Pea Freezing Operations

Transcription

1 I I Pea Freezing perations Part I. Vining G. B. Davis H. M. Hutchings Miscellaneous Paper 66 January 1959 Agricultural Experiment Station, regon State College, Corvallis in cooperation with Agricultural Marketing Service, nited States Department of Agriculture

2 FREWRD This report is the first of a series of publications dealing with costs and efficiencies in pea-freezing plant operations. The others will be concerned with freezing, storing, and packaging. These studies are being made under a regional research project concerned with the marketing of frozen fruits and vegetables. The Experiment Stations of regon, Washington, California, Hawaii, and the Agricultural Marketing Service,. S. Department of Agriculture are co-operating in this program.

3 INTRDCTIN Vining of green peas is an operation that uses large amounts of labor and equipment. Cost of vining is a substantial portion of the total cost of operating a pea-freezing plant. This report is concerned with an analysis of vining costs as they relate to different methods being used in the Northwest frozen-pea industry. Processing costs have risen sharply in recent years, and many of these costs are beyond control of the packer. The cost of transporting the frozen product, materials and supplies, is one example. This is especially important because the Pacific Northwest produces about 7% of the frozen peas marketed nationally. Competing areas are closer to major markets and have a distinct advantage in lower transportation costs and lower wage rates. The frozen-pea industry in the Northwest has viewed these rising costs with concern and has been extremely alert in making changes in their operation that will permit cost reduction. This report concerning vining operations and others soon to be published dealing with costs and efficiencies in freezing, storing, and packaging are intended to provide the industry with information that can be used as a basis for making decisions for further improvements in efficiency. The vining operations analyzed in this report are field vining and plant vining. Both are common methods currently being used in the Northwest. In field vining, viners are portable and are set up in or close to the fields being harvested. After harvest viners are moved by truck to the next harvesting location. The vines are seldom hauled more than two or three miles to the portable vining station. After the peas have been shelled, they are hauled in lug boxes to the freezing plant. There they are unloaded, dumped, and the empty lugs washed and returned to the vining station. Plant vining involves the same general operations except that the viners are located permanently at the freezing plant. Permanence of location permits the use of labor-saving equipment, which will be discussed later. Vines are hauled from fields located mostly within a 2-mile radius of the plant. The shelled peas are moved by flume, belt, or are pumped to the processing plant from the vining station. A method of vining only recently introduced into the regon pea industry is not included in this report. This method will be studied in the near future and its costs and relative efficiency will be compared to plant and field vining. This method utilizes permanent field-vining stations located close to pea production centers. It appears to have some advantages over both plant and field vining. It has most of the labor-saving equipment of plant vining and the relatively short distances for hauling vines as in field vining. Also the shelled peas are hauled to the freezing plant in bin or pallet boxes instead of the lug boxes normally used in field vining. In the following report the costs of plant and field vining are compared on the basis of (1) distance from fields to freezing plants

4 2 (2) scale of operation -- output of clean peas per hour (3) pea-vine ratio. The results are shown first, and the methods used in computing the costs are, shown in a later section. RESLTS Plant vining offers substantial economies over field vining at all distances and for all plant volumes studied (figure 1). A plant with an operating capacity of 2, pounds of clean peas per hour can vine at the plant for an estimated total seasonal cost of about $25, when hauling an average distance of five miles. Total field-vining costs are estimated to be $355, for the same distance and plant volume. This differential in total cost narrows as distance from field to plant increases -- plantvining costs increasing much more rapidly than field-vining costs. At 2 miles, annual costs favor plant vining by only $33, as compared to $15, at five miles. At a distance of 25 to 3 miles, costs for the two methods are approximately the same. This relationship holds true for the other plant volumes and distances considered when costs are computed on a unit basis -- costs per hundredweight of clean peas (figure 2). The distances and plant volumes used in the illustrations are typical of current pea-freezing and canning operations in the Pacific Northwest. The costs cited, however, are not averages of individual plant operations. They are based upon labor and equipment standards of performance developed for the different jobs making up the vining operation. These standards were determined through time and production studies, plant record data and equip, ment manufacturers' specifications. In general, performance standards of labor and equipment were selected that were above average, but well within the capacity of the crew and equipment. Costs take into account all operations beginning with loading vines in the field through clipper cleaning at the freezing plant. Costs include those for labor -- both direct and supervisory -- equipment, facilities, maintenance and repairs, depreciation, taxes, insurance, interest on investment, and operating items such as fuel and power. Costs of placing vines in pits is included but no credit is allowed for their value. verhead expenses at the management level, including the office force and fieldmen, have been excluded. As distance from the plant increases, hauling costs increase much more rapidly for plant vining than for field vining. This is shown in figures 1, 2 and table 1. An increase of one mile in the season's average distance adds over three cents per hundredweight of clean peas to the costs of plant vining, but only slightly more than one cent to field vining. For a 2, pound an hour plant-vining operation, an additional vine truck and driver is required for each increase of about two-thirds of a mile. Field vining has constant vine-truck requirements and only a slight increase in lug-box trucks and drivers as distance increases. (See table 6 for crew organization.)

5 Figure 1. Vining Costs as Related to Method of Vining, Distance of Field from Plant, and Volume of Peas Vined per Hour, regon 1957 Crop Year./1 Thousand dollars 6 Field vining Plant vining 55 3, lbs. per hour $ 35 '-4.n 2,'lbs, per hour , lbs. per hour 5, lbs. per hour Average distance--miles one. field to plant. /1 Assumes the following: a. A 1-hour operating season. b. A distance of 2 miles from the field to the field vining station. c. A pea-vine ratio of 2 percent.

6 r1 far u ^c) 4..1 r-i I ) /4 CL N P4. /-1 u 144 u_ 4.) ' ' a% ri C +J 4 (:), 11 1) 11) ) g r N a 1) to W M 14 W) W N. NI a N Cs! r-1 r-i r-4 saad E9T 3q2Tampaapunq aad lsoo W c.1 r N 4-1 a 44 3 a-1 1a 8 o r-4 W 1,1 1 r1 C6 > 44 1.) 1 1 ) r rr-1 r...1 V. 4. ra a <4 <4.4 3.

7 1-41 n (A 1 75 ) /4 to 2 ) P4 C I's 4-4 CV 4 41 c. W <6..) 14 r-1 444P4 3 oo ch Tn CM I C- 4,t,t,t CD CM.4 CV q) q) 4 4 on el rn A. a a a a a a a a. 44 4J 4, a, to E..-1 -'-4 14 cr W td of) b g -r j3 > > RI 4..) id r CM c4 vd 4 VD CD A. rs ni ni C 1 td nt l 41 P.,-.4 - so ca ) C4 C4 1 on on col 4-1 ol 1 4J.4-4 -r-i P </) JD r1 ' 14 rn 14 )4 4-1 W 44 > C.) 1-1 "1: Id r. N., N.N. h, N. CA cm CA cr.% 14 " 1-4 CM W VD V3 VD v ol ol co) ol c4 N. A. r. r. g 2. " 44 VI a a a. W 44 ul 41 N CM CM CM CV csi ,. ci.)- cr)-. vl to to to Ps 1-n w CD 4 4 ra..g g 8. ' ' cr) --I 4 to u) ca.,4 r-4 ) b 14 > 4.4,.. ij W to 4 cd (,) ) o 5 7 > " 4 >N Ill «I 1 C) 89 CDC)CD CD ra >,--) c) 1:1 --) es) ) " ca.4-4.,4 cc) )4 5 P I's q) In CLI C4 44 ra 41 CM VD S-1 d) CLI ) ) p>.... >... 4 g $4 z4-1 P CD Cd fs4 44 CD en vd CD ID 4 ul,d A tn- M Cll C cd g Cd V jj -d 1 14 W P W cd c.) co- )4 4-1 P4 44 C C 4.'-4 s.14 '4-1 C J J C.).1-1 CA "/:/.L.n 4 Cd -1 CL) Cd 7) Cd td co. g g.l.) ),-) 44,4 41 r-4.44 ul v1 ul to 4 >. >, P4 CN " MD '. 4 nce 4 1 /4 $4 ra cd C) CD CD N 4 4 nt 1 V1 1 1 to ) ) ) 1 4 a a a ft. a (1) 4.4 av -L1 C). CM CM CM CA 4 C4 4.4 W Cd N P.1-1 P 41X) 4,t 4.4 ) to,--1 En al c) n S--.?. 11) 1-1.r.1 7i 3 r-1 a.) ta ) > ) 4 co co cd N,..) C t-4 t-1 3 CM 1-4 -iv )4 r1 N C td 44 N. N. C) A ax tr 1 A -1 4-I 5 cf)...± P ).4 ' V).-4 )- 3- W ) > ) 14 r-4 fa 5:1.,,-) 4-1 to w 14-4 g 1 is W b g 4-1 $4 bl)..r1 G W. oo on 4 c) 1 t %-4 td 4-1 rl V) 9 4 ca Ca.4 3, CM CD 1' >.4 4 -,4 w al 3 > (1 -,4,-.4 5 E-1 g 11,-4.4 al n-4 34 al 1-4.,-1.r.4 E PI 7) Cd $4 r-1 P. Cd >, C in it) 1 CD Lel. 4 C) ri C4 7) P4 to 1-4 )4 W W 4 r- P4 E 34 P. >,.. "Z 44 4; a (3 b IT) 4-1 I 1 C.) 44 ) fit.. '' ) 1"4 4)...c tc31 :54 c) (A g) ; rot rt C RI ;4 2 6 d 3 co t) b. C) 44 5 C 44 N 4 71 v-1 W. u) C.) ) ca. cd ) co. 44 P4

8 At some point between 1 and 15 miles, hauling costs for the plant vining operation exceed the hauling costs of field vining. The plant-vining operation, however, has other costs that continue to be lower than for field vining irrespective of distance. For example, the crew engaged only in the actual vining consists of 67 persons for a field-vining operation of 2, pounds an hour capacity. nly 4 persons are required for a plant operation of the same size. This economy in labor in the plant operation is made possible by the use of electric forks, feed regulators, and conveyor belts to move the shelled peas from the viners. This equipment normally is not employed by the portable field viners. The feed regulator and electric fork reduce labor requirements. Also the output of clean peas per viner-hour was 72 pounds for field vining and 8 for plant vining. This rate of output, of course, will vary depending on the pea-vine ratio (percentage clean peas are of total pea and vine weights), weed content, and other characteristics of the vines. The conveyor system of the plant operation replaces one off-bearer required for each field viner. Together the feed regulator, electric fork, and conveyor belt eliminate three out of four workers for each set of two viners. Another point where field vining uses more labor is the receiving platform at the freezing plant..a freezing plant with a capacity of 2, pounds of clean peas per hour requires about 15 persons for receiving and dumping filled lugs and cleaning and loading the empties. This operation does not exist in plant vining. Also the cost of moving viners from one field station to another does not occur in plant vining. Lower costs per unit of product result from each increase in vining capacity for both methods (table 2). The largest gain in economy is achieved in moving from the 5,-pound level of capacity per hour to the 1,- pound level. Vining costs are reduced by 27 cents per hundredweight for this interval in plant vining and 37 cents for field vining. At capacities greater than 1, pounds per hour, additional economies shrink so that between 2, and 3, pounds per hour costs decrease by only five to six cents per hundredweight for the two methods. These economies are made possible by the more efficient use of both labor and equipment. In the smaller operations, the full capacities of the labor and equipment are not being utilized. For example, a small-scale operation requires the use of vine-spreading equipment in the silage pit, truck scales, lug-box dumping and washing equipment, and the labor to supervise and operate this equipment. Plant capacity could be increased with little or no change in this equipment and labor. Higher pea-vine ratios result in lower vining costs (table 3). When the percentage of clean peas per unit of vines is increased, the output of clean peas per man-hour is increased for jobs such as loading, hauling, and pitching. If the pea-vine ratio is 15%, the estimated total vining cost per hundredweight of clean peas is $1.82 for plant vining and $2.3 for field vining. If the percentage were 25 instead of 15, the cost per hundredweight would be $1.16 and $1.64, respectively. Costs are reduced because fewer

9 $4 al II,. 4 $4 V I", 9,4 1:3 > % W C 4-1 al $4 > la 4.) ) ) ) at C)) ) 4.) at P. I-4 P CD ' f 1 4 CM D A 4 4J 34. 4/3- $4 > 44 Q. P4 ) ) 4.) 4./ al w3.1 $.1 r^1 o14 ta C W P4 P4 r. C4 %.4 CM CM 41 nt CM CM on 41 C.`4 1-4 C) CD CD CD CD CD CD C) CD CD to CD CD CD 4 1 ul trl to C)1 C CD 41 N tenon c4 cm md cm on..4f CD ) 43 4 W ' 3 ea. 4J - to C.1i.1.i Po an 4,.4 W > > :4 :4-4., P. >...-4 el cq. at 4-t to b o ) 44 4! to 4j 1 ta 14 CD CD CM 41 m $4.14 C1.f 1 > > 1 C 1 CM cd 4-J r-4. I 11 W 34 r-1 t W t c:" c.) > 4J CD g.r ca P4 44 T g ) /1. ) CA CD md,t o4 D 41 CM. os C 1 Ps o. 3 1 P. A. A os CD CM CM 41 3 CD CM r C C 4 P. o. CD CM P. 94 CD CM ra 1 on C 4.4 gyp. N. CM el cv co,z1 4 4 g A A A 4 CM 1 r, est N 1-, )- )- rr-t ca t W P4 g g.-4 > P. 6 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD cr% oo. t 44 ' 4." 3 1 P M.4 CD.44 ^waft on nc) ol I. 41 C 1 g1 CD o. ul 4 4 r-4 N r-4.tr) -4 fx4 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD ft. A. A. ul CD CD...A 4 1 -A at 34 " 44 $.4 r-4 44 " g g 44 W ID.. o, g 1: r-4 W al > )., al 4./ rn at 4-4 al M *-4 $4 bo a. 4 4J 43 I-I 44 $ r.1. M > M 4J L ) ao ^ ^ 44, :^ j r-4 4j.:). 44 > ta - I I I co ej t4-4 M r-1 3 ri ^c) C 6 N twp >,-1 g ta 4-1 I i.) 44 M I I o I4 34. M. 4.J -It?, r-44 r"4 l') cn > :4 il N <4 co C) M. 6' VI 44 hl C ID Z (1) N H. 4CCI 1414 m.4

10 a-1 k CP 94 -,J 44 ' al L3 () c4 v3 ) S - aj 4 CD ) >4 a. o C) 4..) C 41 N C.) 134 ) 1.4 r-4 tts 4.3 1`. r CM N CM 1`n A It r ch un if) in, cp ' ) 4-1 1:4 (11 4.).,-) _ g. a3 > e4 1-$ 44 4 :,4 (1) 1 (1 ri 14 1:1 o ca u) al 1-1 r ) t ri tri 5 bp ) N( co >+ ot) te la. cd ( r1 /4 ), t-4 > >. Cd I--4. r...1 I,4 "Z14) CD g r CD W 4 Pu E W. 4.; 4 a r.4 C1) co <4 A -1 (NI 4 cd gc 4-4 ) I - P-1 a. k r-4 CNI u1 1 co r1 L %. g1rr o,. 3,4,4 w4 4 4 V1 4.) ) 4-1 )4 4 > N tap C- 4 4.) ' 4-) g P bt) 54 " 44 1/4.4 u3. ch CM 1 N,4 N 4 1 u1 4 r, N 4 op r- cn 4 1 C4 e4 C3 Ch %CP C4. un c4 M 1 4 C 44- <- CD CD CD 2? CD C CD C, 4 r.4 4) Ch C4 ".4 C,t M r, ul INC M a a... ' N en VD r-. > C ul 1 vp C3 e1 r-.1 ul co el 1r-1-4 r-4 C4 '.--4 r-4 N r-1 g V,-.1 4./ Cu P C) nt ra r.4 ul tr r u1 ^ Mt...1* 1 Ch CT ft A r, 4 ch C5 e44 P. u1 14 C4 \.t N.t,4 1 V) / r.4 r ul u1 C5 u1 CD ul C 4 CA,4 r CNI ' -.4,4..rl tta 4-1 Lk 34 ' LW 14-1 () ' e el (11) of 4 ( r-4 11.ra -.4 k N 4.) g td) 14 Cu $ (1, P ) C T5. 4.) 4.4 CD C -I-I 144 te 111 u ( >, (3) 4.) w Cf) 41 4J I 4-1 r ) ) '44 (44 V) a 4J "4 ) (1) 6 a.. N-4 Cd ) N Cd 4414 v3.1

11 vines are handled for each hundredweight of clean peas. Although the grower and processor have little control over the pea-vine ratio, it is important to point out that vining costs are very sensitive to this ratio. This effect on cost also suggests an area for possible future research directed toward the reduction of the quantity: of vines which must. be handled per unit of clean peas. BASIS FR ESTIMATING CSTS In the cost estimates cited earlier, it has been assumed that the vining season extends for 1, hours of operation at capacity. Individual processing plants may have a season that exceeds or is less than this period. Plant records for these operations, however, indicate that this is a reasonable-season considering the climate and growing conditions required by the crop in the Northwest. Labor Estimated costs for labor are based upon (1) typical wage rates and (2) production standards for the different jobs making up the vining operation. These standards were developed from time and production studies of indivi dual crew operations (table 4). They have been used to compute the estimated size crew needed for specific jobs. For example, the time studies indicate that if 1, pounds of clean peas are to be delivered to the freezing plant, four loader-operators would be required. This is based on, time study results that show a loader's, somewhat better than average, output is 2,5 pounds of clean peas per man-hour. The 1, when divided by 2,5 gives a crew of four operators. Additional labor for field-loading crews consisting of hand pitchers, field foremen, and loader mechanics is calculated in a similar manner. An allowance of 2% for delays and rest periods has been included. sing the same procedure and a 1,-pound hourly output, 7 vine pitchers for plant vining and 28 pitchers and off-bearers for field vining were calculated as the crew requirements for these two methods. The output of clean peas per man-hour was 1,6 pounds for plant vining and 36 for field vining. ther personnel making up the vining-station crew would be estimated from the standards. Wage rates established for particular jobs for both plant and field vining are shown below. Electric fork operator's wages are not shown since they were paid on a piece rate. In the cost calculations these wages have been increased by 6% for social security and other employer costs. Job Wage per hour Foremen $1.75 Clipper cleaner and "cat" operators and mechanics 1.5 All other jobs 1.25

12 1 Table 4. Labor Standards for Vining Green Peas, regon, 1957 Crop Year. LI Method of Vining Job : Plant Vining : (pounds clean peas Field Vining per man-hour) Loading in the field 2,5 2,5 Loader mechanic 5, 5, Field clean up 1,917 1,917 Field foreman 3, 3, Vining 1,6 36 Viner clean up 3,2 "Cat" and tractor operation 15, 1, Viner mechanic 3,2 2,885 Vining station supervision 7,5 1, Hand truck lugs to dumper W 11,599 Dump-lug boxes MP 7,92 Wash-lug boxes III 11,554 Receiving dock clean up 15, Receiving foreman a.* 3, Truck weighing 3, 3, Sample grading 3, 3, Clipper cleaning 7,5 7,5 Truck spotter M 3, Truck dispatcher 3, /1 Includes an allowance for normal delay and periods of downtime. Equipment These costs consist of annual fixed charges' and variable costs including repairs, maintenance, and power. The annual fixed charge is composed of depreciation based on the estimated years of useful life; insurance, taxes, interest; and a sum for fixed repairs. These costs for the different pieces of equipment are shown in table 5. Variable repairs and maintenance are computed on the basis of 1, hours of use. This amounts to 57. of the replacement plus installation cost for most items of equipment. Electricity and fuel consumption for motors was calculated from manufacturers' specifications, results of tractor tests, and other published material. Pricing used on a delivered basis amounted to 15.9 cents per gallon for diesel fuel, 27.9 cents for gasoline, 95 cents per gallon for lubricating oil, and 17 cents per pound for grease. Electricity rates amounted to 8.7 mills per KWH for plant operations. The estimated number of pieces of equipment required for the different rates of output is based upon the equipment standards developed from time and production standards and from manufacturers' specifications. Time and production studies showed that a field viner's output with pea-vine ratio of 2% was approximately 72 pounds per viner-hour. An output of 1, pounds of clean peas per hour would require 14 viners (1, pounds divided by 72 pounds).

13 11 co o r-1 CD 4 ev C (1) In CIN co E-4 W -4 N CNI al r-4 P*4 C I-I 1-4 Et $.4 c.) C. v-4 P4 o 4-I $4 4-1 )4 14 WG) as ix) - P4 op 1-1. V) /4 Ql Ce) C cr) C t Z..4 (NJS I p-1 r...1 V Cr) C M 3 o X S-1 Cn %.o tfy C.) Ps a m ,. 4 Cr' >4 M C1 rv. trt In 1 co 4-1 VI.--1 4J C ".-t 4-. C.) c 'V o-1 al ' C.. C`).. cv.cr). m. -.1* en,..1- ) -1 rz4 54 X 4-4 Q/ 4.) o cd t-4.. E-I, ) e-4 E 4.) v-4 C) ) )4 I4 44", ta g. )4. 14 a.) r-n u ,. PE )4 P, 1.4 v) 4 C4 ). s4 a. --- > 4-1,c) -4 4-I.--1. r-1 1 C r-i C.) 1- C..) 1 en c).3 v3 Li" c.1 VI %13 vi a% co et1 4-4 P.4 in r-4 N.16 1 Cs1 M %la Cif CA / ra C C re cq r1 CS1 v-4 In tin VI trl e cri 1-4 in C In ) r-i C1. 4.) ) )4 $4....t 4.) c ) (NI. ' I a '. m )4... /-I g 14. * 4I $.1 4 C C W > -I- >... CL) **-s..x A..-I a. 121 S......I a. ) 3 :. )4 )4 X ) ) w a. c X --- 1,_ s 1 ' o -1 b :: u ---,'.. al Pc , eq = w p.,

14 12 ).4. 4 (1) an CV. 4.4 co N. ch an r. r t C/3 N es.1 %...I. 3 a a a. E4 N.4 cc).4.1 )...4 IA 111 o c ul,t al c 4) 1/4 vu $.4 H ad -t -d- a, 1/4 4.r) 1/4 en.4 ^ ea4 ) I v) 1 N t) C In tin a% en o n /4-4 I at c4 css o N $4 '. C) 4.).. u 1 ) 4 r-1 cz).4 er g W cc) CD CD CD Ch CD RI %..4 CD Ch 1 h. cd c4 CV ) 34. g.4 W ) CN 4-4 C "C) o C 1 CD 34 r-4 %. CN an en N ft jai W 44 b.4 W 34 v3. sr.-4 CD 1n It) C 1) c1/4i c4 V cc) co co N. -,I. In kl. a ft a a M CN Cd.4 an aft.4,..., C - r t4 Cf) 4J.4 r-4 Pa 34 al -4 ::.?) cc) vi.d. -`,. 4J \).4 ri - co. 3 N I C1) ^ ) 44 \5 ca. Ct. 1.4 an 34 3 n 44 >N 4.4 >, 14 r-4 -,-. >..4 tn ad H X X X a (I). o I. 4 -il v) r.-i.4.4 I C 34 3 i 4.4 or) 34 4t-t ) >._Y 3 C.). n-n cd. al $-1 to cn 5 4..) H 4 (c:i --4a' i_. M f.. n -.I s 14 n to 3.4 E4 T1-1 1:$ 1.4 CV ri 14- P, k P., )4 : n C 44 (1 4J ' ) 14 n 3...1"... 3 () n1 $4 3 W c.). E RI e cd.4. WC)t1.4 3 $4.1.-Y.4.1 z al c.) 4.,-.1 v) o u) iinj g 4 ),-I...I b E-4 Z

15 T) 4) 'el "--1 g g I;:l ' W 4J r1 41.w, ) al 5 al ) $ e -1-1.L.1 a. - 84' J,4-4 N,--I ) v C7' X ) 4) 4 cd c.) cu.-1 r-1 CI 4..) to, v I) " ) C.1,4 ca g ad.e4 4.) > CI r g (3 El 4) = '.1 $4 C. g r-4 v i r v--1.4 > 4 til 4 "..1 CI 4 " ) 4) g " I-1,, g H 44 4) 1.4 A 11) n4 b*--p. PN C $4 -r-1 4-/ C.) M 4.) -, all. X g 14 C r-4 ) ; ) " cd W.a en 4 ^ ) 4) 4-4 4J 44. Ti /4 la co co o to c...) 4.) n I Cr 1.4 C.) 4) ) C.) $4 titt ) o e).-1 4) 4.4 v-1 ).4 "1:1 rl " " 1.4 en CD MI f4). g 14 a I-1 )4 1-i g -,-1 to ) --4 g.. a 4 ) C.) - ca,-, ' $4 'V / 4) ) I ( g a o o o CI 4 CI.4.4.; g.,-) 4) 41 E r.4 r ".4 E4 14 cd co -,-1 C.) 14 al / ei CD r ' " 4) 1.1 r-4 4.) (NI 1-1 ta. a. a. a. 1.4 ) 4./ 4 C *"... ).4 3 ). I-4 o. " 4J 4) 64..' irs: ;3.: 4-I ) -c:f - u) 1 C () r-1 tn $4 rd. " in.. CI 4-1 a ) 1-4 I-1 C.) 44 r-4 44 r ) v ) ) cn C 4-) $4. sa. $4 $4. g.) g w ) co (. C.) ) $ 4 T) 4 C). " 1-4 >, 13,-1 N C X 4 T1 1 4J H > > 4-1 CI) D + o.-4 En g g (i 8 :;14 ctl $42a1,.. 71 r.4 E 14 se 3, 4., " 4-1 Ln g..a a. N 4-1 C 4-4. r-i.).1-4 4).1-1 ) 4-1 pt. -El,-.1 ) Er co $4.) 4) 4J ) 14. Ir.'?... I 4' ) 4-4,--1 g4? }4 ) J. r-1. te W 14-1 M $4 4-1 C111 I C.) ) a3 41..a ) 14 ' a-9 I 3 g. 14 H.I.J W 4.44) r-1 P o 1.1 *14. CI C.) 4.4 ) C Cfl 4. 13) g I $4 cn )4 a+ 4.4 co C.) CI. -. > 5 "-I PN 41) ( ) 4-1 ar 3 v.^4 1-1 a ) ' 13 ri.- C $4 Ea - C -i ) CI) al CA td a. 4J Ca.4 14 X 44 X g us r-1 C Cd 4-1 )4 k..-1 4) ) '-g u ' L'i 44) g H E I:74 o;.) - r...) H J m o ) Ctj Cll $4 $.4 b ca 44 C II 4.j -1 -a - 4.) 34 _. u ) 1.4 a. " a. 4-4 I-4 v---4 C) r Ca ( C.) Lt.1 al C 44 > al 44 g - cv I ent cil

16 14 p ul og C) el 4 ara ul rs op cn C) on ol 1 rl 1.4 r o ' -1 o -o 4 N C.) l ax m /1 $4 )4 n-i b ax. rt C3., $4 C.) co W d o /4 (1) 4.4W N 8 "4 4J g Cri -34 b A - as 3 W N V) H..... ro Ct$ b a-i 14 C CL. r N-1 N E 1-4 u bo a 41,-n " C RS 4,A C4 rn w M 4J -. v-4 a ar) 6 ( 44 r1 ' 1,4 $-) fa,. 3 4J ) l 1 I 1 I ri v--i 44 li M %. Ps D r-4 r.4 / w a., 4J 4-4 u) ) 44. rl u u) VD V VD VD 44 4J -g $-4 $4 ($.$ cl.,-n I-4 w 44 r-o.t.) W to ri N 14 CL ' o W 4,), ",:p C` u g o w, C 4.4 X D tgl C1\11.4 n/ c.) c) C t..? M I b (NI C's4 "4 Ti E.i.a - )4 W W. g C a o,-1 co en 1 en oi3 $4 r.4 r.4 14 > W N4 1-1 o > 3. PN,4-1,-$21 -v,4 ->r k 'V 4 I o co /3.X r-4 C ) c.) *4( w <4 4 <4 'a ''',,i3 4.) to o T) (.9 (1) 43 C) " 9.r) 1 CD 1/1 CD 1 C 1 C,- to C4 c.),..-1 tn t ri <4 H