20181416_USACE Correspondence_20120703

H 3�
Dwo
US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: June 28, 2012
Comment Deadline: July 30, 2012
Corps Action ID #: SAW-2008-02315
TIP Project No. R-2527, R-2530B, B-4974
The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application from the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding a potential future
requirement for Department of the Army authorization to discharge dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States associated with widening construction of NC
24/27 from NC 740 in Albemarle to the proposed Troy Bypass, west of Troy in Stanly
and Montgomery Counties, North Carolina.
Specific alternative alignments and location information are described below and shown on
the attached plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the
Wilmington District Web Site at
http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Wetiands/Notices/Current notices.html. Viewing the on-
line version will better display color and grant the ability to view exploded views.
Applicant: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
c/o Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this application to compare alternatives that have been carried
forward for study pursuant to applicable procedures under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
In order to more fully integrate Section 404 permit requirements with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and to give careful consideration to our required public
interest review and 404(b) (1) compliance determination, the Corps is soliciting public
comment on the merits of this proposal and on the alternatives evaluated in the NCDOT
State Environmental Assessment (EA). At the close of this comment period, the District
Commander will evaluate and consider the comments received as well as the expected
adverse and beneficial effects of the proposed road construction to select the least
environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA). The District Commander is
not authorizing the NC 24/27 improvement project at this time. A final Department of the
Army permit may be issued only after our review process is complete, impacts to the

aquatic environment have been minimized to the maximum extent practicable and a
compensatory mitigation plan for unavoidable impacts has been approved.
Location
The proposed 14.6 mile NC 24127 highway improvement project begins in Stanly County
from west of NC 740 and extends along the existing facility to the proposed Troy Bypass,
west of SR 1138 (Dairy Road), west of Troy, in Montgomery County, North Carolina. The
proposed project crosses tributaries and wetlands that are hydrologically connected to the
Pee Dee River. The corridor is more specifically located starting at Latitude 35.3492 N,
Longitude - 80.1657 W and ending at Latitude 35.3318, Longitude - 79.9320.
Existing Site Conditions
The project is located within the Carolina Slate Belt Eco- region in the Pee Dee River
Basin, USGS 8 -digit hydrological unit 03040104. The Biotic resources surrounding the
project area is indicative of a rural setting, with pine and hardwood forests, pine
plantations, agricultural fields and residential and commercial developments accounting for
the majority of the land uses. The large portion of the project located east of the Pee Dee
River is located within the Uwharric National Forest. Topography is characterized as gently
sloping to hilly with steep areas occurring along drainage ways. Elevations range from
approximately 300 to 600 feet above mean sea level.
All streams identified within the R -2530 portion of the project study area are unnamed
tributaries to one of three named systems: Mountain Creek, Jacobs Creek, and the Pee Dee
River. The water resources present in the R -2527 portion of the project study area include
Lake Tillery /Pee Dee River, Rocky Creek (Lake Tillery tributary), Dumas Creek, Clarks
Creek, Lick Fork Creek, Rocky Creek (Little River tributary), Smith Branch, Cattail Creek
and Wood Run. The Pee Dee River at this location is dammed downstream to form Lake
Tillery. The lake does not exhibit riverine conditions due to the dam, and is typical of
manmade reservoirs throughout the state. The streams in the project area have NCDWQ
classifications of Class B waters, Class C waters and Water Supply (WS) IV waters. A
Best Usage Classification of C indicates waters are used for secondary recreation, fishing,
wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of
biological integrity, and agriculture. A Best Usage Classification of B indicates waters are
used in the same manner as Class C waters in addition to primary recreation activities that
involve human contact with water. A Best Usage Classification of WS -IV indicates waters
are used as sources of potable water where a WS -1,11, or III classification is not feasible.
WS -IV waters are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds or Protected
Areas. Most of the WS -IV waters in the project area are designated Critical Areas (CA),
which means the areas are within one -half mile upstream and draining to a river intake or
within one -half mile and draining to the normal pool elevation of water supply reservoirs.
There is one stream system with a supplemental classification of High Quality Water
(HQW), which indicates the waters are rated excellent based on biological and
N

physical /chemical characteristics. There are no designated Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW), Water Supply I (WS -I), Water Supply (WS-11) or 303(d) listed waters in within 1.0
mile of the project area. See Table 1 for the designations of the water bodies in the project
area.
TABLE 1: WATER RESOURCES DATA
Project
Water
Resource
DWQ Stream
Index No.
Subbasin
Best Usage Classification
R -2530B
Mountain Creek
13-5-(0.7)
03 -07 -08
WS -IV, CA
R -2530B
Jacobs Creek
13-9-(0.5)
03 -07 -08
WS -IV, CA
R -2530B
Pee Dee River
13-(1)
03 -07 -08
WS -IV, B, CA
B -4974 &
R -2527
Lake
Tillery /Pee Dee
River
03 -07 -08
WS -IV, B, CA
R -2527
Rocky Creek
(Lake Tillery
tributary)
13 -8 -(2)
03 -07 -08
WS -IV, CA
R -2527
Dumas Creek
13 -16 -1
03 -07 -08
C
R -2527
Clarks Creek
13 -16
03 -07 -10
C
R -2527
Lick Fork Creek
13 -16 -4
03 -07 -10
C
R -2527
Rocky Creek
(Little River
tributary)
13- 25- 30 -(0.5)
03 -07 -15
C, HQW
R -2527
Smith Branch
13- 25 -30 -1
03 -07 -15
C
R -2527
Cattail Creek
13 -8 -1
03 -07 -08
WS -1V
R -2527
Wood Run
13-7-(l)
03 -07 -08
WS -IV
All wetlands in the project area were delineated using the current Corps of Engineers
methodology. The jurisdictional wetlands within the project area are primarily palustrine,
forested wetlands including headwater, bottomland hardwood and seep wetlands.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
The purpose of these projects is to improve traffic flow and level of service (LOS) on the
section of NC 24 -27 between NC 740 in Albemarle to the proposed Troy Bypass, west of
Troy, and to maintain a bridge across the Pee Dee River that addresses the needs of
highway users.
The proposed projects are intended to address the following needs:
• Transportation deficiencies exist along NC 24 -27 in the project study areas which
are projected to increase substantially by the year 2035.
• Bridge No. 51 over the Pee Dee River is considered structurally deficient and is
eligible for the Federal -Aid Highway Bridge Program.

• Maintain and improve the mobility and connectivity functions of the NC 24 -27
corridor as part of the Strategic Highway Corridor Vision and the North Carolina
Intrastate System.
Project Description
The following description of the work and the alternatives were taken from data provided
by the applicant. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) project R -2530B
involves widening existing NC 24 -27 from west of NC 740 to the Pee Dee River in Stanly
County from a two and three -lane facility to a four -lane divided facility with a 23 -foot
raised median from NC 740 to SR 1731 (Sweet Home Church Road) and transitioning to a
46 -foot depressed median from east of SR 1731 to the Pee Dee River in Stanly County.
TIP project B -4974 involves replacing existing Bridge No. 51 over the Pee Dee River on
the Stanly / Montgomery County line. TIP project R -2527 involves widening existing NC
24 -27 from a two -lane facility to a four -lane divided facility with a 46 -foot depressed
median from the Pee Dee River to the proposed Troy Bypass, west of Troy in Montgomery
County. The total length of the proposed project is approximately 14.6 miles long. See the
attached Vicinity Map and Typical Sections.
Alternatives Considered
"No- Build" Alternative
The No -Build Alternative would not provide any substantial improvements to the NC 24-
27 study corridor and would not improve traffic flow or level of service (LOS) on the
section of NC 24 -27 through the project study area. The structural deficiencies of the
James B. Garrison Bridge would not be addressed.
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements involve increasing the
available capacity of the roadway within the existing right -of -way with minimum capital
expenditures and without reconstructing or adding additional through lanes to the existing
road. Addition of turn lanes, striping, signing, signalization, and minor realignments are
examples of TSM physical improvements. Examples of TSM operational improvements
include traffic law enforcement, speed restrictions, access control, and signal timing
changes.
Alignment Alternatives
The project will consist of two alignment alternatives. Both alignment alternatives within
the R -2527 and R -2530B portions of the project would involve the asymmetrical widening
"Best Fit" widening) of NC Highway 24127. This `Best Fit" alignment would involve
widening the road either to the north or south of the existing roadway depending on
engineering considerations as well as human and natural environmental constraints. "Best
4

Fit" locations were evaluated and selected to improve the existing road alignment,
minimize impacts, and permit maintenance of traffic during construction.
Alternative 4 would consist of asymmetrically widening NC Highway 24127 as described
above. This alternative would involve the replacement of Bridge Number 51 with a new
bridge along the existing roadway alignment. Alternative 4 would involve adverse impacts
to Bridge Number 51, which is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places.
Alternative 1 would consist of the same asymmetrical widening of NC Highway 24127
described above. This alternative would involve the replacement of Bridge No. 51 with a
new bridge south of the existing bridges. This alternative does not directly impact Bridge
Number 51 and may provide a potential preservation opportunity for an interested
individual, group or municipality. Stanly County may be interested in taking over the
maintenance of Bridge Number 51 to provide a trail connection between Morrow Mountain
State Park and the Uwharrie National Forest.
Table 2 provides a summary and comparison of impacts associated with both alternatives
and Table 3 compares the costs of both alternatives.
TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
ar. V ;ky.�,i
A
B -1
B -4
C
R -2530B
B -4974,
B -4974,
R -2527
A +B 1 +C
A +B4 +C
Alt.I
Alt.4
Natural Resources Impacts
Federal Listed Species Habitat
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
100 -Year Flood Plain and
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Floodway Impacts
Wetlands (number of
4/0.58
2 / 0.08
1/0.02
23/1.71
2912.37
2812.31
crossings/acres)
Stream Crossings (number /linear
23/
7/
8/
29/
59/
601
feet ) * * **
7,122
1,314
1,467
6,438
15,227
15,518
Water Supply Critical Areas
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Rare Plants *
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
USFS Forest Land (acres) * * * **
0
9
X20
440
0
0
50
50
50
Human Environment Impacts
Residential Relocations (number)
ee
18
16
7
25
23
B
Business Relocations (number)
see
24
19
3
27
22
B-49
Low Income /Minority Population
No
No
No
No
No
No
Cemeteries /Gravesites (number of
Yes / 0
No
No
No
Yes / 0
Yes / 0
raves impacted)

Historic Structures **
0
0
1
0
0
1
Archaeological Sites
3
0
0
3
6
6
Section 4 Impacts
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Traffic Noise Impacts (receptors)
/Noise Sensitive Areas
19
* **
* **
11
30
30
Air Quality
Within an Attainment area
Physical Environment Impacts
R -2527
$3,089,790
Railroad Crossings (number)
0
0
0
1
1
1
Farmland
No
No
No
No
No
No
Potentially Hazardous Materials
Sites (number)
17
* * *
* * *
6
23
23
NOTES:
+ All impacts, but the USFS Forest Land acreage, are based on preliminary design slope stake limits plus 25 feet. The USFS
Forest Land acreage is based on preliminary proposed right of way limits.
+ * Rare plants include Schweinitz's Sunflower, Georgia Aster, Large Witch Alder and Smooth Sunflower.
• ** The Swift Island Ferry / James B. Garrison Bridge (Existing Bridge 51) is eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places.
• * ** Impacts for B-4974 are included with R -2530B or R -2527.
0 * * * *St -W was declared to be an ephemeral feature not subject to the permit requirement of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act at the February 2, 2011 CP2A Feld meeting and should be deleted.
0 * * * ** USFS Forest Land acreage was recalculated based on updated forest boundaries.
TABLE 3: LATEST PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Project Number
Right of Way Cost
Construction Cost
Project Cost
R- 2530B:
Tie to Alternative 1
$10,620,830
$26,100,000
$36,720,830
Tie to Alternative 4
$9,482,460
$26,100,000
$35,582,460
B -4974:
- Alternative 1
$1,665,000
$14,700,000
$16,365,000
- Alternative 4
$1,588,150
$12,100,000
$13,688,150
R -2527
$3,089,790
$34,600,000
$37,689,790
Alternatives 2 and 3 were eliminated based on higher natural environmental impacts and
the NCDOT Bridge Management Unit's recommendation to not replace Bridge No. 50 at
this time.
Bridges and Drainage Structures
Table 4 below shows the bridges and drainage structures proposed for the major stream
crossings in the alternatives under consideration within the R- 2530B, B -4974 and R -2527
project limits.
31

TABLE 4: Proposed Bridges and Drainage Structures (Major Stream Crossings)
Site
Stream under or
Location on
Flood Zone
No.
Railroad over
NC 24 -27
Recommended Structure
Status
NC 24 -27
R- 2530B:
1
0.3 miles SE of the
Retain and Extend 1 @ 87.5" X 68"
NIA
UT Mountain Creek
NC 740 junction
(87 "X63 ") CMPA
2
UT Mountain Creek
0 3 miles NW of the
Retain and Extend 1 @ 6' X 6' RCBC
NIA
SR 1537 junction
°
3
UT Mountain Creek
0.05 miles SE of the
Retain and Extend 1 .6' X 6' RCBC
NIA
SR 1731 junction
B -4974:
4
0.2 miles SE of the
Retain and Extend 1@ 7' X 7'
NIA
UT Pee Dee River
SR 1778 junction
Bottomless RCBC
Pee Dee River
0.1 miles W of the
Buiid a new 1135' bridge south of the
Designated Flood
5
Alternative 1
NC 73 Junction
existing bridges. Existing Bridge No.
Hazard Zone
51 can remain in place.
Pee Dee River
0.1 miles W of the
Remove Bridge No. 51 and replace it
Designated Flood
5
Alternative 4
NC 73 Junction
with a new 1174' bridge. Existing
Hazard Zone
Bridge No. 50 will remain in lace.
R -2527:
6
Rocky Creek
0.4 miles W of the
Retain and Extend 2 (2 10 X 7 RCBC
Designated Flood
SR 1150 junction
Hazard Zone
7
Rocky Creek
0.08 miles W of the
'unction
Retain and Extend 2 9 X 7 RCBC
Designated Flood
SR 1150
�r�,
Hazard Zone
$
Clarks Creek
0.8 miles SW of the
Retain and Extend 2 n 10 X 7 RCBC
Designated Flood
SR 1134 junction
Hazard .Zone
9
UT Lick Fork Creek
0.5 miles NE of the
'unction
Retain and Extend 7 X 7 RCBC
Designated Flood
SR 1134
Hazard Zone
10
UT Rocky Creek
0.2 miles W of the
'unction
Retain and Extend I@ 7 X 5 RCBC
N/A
SR 1137
11
UT Rocky Creek
0.1 miles E of the
Retain and Extend 1 @ 7 X 5 RCBC
NIA
SR 1137 junction
12
Rocky Creek
0.3 miles E of the
Retain and Extend 3 a 9 X 9 RCBC
Designated Flood
SR 1137 junction
Hazard Zone
Near
Norfolk Southern)
0.1 miles W of the
Build a new 210' bridge and railroad
12
Aberdeen Carolina &
NC 109 junction
track west of the existing bridge.
NIA
Western
Remove Bridge No. 14
13
Smith Branch Creek
0.4 miles NE of the
'unction
Retain and Extend 1 g 8 X 8 RCBC
NIA
NC 109
Notes: UT — Unnamed Tributary
RCBC — Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert
CMPA — Corrugated Metal Pipe Arch
7

Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation will be required for project impacts to wetlands and streams. The
applicant will investigate potential on -site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities.
Compensatory mitigation requirements may also be fulfilled by using the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program or a nearby mitigation bank.
Cultural Resources
Historic Architectural Resources
A Historical Architectural Survey Report was completed in 2000 for the R -2527 Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in Montgomery County. This report recommended that there are
no National Register- listed properties within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and that
the properties over 50 years old in the APE are not considered eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places.
A Historical Architectural Survey Report was completed in February 2005 for the R -2530B
and B -4974 APE in Stanly County. This report recommended that the James B. Garrison
Bridge (Swift Island Ferry Bridge) over the Pee Dee River, Bridge Number 51, is
individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, The James B. Garrison
Bridge (Swift Island Ferry Bridge) over the Pee Dee River is an open spandrel arch bridge
and was built in 1927 -28 by Carolina Power and Light (CP &L) in cooperation with the
Highway Commission to replace a bridge flooded by the raising of the Tillery Reservoir for
a hydroelectric plant.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
(HPO) concurred with the recommendations discussed in the 2000 report for project R-
2527. The HPO concurred with the recommendations discussed in the February 2005
report for projects R -2530B and B -4974 in a March 23, 2005 memorandum.
The project may or may not adversely affect Bridge Number 51. The project will not
adversely affect Bridge Number 51 if a new owner agrees to take ownership of the bridge.
If no one agrees to take ownership over the bridge, the bridge will be removed and the
project will adversely affect the historic property.
Archeological Resources
An Intensive Archaeological Survey and Evaluation (Phase I and II) report was completed
in August 2006 for the R -2530B portion of the project study area in Stanly County. This
investigation recommended that only one site (31ST195) was individually eligible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under criterion [d] of 36 CFR
60.4, and three sites (31 ST195, 31 ST196 and 31 ST204/204) were eligible for listing in the
8

NRHP as an archaeological district under criterion [a] and [d] of 36 CFR 60.4 (sites
31 ST 196 and 31 ST204/204 are not considered to be individually eligible for the NRHP).
Two historic cemeteries were also documented during the course of field investigations but
are not recommended as eligible for the NRHP as individual archaeological resources.
Avoidance is recommended for both of the cemeteries and all of the site components to the
proposed archaeological district.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
(HPO) concurred with the recommendations discussed in the August 2006 report in a
March 29, 2007 memorandum. This memorandum also recommended that if avoidance is
not possible, then data recovery excavations be conducted at 31 ST195 and additional
laboratory analyses be undertaken with archaeological materials recovered from sites
31 ST 196 and 31 ST204/204.
An Intensive Archaeological Survey and Evaluation (Phase I and II) report was completed
in March 2008 for the R -2527 portion of the project study area in Montgomery County.
This investigation recommended that three sites (31MG321, 3IMG1629 and 31MG1806)
were eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under criterion
[d] of 36 CFR 60.4. Avoidance is recommended for these three sites. If avoidance is not
possible, then mitigation of effects (including data recovery excavations) will be required at
these sites prior to ground disturbing activities.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
(HPO) has concurred with the recommendations discussed in the March 2008 report in a
April 8, 2008 memorandum.
Endangered Species
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three federally protected species for
Montgomery and Stanly Counties. Table 4 provides a list of the federally protected species
and a description of the effects the project may have each species.
Project Portion &
Common Name
Federal
Habitat
Biological
County
Status
Present?
Conclusion
R -2530B & R -2527 -
Schweinitz's Sunflower
E
Yes
May Affect, Likely to
Stanl / Montgomery
dversel Affect
R -2527 - Montgomery
Smooth Coneflower
E
Yes
No Effect
R -2527 - Montgomery
Red - cockaded Woodpecker
E
No
No Effect
Sunflower surveys were conducted in October 2011 within the project study areas. A
population of Schweinitz's sunflowers was identified on the southwest side of NC 24 -27
within the R -2530B portion of the project. Fifty -five stems were observed in addition to a
few seedlings. Schweinitz's sunflowers were also found in the study corridor along the
railroad tracks south of NC 24 -27 within the R -2527 portion of the project.
E

The USFWS lists Georgia Aster and Yadkin River Goldenrod as Candidate species for
Montgomery and Stanly Counties. During an October 2011 environmental survey, a
population of Georgia asters was found along NC 24 -27 in Stanly County.
Due to the presence of Schweinitz's sunflower within the project area, the project will
likely adversely affect the plant. Additional surveys will likely be conducted prior to
project construction and coordination and consultation with the USFWS will be required.
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit (which will come after the Least Environmentally
Damaging Practicable Alternative Corridor is selected) will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public
interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization
of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which
may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof,
among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns,
wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values (in
accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and
accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety,
food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in
general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving the discharge of
dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of the impact of the
activity on the public interest will include application of the Environmental Protection
Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials, including any consolidate state viewpoint or written position of the
Governor; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps
of Engineers to select the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA).
To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species,
historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public
interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of a Corps of Engineers
Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant
to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine
the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed
activity.
10

Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, July 30, 2012. Comments
should be submitted to Mr. Ronnie D. Smith, Wilmington Regulatory Field Office, 69
Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 or by email to
Ronnie. d. smith @usace.army.mil.
11

0
0
(n
m
�a
m:�
Nr
rn
0
O
con
,VI
(W^
v
CV
rn
/-O
`V
C
C7
O
a
O
Tj
C
Q
—i
C)
f
G)
N
a
0
a
V
�o�
::D I I
❑z-i
rnm�
❑
� I
�C)n
VV
�I
o
0
a
N
Y
A
Vl
V
r..
a
0
a
m
r-
Q
rn
d
c�
a
�1
'I
^^V
0
1
L.l
4
To
CV
n
0
0
Q
I
hI
U-1
Vn
1
j❑
W
O O
rn�o
Fri
rnrn<
O �
❑
CO
rn
-`o °o
1:Z--
cF
F
c
F
N F
EMWINq
MEW-do
I
0
z
O
y
0
0
x
n
rn
r-
0
m
ti
z
y
O
A

mm'23
DIONN.
-n
X
"') a , srdr
r
C)
5-1
mm
c:
co
-4
-u
-u
CD
CL
C)
CV)
mxzc:'11O>Mo,o,T
Tm
-
�>
w
;ma
0
c
>
xm
'C":
(0j) o
Z
>
- q
omo>o
z
igM 0
> r)
c)
C)
C)
')o
-4 g
m
x
r-
> M 5 -.q —
r- x > z
OZ
z
0
Z g > z m
o
0
> m
Z
C) 0
ou c
>
oz
C
m
>
ox,
NI,
Ili
4
'C",
w
CD
Fri
cn
0 0
c 0
X
0 -n
m
m
4
4�6
m
--I
m
C)
-n C)
cf)
F
m
;o
G)
>
CD
CD C)
m
;o
m
cn
0
c
;o
0
Ill
U)
mm'23
DIONN.
be-
i0l,
op
Pk
73"
e Al
W111
11 1 1 ili�li
ch,
-n
X
"') a , srdr
0
Cl)
>:
co
-4
0 Z
r
1
1 9
z
>
Z 0 ;0 0 -n 0
I;= z u
(0j) o
Z
>
- q
omo>o
z
igM 0
> r)
g o cn>
rn 0 -m ;0
ZM 00
< =;o
')o
-4 g
0 ;0 -!6
r-
> M 5 -.q —
r- x > z
1
C)
Z g > z m
o
0
> m
Z
C) 0
ou c
m --I
;o >
;o
Fn > --i
z 9
0
0
M z
> -i
Fri
cn
0 0
c 0
z
0
4
4�6
z c
Z
be-
i0l,
op
Pk
73"
e Al
W111
11 1 1 ili�li
ch,