The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutINS-11-018 - Five-Year Stormwater Report Card 2010REPORT TO: Community & Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: February 28, 2011 SUBMITTED BY: K. Grant Murphy, P.Eng., Director of Engineering Services (519-741-2410) PREPARED BY: Diana Lupsa, P.Eng., Design & Construction Project Manager (519-741-2815) WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: January 24, 2011 REPORT NO.: INS 11-018 SUBJECT: FIVE-YEAR STORMWATER REPORT CARD 2010 RECOMMENDATION: That the attached Five–Year Stormwater Report Card 2010 Technical Report and the 2010 Report Card brochure be received and endorsed. BACKGROUND: In 2001, the City of Kitchener developed a Master Stormwater Management (SWM) Policy that outlined the City’s strategy for dealing with stormwater management related to development. This policy specified that the City would monitor its streams to establish the effectiveness of the policy on improving water quality, aquatic habitat and stream stability. The status of works completed as part of the policy, a review of the SWM Redevelopment/Infill Charge (cash-in-lieu) along with the monitoring results are incorporated in yearly SWM Audit reports completed since 2002. A 5-Year Report on the status of SWM works within the City was recommended to assess the effectiveness of the policy. The overall intention of the stormwater report card is to provide: An indication of overall stream health; Public access and awareness of stormwater management; and Identification of the potential for stormwater improvements. The first 5-year report card was published in 2008 and reported on data collected from 2002- 2006. The report was presented to the public in a format including two documents: a brochure and a technical report available through the City’s website. The 2010 5-year Report Card, is the second report prepared, and reports on data collected from 2006-2010. é ó ï REPORT: As mandated by the Master Stormwater Management (SWM) Policy, in 2002 the City of Kitchener initiated a monitoring program to describe current biological and water quality conditions under both dry and wet conditions. The monitoring program included a moving set of 7 to 8 stations on streams within the City of Kitchener. Monitoring locations have been selected on an annual basis and samples were taken for water quality analysis and assessment of aquatic ecological health (benthic invertebrate and fish surveys). Four sets of parameters including chemical, biological, physical and overall stormwater management practices have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of the SWM plan. Each parameter provides an indication of how the system is functioning and what potential there is for improvement. The City’s consultant rated each parameter using an “excellent/good/fair/marginal/poor” system that is specific to each indicator. Chemical The quality of the water in our streams and rivers is important to the health of aquatic ecosystems as well as people in the City of Kitchener and recipients of drinking water downstream. Clean water supports a diverse biotic community, recreational activities within parks and green spaces as well as contributing to overall human health within and downstream of the City. The quality of water in City of Kitchener streams was assessed using the results of the chemical and bacteriological testing done on water samples collected during both wet and dry weather conditions as part of the annual audit program. The purpose of the water quality sampling and reporting is to determine how well the system is managing stormwater. A summary of the overall ratings for the dry and wet weather events is presented in Table 1 below: é ó î é ó í Both the 2006 and 2010 results show that the majority of the streams have reduced water quality, especially during wet weather events. It is obvious that in wet weather conditions water quality is degraded compared to dry weather samples. This indicates that stormwater management practices within the City require upgrading to manage wet weather flows and reduce the water quality degradation. Biological The type and diversity of aquatic life in our streams indicates the level of health of the aquatic ecosystems in the City of Kitchener. The invertebrate and fish populations also establish the time-averaged health of the stream as they respond to changes in water quality, temperature and the physical conditions in the streams. Aquatic invertebrates (larval stages of insects and aquatic worms) and fish were identified each summer at seven rotating locations as part of the City-wide stormwater program. Indices of biological health have been established for each location based on the number of individuals and type of aquatic life found. Table 2 summarizes the level of aquatic health as determined by biological indices for each creek. é ó ì é ó ë With respect to the biological results, there is very little difference in water quality status between stations on a particular stream. Streams draining the urban sections of Kitchener are mostly in the fair to poor water quality rating. Fish diversity is relatively low at most stations with six or fewer fish species present; the fish community is being dominated by pollution tolerant species. The exceptions to these generalizations are Blair Creek and Strasburg Creek which have good water quality and cold water species such as brook trout. Biological results presented in the 2010 report card were similar to conditions noted in the 2006 report card. Physical The physical indicators used to describe the status of the City’s stream include riparian cover (vegetation on the stream banks) and erosion. In an urban environment the riparian cover provides several benefits to streams: Decreases temperatures by shading the stream from the sun; Improves bank stability and reduces erosion; Filters out excess nutrients and suspended solids; Provides habitat and cover for fish and other organisms; and Provides energy inputs to the stream by way of leaves and other organic debris. For the 2010 report card, the 2009 aerial photography of the City of Kitchener was used to identify the percent of riparian cover provided to each section of creek and compared to the total length of the creek to determine an overall weighted percentage of riparian cover for the entire creek length. This method of using an overall weighted percentage is more accurate than the analysis method used in the 2006 report card. Therefore, a direct comparison of the 2006 and 2010 results was not provided. In 2009 and 2010 the streams in the City were walked to determine stream condition including the identification and quantification of geo-referenced sites with notable erosion along streambanks. This data was used to determine the percent of stream length impacted by erosion and provided a more accurate assessment of stream erosion than the 2006 report card. Therefore, a direct comparison of 2010 and 2006 results was not provided. Table 3 summarizes the 2010 ratings based on the level of riparian cover along each stream and the erosion. é ó ê Table 3. Overall Ratings- Physical Parameter 2010 Physical – Creeks Overall Rating SchneiderHenry Montgomery StrasburgIdlewood KolbSandrock Parameter CreekSturmCreekCreekCreekCreekGreenway Greenway RiparianMarginalMarginalPoor Fair Excellent Good Poor Cover 2010 PoorExcellentExcellent ExcellentExcellentExcellentExcellent Erosion Areas 2010 Riparian rating (% cover: 75-100% Excellent, 55-74% Good,40-54% Fair, 20-39% Marginal, 0-19% Poor; Erosion (stream length impacted): 0-3% Excellent, 4-7% Good, 8-10% Fair,11-14% Marginal, 15-100% Poor; All creeks with the exception of Schneider Creek exhibit excellent erosion ratings; Schneider Creek has the most erosion sites, having a poor rating. Riparian cover is the most diverse rating with Idlewood Creek having an excellent riparian cover, followed by Kolb Creek (good), Strasburg Creek (fair), Schneider Creek and Henry Sturm Greenway (marginal) and Montgomery Creek and Sandrock Greenway with a poor rating. Stormwater Management The goal of stormwater management is to reduce the negative impacts of development on downstream watercourses as well as protect the aquatic ecosystems, human health and property (by minimizing flooding and erosion risks). Stormwater management facilities are constructed to provide water quality treatment and quantity control of water entering receiving streams. The catchment area draining into City-owned SWM ponds was identified along with the level of treatment provided (quality, quantity or both). Streams in the City have been identified as natural, straightened or concrete lined. The stream characteristics have an impact on the water quantity and quality, with straightened and concrete lined channels not dissipating the stream energy and increasing the potential for erosion. Two measures of stormwater infrastructure have been used to characterize each stream. The contributing drainage area treated by City-owned SWM ponds, and whether the channel has been modified from natural conditions to exhibit straightened or hardened characteristics. Table 4 summarizes the City’s ratings for stormwater management coverage (based on the percentage of drainage areas serviced by City-owned SWM ponds) and the channel type ratings. é ó é Table 4. Overall Ratings - Stormwater Stormwater – Creeks Overall Rating SchneiderHenry Montgomery StrasburgIdlewood KolbSandrock Parameter CreekSturmCreekCreekCreekCreekGreenway Greenway TreatedPoorPoorPoor Poor Poor Poor Poor Area (Quality) 2010 GoodFairPoor Excellent Excellent Good Good Channel Type 2010 Stormwater (% area treated): 75-100% Excellent, 55-74% Good,40-54% Fair, 20-39% Marginal, 0-19% Poor: Channel type (% stream length impacted):0-19% Excellent,20-39% Good, 40-54% Fair,55-74% Marginal, 75- 100% Poor: Currently, most of the City’s developed land area does not have its stormwater runoff treated by stormwater management quality controls and this is evident by the reduced water quality in many of its streams, especially during wet events. The stormwater management program has identified priorities for improving this situation by upgrading existing SWM facilities, building new SWM facilities and restoring deteriorated stream reaches. Idlewood Creek, Strasburg Creek, Schneider Creek, Kolb Creek and Sandrock Greenway all have excellent-good channel type ratings. The majority of these systems exhibit characteristics of good natural riparian corridors and stream systems. Effort should be made to maintain these stream corridors and improve sections that do not exhibit these characteristics, while rehabilitation works are carried out on other streams to improve their condition. Stormwater management in the form of quality controls need to be upgraded in these drainage areas to ensure that no further deterioration occurs. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Between 2006 and 2010, $1,796,956 in Stormwater Management Redevelopment/Infill Charges (cash-in-lieu) have been collected to improve stormwater quality. Some of that money has been spent on retrofitting the Krizsanderon SWM pond, installing ten oil-grit separators (OGS) providing 78 ha of treated stormwater area and rehabilitating streams to provide 270 ha of rehabilitated drainage area. There are obvious deficits in the control of stormwater within the City, but the City-wide stormwater program is monitoring the situation to establish priority works that will most effectively improve the function of receiving water bodies. é ó è The City of Kitchener will continue its proactive approach to SWM and environmental protection. This will include continued monitoring and an increased level of program implementation. Some of the things the City is planning include: Rehabilitation of older stormwater ponds to meet current standards Construction of new ponds to increase the coverage of stormwater treatment Installation of new oil and grit separators (OGS) Ensure appropriate maintenance of stormwater facilities Installation of at source stormwater controls such as infiltration systems where appropriate Rehabilitation of impacted streams Continued monitoring and reporting of stream health Continuation of the Yellow Fish Road program Public education program as part of the stormwater utility implementation Other environmental protection initiatives and enhancement projects In June 2010, City Council adopted a resolution to proceed with implementation of the stormwater rate in January 2011. A stormwater rate is an alternative financing mechanism that allocates SWM program costs in existing developed areas according to each property’s contribution to the municipal stormwater system. It is administered as a user fee, in a similar fashion as a water/wastewater rate. The basis for charge is the relative amount of stormwater runoff generated, based on the area of impervious ground cover (e.g., rooftops, driveways, and parking lots). Properties with more impervious area generate more stormwater runoff and pollutant loading and consequently would pay more under the City’s stormwater utility program. The main impetus for initiating the City’s stormwater utility was to obtain adequate and sustainable funding to improve the current level of service provided by the municipal SWM program. While C-i-L revenue has been used for a number of retrofit/restoration projects throughout the City, their limited extent and coverage is not expected to result in significant in- stream quality or habitat improvements in the receiving watercourses. However, with the revenue from the new stormwater utility used to ramp up the City’s current capital improvement program, it is expected that noticeable improvements would be detected when compared to baseline conditions established through the City’s long-term monitoring program. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: As part of this Report Card, the Annual Audit program and the Stormwater Management Review project, the City has initiated an education program to ensure the public understands stormwater, what City services are being provided to manage stormwater, and what they can do to help improve SWM within the City. As the new stormwater utility is implemented, additional resources will be made available to support the education process. CONCLUSION: The City is acting to improve the status of its streams and rivers through the City-wide Stormwater Management Program. It is committed to improving water quality, physical stability é ó ç and aquatic ecosystem function to enhance the environment, human enjoyment of the City and health of its residents. The City-wide Stormwater Management Program identifies and monitors areas that require improved stormwater controls within the City and prioritizes work that will most cost-effectively improve the functioning of receiving water bodies. Staff will continue to work with the Consultants and the Steering Committees to prepare the 2010 Annual Audit. At the beginning of 2016 a third 5-year report card will be prepared. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO Infrastructure Services Department é ó ïð AECOMFive-Year Stormwater Report Card City of Kitchener 2010 Technical Report Executive Summary Introduction As part of the Kitchener Stormwater Annual Audit, a stream monitoring program was initiated to detail and report on existing creek conditions including biological, chemical, physical and stormwater control parameters. Every five years the findings of this continuous monitoring program are summarized into an overall report card to provide an overview of the effectiveness of the city-wide stormwater management (SWM) policy, provide an opportunity to identify gaps in the SWM practices within the city and establish trends to determine whether the new policies are acting to improve water quality and ecosystem health. The first report card was published in 2006 and reported on data collected from 2002-2006. This 2010 report includes monitoring data collected from 2006-2010. Both the 2006 and 2010 report cards are presented in similar formats which includes two documents presented to the public. The first document is a brochure providing a summary of the Report Card study and the second document is this technical report providing more thorough details of the study. Both documents are available through the City’s website. Annual variations in water quality and biological results and the time elapsed since the implementation of improvements can make it difficult to formulate broad statements about the state of a SWM system and provide explanations for noted changes in results. Variables such as rainfall, air temperature, and upstream watershed conditions can impact overall monitoring results. Providing a direct correlation between SWM facilities and in-stream water quality is difficult at the current level of detail and given the limited number of years of available data. The overall intention of the stormwater report card is to provide: An indication of overall stream health based on annual stormwater monitoring results; Public education and awareness of stormwater management; and Identification of potential for SWM improvements. Description of Parameters The report card format includes mapping of four sets of parameters that have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of the SWM strategy. This includes chemical, biological, and physical conditions as well as the level of stormwater treatment provided. Each parameter provides an indication of how the system is functioning and what potential there is for improvement. A summary and comparison is then completed for individual creeks where data is available for all parameters. Chemical Eight water quality sampling parameters were chosen that best represent stormwater impacts on the stream system and to provide information on the efficacy of the SWM program. To synthesize water chemistry results into a simple, comprehensive and meaningful indicator of system health, the Water Quality Index (WQI) developed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) was used. The analysis and related reporting included in this study includes sampling sites where 3 or more years of data were collected during the 5-year reporting period. Overall the chemistry conditions of Kitchener creeks remain in similar condition to findings of the 2006 report card. There are indications of a slight improvement in dry weather results at Montgomery Creek and Schneider Creek stations. However, it is important to note that the current level of analysis does not provide sufficient detail to draw conclusions identifying causes for changes in the overall WQI. é ó ïï i 2010 Report Card_Final.Docx AECOMFive-Year Stormwater Report Card City of Kitchener 2010 Technical Report Biological Three metrics were chosen for inclusion in the five-year Report Card that consider both aquatic invertebrates and fish species to characterize biological conditions from a stream health perspective. The three metrics include number of fish species, presence of indicator fish species, and the Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI). Invertebrates and fish are good indicators of water quality since they are exposed to stream conditions over an extended period of time. The results from all three biological metrics were examined, but HBI values were given the greatest weighting. Overall the biological conditions remain in similar condition to findings of the 2006 report card and show results typical of urban creek systems. Physical The physical indicators used to describe the status of the City’s streams include riparian cover (vegetation on the streambanks) and erosion. Riparian Cover Riparian cover has several benefits to streams that can improve ecosystem health in an urban environment. For the 2010 report card, the 2009 aerial photography of the City of Kitchener was used to identify the percent of riparian cover provided to each section of creek and compared to the total length of the creek to determine an overall weighted percentage of riparian cover for the entire creek length. This method of using an overall weighted percentage is more accurate than the analysis method used in the 2006 report card. Therefore, a direct comparison of the 2006 and 2010 results will not provide an accurate indication of changes to riparian cover in the last five years. However, it is unlikely that a significant change in riparian cover has occurred since 2006 along any of the Kitchener creeks. Erosion Streambank erosion occurs when the energy in the stream flow increases beyond that at which a streambank is stable. The level and velocity of flow at which banks become unstable is dependent upon the bank material. Erosion can be directly caused by uncontrolled stormwater in urban environments which increases the frequency of peak stream flows and the resultant energy. Erosion causes many problems including an increase in total suspended solids (i.e. sediment) in the water, degradation of aquatic habitat and the potential for loss and damage to private property. In 2009 and 2010 the streams in the City were walked to determine stream condition including the identification and quantification of geo-referenced sites with notable erosion along streambanks. This data was used to determine the percent of stream length impacted by erosion and provided a more accurate estimate of stream erosion than used in the 2006 report card. It was recommended that a new erosion rating system be used in 2010 to reflect the accuracy of data collected in 2010. Therefore, a direct comparison of 2010 and 2006 results will not provide an accurate comparison of existing conditions. Stormwater Treatment Two measures of stormwater infrastructure have been used to characterize each stream. The contributing area treated by City-owned SWM ponds providing water quality control, and whether the channel has been modified from natural conditions to exhibit straightened or hardened characteristics. Treated Area (Quality) Every attempt has been made to capture contributing areas of City-owned SWM ponds providing water quality control. The total contributing area providing stormwater quality control to the entire creek drainage area provides a useful basis for comparison. The goal of the SWM strategy is to increase the area treated for water quality throughout Kitchener. An assessment and inventory of City-owned SWM ponds completed in 2008 provided an é ó ïî ii 2010 Report Card_Final.Docx AECOMFive-Year Stormwater Report Card City of Kitchener 2010 Technical Report update to the contributing drainage areas and revisions of City and private SWM ponds within Kitchener. This update provided significant changes in comparison to the 2006 results. A direct comparison to 2006 results will not provide an accurate comparison changes in the land area treated by City-owned SWM ponds in 2006 and 2010. Channel Type Straightened and hardened channels do not dissipate energy to the same extent as natural channels, since they allow energy to be transferred to downstream reaches, increasing the potential for erosion. The City’s Stormwater Management Policies establish channel naturalization as a SWM goal. The percent of a channel lining that is unnatural (channelized or concrete lined) provides an indication of overall channel characteristic. This file has been more accurately updated since 2006 by both the City and AECOM. Channel type ratings in 2010 were updated by AECOM using the 2009 City of Kitchener aerial photography to ensure an accurate channel lining classification. A direct comparison to 2006 results will not provide an accurate comparison of changes in channel linings that occurred since 2006 due to refinements made to the channel type data. Conclusions Overall, 20% of Kitchener’s developed land area is treated by City-owned SWM ponds that provide water quality control. This is evident by the reduced water quality in many of its streams, especially during wet weather events. Although modest retrofit and restoration projects have been implemented through the City’s Cash-in-Lieu program, with such a limited coverage it is not expected that significant in-stream quality or habitat improvements will be achieved in the receiving watercourses. However, with the revenue from the new stormwater utility used to ramp up the City’s current capital improvement program, it is expected that noticeable improvements would be detected when compared to baseline conditions established through the City’s long-term monitoring program. A comparison to the 2006 report card results show generally the same chemical water quality conditions noted at stations located on Kolb and Henry Sturm Creeks. An improvement in water quality indicators was noted during dry weather events on Schneider and Montgomery Creeks. Results indicate that the main Strasburg branch experiences healthier water quality conditions while the North Strasburg Branch water quality results indicate more impaired conditions. It should also be noted that the majority of the sampling stations on all creeks are located at the downstream reaches, where many of the streams also have their confluences with major waterways in more densely populated and industrial areas near the centre of the City where quality control is more limited. With respect to the biological sampling, there is very little difference in water quality status between stations on a particular stream. For example, Schneider Creek, Kolb Creek and Strasburg Creek HBI station averages are very similar along the length of each particular stream. Based on HBI values streams draining the urban sections of Kitchener are mostly in the fair to poor water quality rating. Fish diversity is relatively low at most stations, with the exception of two stations located near the mouth of streams and the Grand River (SC2 and KD1) where fish species present may have entered the creeks from the river. Most stations have six or fewer fish species present, with the fish community being dominated by pollution tolerant species. The exceptions to these generalizations are Blair Creek which has very good water quality and cold water species such as brook trout and Strasburg Creek which had brook trout present at two sampling locations. Biological results presented in the 2010 report card were similar to conditions noted in the 2006 report card. All creeks with the exception of Schneider Creek exhibit excellent erosion ratings, with Schneider Creek showing a poor Erosion rating. Riparian cover is the most diverse rating with Idlewood Creek having the greatest riparian cover rating of excellent, followed by Kolb Creek with a good erosion rating, Strasburg Creek with fair, Schneider Creek and Henry Sturm Greenway with marginal and Montgomery Creek and Sandrock Greenway with a poor rating. é ó ïí iii 2010 Report Card_Final.Docx AECOMFive-Year Stormwater Report Card City of Kitchener 2010 Technical Report Idlewood Creek, Strasburg Creek, Schneider Creek, Kolb Creek and Sandrock Greenway all have excellent to good Channel Type ratings indicating the majority of these systems exhibit characteristics of good natural riparian corridors and stream systems. Effort should be made to maintain these stream corridors and improve sections that do not exhibit these characteristics, while rehabilitation works are carried out on other streams to improve their condition. Stormwater management in the form of quality controls needs to be upgraded in these drainage areas to ensure that no further deterioration occurs. é ó ïì iv 2010 Report Card_Final.Docx ï×ÐÓÈÂ×Ê ùÊ××Ñ ðÛÇÊ×Ð ùÊ××Ñ ñø ñÍÐÚùÊ××Ñ ñø å×ÉÈÏÍÇÎÈ øÊÛÓÎ óå óå ôé óØÐ×ÅÍÍØ ïÍÎÈÕÍÏ×ÊÃ ùÊ××Ñ ùÊ××Ñ ôé ô×ÎÊÃéÈÇÊÏ éï õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ éÔÍ×ÏÛÑ×Ê éê õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ ïõ ø×ÈÅ×ÓÐ×Ê õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ æÍÓÉÓÎ õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ éÛÎØÊÍÙÑ õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ úÍÊØ×ÎúÛÐÂ×Ê æé õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ éÙÔÎ×ÓØ×Ê ùÊ××Ñ éú îéÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕ éú ùÊ××Ñ ïÓØØÐ×éÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕ éú ùÊ××Ñ éú éù éú øÍÍÎéÍÇÈÔ éÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕùÊ××Ñ ùÊ××Ñ úð úÐÛÓÊùÊ××Ñ ïÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕ ã×ÛÊéÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×Êê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ úûé÷ðóî÷ìûêûï÷è÷êé ðÍÙÛÈÓÍÎÉ úóíðíõóùûðùô÷ïóùûð è×ÙÔÎÓÙÛÐê×ÌÍÊÈ ïÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕèÃÌ×É èÍÈÛÐéÇÉÌ×ÎØ×ØéÍÐÓØÉèéé ûËÇÛÈÓÙÏÛÙÊÍÓÎÆ×ÊÈ×ÚÊÛÈ×É èÍÈÛÐìÔÍÉÌÔÍÊÍÇÉ öÓÉÔ û÷ùíïïÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕðÍÙÛÈÓÍÎ ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈÓÍÎçèïâÍÎ×î éÍÐÇÚÐ×ìÔÍÉÌÔÍÊÍÇÉ øÛÈÇÏîûø îÓÈÊÛÈ× åÛÈ×ÊÙÍÇÊÉ× ÷ÙÍÐÓ ñÓÈÙÔ×Î×ÊêÍÛØÉ ï×ÈÛÐÉâÓÎÙùÍÌÌ×Êð×ÛØÛÎØ ùÔÐÍÊÓØ× ñÓÈÙÔ×Î×ÊúÍÇÎØÛÊÃ öÓÕÇÊ× ö×ÚÊÇÛÊÃ é ó ïë ñÓÐÍÏ×ÈÊ×É õàìÊÒ à ñÓÈÙÔ×Î×ÊéÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊûÇØÓÈ àõóéàø×ÉÓÕÎàê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ àø×ÉÓÕÎ ðÛÎÙÛÉÈ×ÊéÈå é ó ïê ðÛÎÙÛÉÈ×ÊéÈå é ó ïé ðÛÎÙÛÉÈ×ÊéÈå é ó ïè ðÛÎÙÛÉÈ×ÊéÈå é ó ïç ðÛÎÙÛÉÈ×ÊéÈå é ó îð ùÓÈÃåÓØ×éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×Ê ïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈ ã×ÛÊê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ ã×ÛÊê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ ìÊ×É×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎÈÍùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃ ìÊ×É×ÎÈÛÈÓÍÎÈÍùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃ óÎÖÊÛÉÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×é×ÊÆÓÙ×ÉùÍÏÏÓÈÈ×× óÎÖÊÛÉÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×é×ÊÆÓÙ×ÉùÍÏÏÓÈÈ×× ö×ÚÊÇÛÊÃ ö×ÚÊÇÛÊÃ úÛÙÑÕÊÍÇÎØ §óÎÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÙÍÏÏ×ÎÙ×ØÛÉÈÇØÃÈÍÌÊ×ÌÛÊ×Û ïÛÉÈ×ÊéÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈéåïìÍÐÓÙÃÛÎØÈÔ× ÖÓÎÛÐÊ×ÌÍÊÈÅÛÉÛÌÌÊÍÆ×ØÚÃùÍÇÎÙÓÐÓÎ §èÔ×ÕÍÛÐÓÉÈÍÌÊÍÆÓØ×ÛùÓÈÃÅÓØ×ÛÌÌÊÍÛÙÔÈÍéåï §èÔ×ÍÚÒ×ÙÈÓÆ×É ¦ÓÏÌÊÍÆ×ÉÈÊ×ÛÏÔÛÚÓÈÛÈ ¦ÌÊÍÆÓØ×ÛÎ×ÈÕÛÓÎÓÎÖÓÉÔ×ÊÃÊ×ÉÍÇÊÙ×É ¦Ê×ØÇÙ×ÐÍÛØÓÎÕÉÍÖÙÍÎÈÛÏÓÎÛÎÈÉÈÍÈÔ×ÉÇÊÖÛÙ×ÅÛÈ×ÊÉ ¦ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ÖÐÍÅÈÍÕÊÍÇÎØÅÛÈ×Ê ¦ÏÛÄÓÏÓÂ×ÈÔ××ÖÖÓÙÓ×ÎÙÃÍÖ×ÄÌ×ÎØÓÈÇÊ×É §ûÎÎÇÛÐÛÇØÓÈÊ×ÌÍÊÈÙÍÏÌÐ×È×Ø×ÛÙÔÃ×ÛÊÈÍÉÇÏÏÛÊÓÂ× ÈÔ×ÌÊÛÙÈÓÙ×ÉÙÛÊÊÓ×ØÍÇÈÓÎÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÅÓØ×ÌÐÛÎ é ó îï úÛÙÑÕÊÍÇÎØ §ûÖÈ×ÊÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖØÛÈÛÙÍÐÐ×ÙÈÓÍÎ ÈÔ×ÖÓÊÉÈ ÉÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊÏÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈÊ×ÌÍÊÈÙÛÊØÅÛÉÌÊÍØÇÙ×ØÓÎ §é×ÙÍÎØÊ×ÌÍÊÈÙÛÊØÙÍÏÌÐ×È×ØÓÎ ÛÎØÊ×ÌÍÊÈ×Ø ÍÎØÛÈÛÙÍÐÐ×ÙÈ×ØÖÊÍÏ §èÅÍÏÛÓÎÌÇÊÌÍÉ×ÉÍÖÈÔ×Ê×ÌÍÊÈÙÛÊØÛÊ× ¦é×ÊÆ×ÉÛÉÛÏÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈÛÎØ×ÆÛÐÇÛÈÓÍÎÈÍÍÐÍÖÈÔ× éåïìÍÐÓÙÃ×ÖÖ×ÙÈÓÆ×Î×ÉÉ ¦ùÍÏÏÇÎÓÙÛÈ×ÉÈÍÈÔ×ÌÇÚÐÓÙÈÔ×ÉÈÛÈ×ÍÖÉÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×Ê ÏÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈÛÎØÊ×Ù×ÓÆÓÎÕÅÛÈ×ÊÙÍÇÊÉ×ÉÓÎÈÔ×ùÓÈÃ §íÆ×ÊÛÐÐÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÓÍÎÚ×ÈÅ××ÎÈÔÓÉûÇØÓÈ ïÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕ ÌÊÍÕÊÛÏÛÎØÈÔ×ÙÛÌÓÈÛÐÌÐÛÎÎÓÎÕÌÊÍÙ×ÉÉ ¦ìÊÍÒ×ÙÈÌÊÓÍÊÓÈÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÛÎØÖÓÎÛÎÙÓÎÕ ê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ ÏÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕÌÊÍÕÊÛÏÊ×ÉÇÐÈÉÛÊ×Ê×ÌÍÊÈ×ØÓÎÛéåïê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ ÌÊ×É×ÎÈ×ØÓÎÚÍÈÔÛÈ×ÙÔÎÓÙÛÐØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÛÎØÛÌÛÏÌÔÐ×È é ó îî ê×ÌÍÊÈùÛÊØ öÍÇÊÌÛÊÛÏ×È×ÊÙÛÈ×ÕÍÊÓ×ÉÖÍÊÊÛÈÓÎÕÈÔ×ÉÃÉÈ×Ï §ùÔ×ÏÓÙÛÐ ¦ùÛÎÛØÓÛÎùÍÇÎÙÓÐÍÖïÓÎÓÉÈ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔ×÷ÎÆÓÊÍÎÏ×ÎÈ åÛÈ×ÊëÇÛÐÓÈÃóÎØ×Äùùï÷åëó §úÓÍÐÍÕÓÙÛÐ ¦ôÓÐÉ×ÎÔÍÖÖúÓÍÈÓÙóÎØ×Äôúó §ìÔÃÉÓÙÛÐ ¦êÓÌÛÊÓÛÎÙÍÆ×Ê ¦÷ÊÍÉÓÍÎÓÏÌÛÙÈÉ §éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈ ¦éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊËÇÛÐÓÈÃÈÊ×ÛÈ×ØÛÊ×ÛÉ ¦ùÔÛÎÎ×ÐÈÃÌ× é ó îí ùÔ×ÏÓÙÛÐ åÛÈ×ÊëÇÛÐÓÈÃéÈÛÎØÛÊØÉ ìÛÊÛÏ×È×ÊéÈÛÎØÛÊØçÎÓÈÉìÛÊÛÏ×È×ÊùÔÍÓÙ×éÈÛÎØÛÊØùÔÍÓÙ× óÏÌÛÙÈÍÖÊÍÛØÉÛÐÈùåëõÖÍÊØÊÓÎÑÓÎÕÅÛÈ×ÊÛÐÉÍÇÉ×Ø ùÔÐÍÊÓØ×øÓÉÉÍÐÆ×Ø ÏÕ ð ÛÌÌÐÓÙÛÈÓÍÎÚÃõêùû óÏÌÛÙÈÍÖÔÇÏÛÎÛÎØÔÛÐÖÈÔ×É×Å×ÊÇÉ×ÚÃÐÛÅÐÓÏÓÈÛÎØ ÷ÙÍÐÓ ùöç Ïð ÎØ ÛÎÓÏÛÐÅÛÉÈ× Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈÓÐ×ÍÖØÊÃÅ×ÛÈÔ×ÊÆÛÐÇ×É ï×ÈÛÐÓÎØÓÙÛÈÓÎÕÓÎØÇÉÈÊÓÛÐ ùÍÌÌ×Ê ÏÕ ðìåëí ÓÏÌÛÙÈÉ ï×ÈÛÐÓÎØÓÙÛÈÓÎÕÓÎØÇÉÈÊÓÛÐ ð×ÛØ ÏÕ ðìåëí ÓÏÌÛÙÈÉ ï×ÈÛÐÓÎØÓÙÛÈÓÎÕÓÎØÇÉÈÊÓÛÐ âÓÎÙ ÏÕ ðìåëí ÓÏÌÛÙÈÉ èÍÈÛÐéÇÉÌ×ÎØ×ØéÈÛÎØÛÊØéåï×ÖÖÓÙÛÙÃùùï÷ÕÇÓØ×ÐÓÎ×ÉÖÍÊ ÏÕ ð éÍÐÓØÉÌÛÊÛÏ×È×Êïí÷ ìÊÍÈ×ÙÈÓÍÎÍÖûËÇÛÈÓÙðÓÖ× ìÔÍÉÌÔÍÊÍÇÉèÍÈÛÐîÇÈÊÓ×ÎÈÓÎØÓÙÛÈÓÎÕÓÏÌÛÙÈìåëí¦ÈÍ×ÐÓÏÓÎÛÈ××ÄÙ×ÉÉÓÆ×ÌÐÛÎÈ ÏÕ ð øÓÉÉÍÐÆ×ØÍÎ×ÙÍÉÃÉÈ×ÏÕÊÍÅÈÔ îÇÈÊÓ×ÎÈÓÎØÓÙÛÈÓÎÕÓÏÌÛÙÈ îÓÈÊÛÈ× ÏÕ ðùåëõ ÍÎ×ÙÍÉÃÉÈ×Ï ìåëí¦íÎÈÛÊÓÍåÛÈ×ÊëÇÛÐÓÈÃíÚÒ×ÙÈÓÆ× ùåëõ¦ùÛÎÛØÓÛÎåÛÈ×ÊëÇÛÐÓÈÃõÇÓØ×ÐÓÎ× é ó îì ùÊ×ÛÈ×ØòÛÎÇÛÊÃ ùÔ×ÏÓÙÛÐ ùùï÷åëóêÛÈÓÎÕÉ éÙÍÊ×êÛÈÓÎÕ ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ õÍÍØ öÛÓÊ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ìÍÍÊ ùÔ×ÏÓÙÛÐ¦ùÊ××ÑÉíÆ×ÊÛÐÐêÛÈÓÎÕ ìÛÊÛÏ×È×Ê éÙÔÎ×ÓØ×Êô×ÎÊÃéÈÇÊÏïÍÎÈÕÍÏ×ÊÃéÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕéÛÎØÊÍÙÑñÍÐÚ ùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××Ñ øÊÃ öÛÓÊïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐöÛÓÊìÍÍÊïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ å×È ìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊ é ó îë ùÊ×ÛÈ×ØòÛÎÇÛÊÃ úÓÍÐÍÕÓÙÛÐ úÓÍÐÍÕÓÙÛÐêÛÈÓÎÕÉ ï×ÛÎôúóêÛÈÓÎÕ ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ õÍÍØ öÛÓÊ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ìÍÍÊ úÓÍÐÍÕÓÙÛÐ¦ùÊ××ÑÉíÆ×ÊÛÐÐêÛÈÓÎÕ ìÛÊÛÏ×È×Ê éÙÔÎ×ÓØ×Êô×ÎÊÃïÍÎÈÕÍÏ×ÊÃéÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕóØÐ×ÅÍÍØéÛÎØÊÍÙÑñÍÐÚ ùÊ××ÑéÈÇÊÏùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××Ñ õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ æÛÐÇ×ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐöÛÓÊïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐõÍÍØöÛÓÊïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐìÍÍÊ é ó îê ùÊ×ÛÈ×ØòÛÎÇÛÊÃ ìÔÃÉÓÙÛÐ êÓÌÛÊÓÛÎùÍÆ×ÊêÛÈÓÎÕÉ÷ÊÍÉÓÍÎêÛÈÓÎÕÉ ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈì×ÊÙ×ÎÈéÈÊ×ÛÏ êÛÈÓÎÕêÛÈÓÎÕ ùÍÆ×Êð×ÎÕÈÔóÏÌÛÙÈ×Ø ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ õÍÍØõÍÍØ öÛÓÊ öÛÓÊ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ìÍÍÊ ìÍÍÊ ìÔÃÉÓÙÛÐ¦ùÊ××ÑÉíÆ×ÊÛÐÐêÛÈÓÎÕ ìÛÊÛÏ×È×Ê éÙÔÎ×ÓØ×Êô×ÎÊÃéÈÇÊÏïÍÎÈÕÍÏ×ÊÃéÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕóØÐ×ÅÍÍØéÛÎØÊÍÙÑñÍÐÚ ùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××Ñ êÓÌÛÊÓÛÎïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐìÍÍÊöÛÓÊ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈìÍÍÊõÍÍØ ùÍÆ×Ê ÷ÊÍÉÓÍÎìÍÍÊ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ ûÊ×ÛÉ é ó îé éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊïÛÎÛÕ×Ï×ÎÈ ùÔÛÎÎ×ÐèÃÌ×êÛÈÓÎÕÉ éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊèÊ×ÛÈÏ×ÎÈêÛÈÓÎÕÉ ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈéÈÊ×ÛÏ ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈûÊ×ÛèÊ×ÛÈ×Ø êÛÈÓÎÕ êÛÈÓÎÕ ð×ÎÕÈÔûÐÈ×Ê×Ø ëÇÛÐÓÈÃ ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ õÍÍØ õÍÍØ öÛÓÊ öÛÓÊ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ïÛÊÕÓÎÛÐ ìÍÍÊ ìÍÍÊ éÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×Ê¦ùÊ××ÑÉíÆ×ÊÛÐÐêÛÈÓÎÕ ìÛÊÛÏ×È×Ê éÙÔÎ×ÓØ×Êô×ÎÊÃïÍÎÈÕÍÏ×ÊÃéÈÊÛÉÚÇÊÕóØÐ×ÅÍÍØéÛÎØÊÍÙÑñÍÐÚ ùÊ××ÑéÈÇÊÏùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑùÊ××ÑõÊ××ÎÅÛÃùÊ××Ñ õÊ××ÎÅÛÃ èÊ×ÛÈ×ØûÊ×Û ìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊìÍÍÊ ëÇÛÐÓÈÃ ùÔÛÎÎ×ÐèÃÌ×õÍÍØöÛÓÊìÍÍÊ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈ÷ÄÙ×ÐÐ×ÎÈõÍÍØõÍÍØ é ó îè ùÍÎÙÐÇÉÓÍÎÉ §éÈÊ×ÛÏÏÍÎÓÈÍÊÓÎÕÊ×ÉÇÐÈÉÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÌÛÉÈ Ã×ÛÊÉ ÉÇÕÕ×ÉÈÉÈÔÓÎÕÉÛÊ×ÎªÈÕ×ÈÈÓÎÕÛÎÃÚ×ÈÈ×Ê ¦ðÓÏÓÈ×ØÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÍÖéåïËÇÛÐÓÈÃÈÊ×ÛÈÏ×ÎÈÖÛÙÓÐÓÈÓ×É ¦ðÛÙÑÍÖØ×ØÓÙÛÈ×ØÖÇÎØÓÎÕÈÍÌÊÍÆÓØ×©ÉÇÉÈÛÓÎÛÚÐ×¨É×ÊÆÓÙ× §ûÎÎÇÛÐûÇØÓÈÌÊÍÕÊÛÏÓÎÖÍÊÏÉÙÛÌÓÈÛÐÌÐÛÎÎÓÎÕ ÍÌ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎÉÅÓÈÔÛÉ×ÈÍÖÏ×ÛÉÇÊÛÚÐ×ÙÊÓÈ×ÊÓÛÈÍ ¦ï×ÛÉÇÊ×ÈÔ×ÉÇÙÙ×ÉÉÍÖéåïÓÎÖÊÛÉÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×ÛÎØÖÛÙÓÐÓÈÓ×É ¦ìÊÓÍÊÓÈÓÂ×ÅÍÊÑÉÈÍÓÏÌÊÍÆ×ÖÇÎÙÈÓÍÎÛÎØÔ×ÛÐÈÔÍÖÉÈÊ×ÛÏÉ §úÇØÕ×ÈÓÎÕÛÎØÖÓÎÛÎÙÓÎÕÍÖéåïÌÊÓÍÊÓÈÃÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉ ¦î×ÅØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈùÔÛÊÕ×É ¦óÎÖÓÐÐ ê×Ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈùÛÉÔÓÎðÓ×Ç ¦÷ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈéÈÍÊÏÅÛÈ×ÊçÈÓÐÓÈÃ ëÇ×ÉÈÓÍÎÉý é ó îç