNN‘NNN NF NFNNNNNNNN NNLNN F.NNF FN a =NNN m NFsqu mumo Lona: scam mmFF: a>FuFamNeou ume: NNF>LNN we Lassa: mmm .ucoEzqu F usomEF mmcwvgum .cuu oN oF .NEF..eoo FFo vocFNmm o -NN N F NN «LNNEF FFN mango NNFN: .vcoFusoN "NmNLuu=3u ”Nmo Nona: song NmFFz m>NuFumaeou ume: mcF>gmm No LmnENz Amxgmumz ‘ hmom ozge: HNN uNNN EuaF “Loamum zOFOuN Ngum No guasaz NEuNF NOLNO FFNLu>O NNNNx Nnguuoz N NNON O2< moo: Naommzo «064:--4Ngw <\z <\z ogw FNNccuN .NgocoO NF .EOO ..OEF wwoFFN-ouguu mN .ENO ..asF LNNNLOOFN e NF F ON uFumuEOO NFNN xuom Nmm.F .ccuN .Noumcchux :uz m uFuNuENO NFFFE EogN Fuuum N N F NN NFNNuENN Fuuum NuNNuFLNNN NNN.F NFNNNFNNNNNN .NNLNNNNNFN OF uFuNueoO Fuuum .uNFx O< uFuNuEOO Fu>ugm a ucom gnu: .OOFFuugz N «Nu: .umguss< anon mF uFNNueoO NNNN FNEFN< mN uFuNuEOO NuNNNFNz N-N NF N NN NFNmusNN LNNFFFNLNN NNN.F NNNNNNL< .uNNNNNN <\z <\z :FNLO <\z <\z FNoO N NF F <\z <\z FFN NNN.F NFNNNNNF: .NNNNNNNNN mF uuomxm OOLF mmNum Ne uFumuEOO NuNNOugmm< O Nux No (\2 52m szm N NNN m we <\z omgmu FNLucuO OO<.F cchouNF: .uuxNNIFFz muNFFuNLNN NucFquNLN NONNLFFNN usaFo> uNxN EuNF uuoaaum zOFumm Nuum No guaENz msuuF OOLNO FFNLu>O Lona: Nuzguumz N NNON Ozm we uFNNN .NuNNH oauau Nascguum NNOF: uum N FLNNNN NNNN mN «Loaxu guess; N N F NN tax". 3:8 NNNEN £8 38 "hmgum No Lunazz usuuF omLNO FFNLu>O scum: meuuuaz N NNON Oz