ࡱ> 5@ Xbjbj22 XX?T  d, HLLLDD@&f|$ښoqqqqqq$R!"6!!2!!!! o!!o!"!CR]4 u%nL +D01<d t d  n&: !`\nnnDfLpLTrends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006   Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Prepared for: Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada Project No: 62-750007 Prepared by: Jeff Suggett, M. Sc. Manager, Special Projects Final Report April 2006 Table of Contents  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984964" 1.0 INTRODUCTION  PAGEREF _Toc131984964 \h 1  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984965" 1.1 Scope of study  PAGEREF _Toc131984965 \h 2  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984966" 1.2 The data set  PAGEREF _Toc131984966 \h 3  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984967" 1.3 Organization of report  PAGEREF _Toc131984967 \h 3  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984968" 2.0 DRIVER LICENSING IN SASKATCHEWAN  PAGEREF _Toc131984968 \h 4  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984969" 2.1 Criminal Code convictions  PAGEREF _Toc131984969 \h 4  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984970" 2.2 Statutory licence disqualifications under The Highway Traffic Act  PAGEREF _Toc131984970 \h 5  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984971" 2.3 Court-ordered (CCC) prohibitions  PAGEREF _Toc131984971 \h 5  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984972" 2.4 Addiction screening program  PAGEREF _Toc131984972 \h 6  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984973" 2.5 Early reinstatement  PAGEREF _Toc131984973 \h 7  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984974" 2.6 Ignition Interlock Program  PAGEREF _Toc131984974 \h 8  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984975" 2.7 Safe Driver Recognition  PAGEREF _Toc131984975 \h 9  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984976" 3.0 REVIEW OF FIRST OFFENDERS  PAGEREF _Toc131984976 \h 10  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984977" 3.1 First offenders  PAGEREF _Toc131984977 \h 10  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984978" 3.2 First offender outcomes  PAGEREF _Toc131984978 \h 11  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984979" 3.3 Relicensing  PAGEREF _Toc131984979 \h 11  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984980" 3.4 Relicensing within one week  PAGEREF _Toc131984980 \h 12  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984981" 3.5 Relicensing within one year  PAGEREF _Toc131984981 \h 16  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984982" 3.6 Concluding remarks  PAGEREF _Toc131984982 \h 19  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984983" 4.0 FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH FAILING TO RELICENSE  PAGEREF _Toc131984983 \h 20  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984984" 4.1 Subsequent CCC convictions  PAGEREF _Toc131984984 \h 22  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984985" 4.2 Traffic offences  PAGEREF _Toc131984985 \h 23  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984986" 4.3 Administrative suspensions  PAGEREF _Toc131984986 \h 25  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984987" 4.3.1 Addiction screening program  PAGEREF _Toc131984987 \h 25  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984988" 4.3.2 Financial requirements  PAGEREF _Toc131984988 \h 28  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984989" 4.4 Unauthorized personal identification codes (PIC)  PAGEREF _Toc131984989 \h 28  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984990" 4.5 Unknown reasons  PAGEREF _Toc131984990 \h 29  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984991" 4.6 Concluding remarks  PAGEREF _Toc131984991 \h 29  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984992" 5.0 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GROUPS  PAGEREF _Toc131984992 \h 31  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984993" 6.0 COMPARISON WITH ONTARIO  PAGEREF _Toc131984993 \h 34  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984994" 6.1 Explanation of results  PAGEREF _Toc131984994 \h 36  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984995" 7.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS  PAGEREF _Toc131984995 \h 40  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984996" 7.1 Review of findings  PAGEREF _Toc131984996 \h 40  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984997" 7.2 Further research  PAGEREF _Toc131984997 \h 42  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984998" 7.3 Recommendations for SGI  PAGEREF _Toc131984998 \h 43  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc131984999" 7.4 Deterrent strategies  PAGEREF _Toc131984999 \h 44 Appendix A Groups excluded from study ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Synectics Transportation Consultants Inc. wishes to acknowledge the contribution by Saskatchewan Government Insurance in providing the data that made this study possible. David Koch created the data set that allowed the research questions raised in this report to be answered. Editorial comments, insight into SGIs licensing system, and suggestions on presentation were provided by David Koch, Kwei Quaye, Phyllis Glowatsky, Wendy Coderre and Gail Carteri. Funding for this study was provided by MADD Canada in conjunction with Transport Canada. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As a follow-up to a recent Ontario study titled Trends in First-Time One-Year Licence Suspensions in Ontario: 1993-2001, MADD Canada (in partnership with Transport Canada) funded a study examining trends in Criminal Code (CCC) driving disqualifications in Saskatchewan. Over the years, the Province has implemented a number of sanctions directed against drinking and driving, seeking to encourage safe driving through a series of incentives and remedial measures. The most notable changes occurred on August 1, 1996. Statutory licence disqualifications were lengthened. Most notably, drivers were required to participate in a remedial measures program (addiction screening) where they were subsequently referred to either the Driving Without Impairment (DWI) education course or the recovery program, depending on whether they were identified as having an chemical dependency or not. For this study, Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) provided Synectics Transportation Consultants Inc. (Synectics) with a comprehensive data set that allowed them to examine trends in disqualifications and driver response to legislated changes in driver relicensing requirements. The data set contains detailed driving histories for all first-time CCC offenders (referred to as first offenders) with relicensing eligibility dates on or after January 1, 1993 or before January 1, 2006. Approximately 72 percent of the first offenders relicensed. The last known information on another 27 percent of the first offenders is that they remain unlicensed. The remainder were deceased or have left the province. Legislation that was introduced on August 1, 1996 was used as the basis for assessing changes in the yearly proportion of first offenders not relicensing within one week and one year of eligibility. This legislation would have affected first offenders with full privilege eligibility dates starting in the following year (1997). First offenders with eligibility dates in the post-1997 period are less likely to have relicensed within one week or one year, compared to first offenders with eligibility dates in the pre-1997 period. The reason for the change was attributed to the legislation changes that occurred on August 1, 1996, including the remedial measures requirement. Reasons why a first offender required more time to relicense were investigated. Some first offenders either reoffended (under the Criminal Code) or were convicted of another driving offence (demonstrating that they are still driving), did not complete addiction screening program requirements, did not pay a fine, or had an unauthorized personal identification code. These first offenders were all more likely to require more than one year beyond their eligibility date for relicensing, if at all. First offenders following through with the addiction screening program and subsequently being referred to the DWI course were more likely to relicense within a year of their eligibility date, while their counterparts in the recovery program were more likely to require longer than a year. The results of the study were compared to the results of the earlier Ontario study. Comparison of relicensing in the periods before and after the introduction of remedial measures programs indicate that while there is a greater likelihood of first offenders requiring additional time for reinstatement in both provinces in the after period, the difference is less pronounced in Saskatchewan. It appears that the introduction of a remedial measures program had less impact on first offender relicensing delays in Saskatchewan as compared to Ontario. The above is supported by a comparison of non-participation rates in the remedial measures programs in both provinces. In Saskatchewan, 27 percent of first time offenders referred to addiction screening did not follow through by attending their initial session. Research in Ontario suggests a non-participation rate of 55 percent. Differences in the two provinces that may explain the different non-participation rates are shown in Exhibit E-1. Possible reasons for the difference in participation are incentives built into program requirements in Saskatchewan, their straightforwardness, lower insurance costs associated with relicensing, and the higher likelihood of being charged of an alcohol related offence in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. Finally, in Saskatchewan, driver licensing and the public automobile insurance program are both administered by SGI. Exhibit E-1 Comparison of Ontario and Saskatchewan1 ItemOntarioSaskatchewanIncentives to complete remedial measuresNo incentives providedEarly reinstatement to restricted, provisional licence or ignition interlockProgram fees$450 for Back on Track$150 for DWI course onlyProgram requirementsEducation or treatment requirement and follow-up interview six months later2Education or treatment requirement onlyInsurance costs upon relicensingTypically several thousand dollars per yearOne-time Safe Driver Recognition penalty of $500Charge rates for alcohol related offences3Approximately 200 per 100,000 population (16 years and older)Approximately 600 per 100,000 population (16 years and older)Integration of driver licensing and automobile insuranceAdministered by Ontario Ministry of Transportation and private insurersBoth administered by SGINotes: 1 In the period after the introduction of the remedial measures program in each province. 2 Follow-up interview requirement introduced in 2001. 3 Based on Juristat data, Uniform Crime Reporting Survey, 2002 data Recommendations made to SGI include: A follow-up letter to first offenders six months into their licence disqualification period reminding them of general program requirements and identifying any additional requirements specific to the offender; and For first offenders showing no evidence of attending the initial addiction screening session, contact by telephone to remind them of the program requirements. INTRODUCTION As a follow-up to a recent Ontario study titled Trends in First-Time One-Year Licence Suspensions in Ontario: 1993-2001, MADD Canada (in partnership with Transport Canada) funded a study examining trends in Criminal Code (CCC) driving disqualifications in Saskatchewan. Over the years, the Province has implemented a number of sanctions directed against drinking and driving, seeking to encourage safe driving through a series of incentives and remedial measures. Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI), a Crown corporation responsible for driver and vehicle licensing and the Provinces compulsory automobile insurance program, provided Synectics Transportation Consultants Inc. (Synectics) with a comprehensive data set that allowed them to examine trends in disqualifications and driver response to these remedial measures. The purpose of this study was to conduct an in-depth review of the driving histories of a group of offenders meeting the following criteria: The offender was convicted of a first offence under the Criminal Code; The offender would have been eligible for a full privilege licence on or after January 1, 1993 or before January 1, 2006; The offender was a resident of Saskatchewan at the time of the offence; The offender did not have other CCC convictions on the first conviction date; and There was no appeal activity related to the conviction. For the purposes of this study, the above group of offenders will herein be referred to as first offenders. Appendix A contains a description of groups excluded from the study. Scope of study In the Ontario study, first-time one-year CCC convictions were examined in order to determine whether or not the driver was completing any required action to have their licence reinstated upon the completion of their licence suspension [on their eligibility date]. In that study, a general trend was observed towards more first-time one-year CCC convictions resulting in a licence not being immediately reinstated in the period after the proclamation of the Back on Track program and the introduction of the reinstatement fee in 1998. As a whole, more suspended drivers were failing to carry out the requirements placed on them to get their licence reactivated. This study will examine similar questions in Saskatchewan, but will be able to examine the trends in further detail, due to the detailed data set provided by SGI. This project examined the detailed driving histories of first offenders in Saskatchewan in order to identify: Whether they are completing program requirements in order to have their licence reinstated; The length of time between their licence eligibility date and their actual licence reinstatement; Reasons for delay in licence reinstatement past the licence eligibility date; Differences among alcohol and non-alcohol related CCC offenders; Differences among males and females; and Differences among different age groups (<21 years, 21-45 years, and >45 years). This report will then draw comparisons between the findings of the previous Ontario study and the current study in Saskatchewan. A second study by Synectics, Driving While Disqualified in Saskatchewan, also commissioned by MADD Canada and Transport Canada, examined evidence of whether or not first offenders who are unlicensed are still driving and if they are, what is their likelihood of being involved in an accident and being at-fault. In addition, Synectics will be examining the accident involvement of suspended drivers in Ontario at a later date, using data provided by the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario. The data set The data set provided to Synectics by SGI contains detailed driving histories of all first offenders (as previously defined), from their initial convictions and related licence disqualifications, through to actions that may have delayed licence reinstatement, up to their relicensing date (if it occurred). Information contained in the dataset includes: Type of offender age and sex; Type of CCC offence; Date of offence and conviction; Eligibility dates for relicensing under an ignition interlock program, a special restricted licence, a provisional licence, and a full privilege licence; Events that may have impacted the time to relicense including reinstatement requirements, administrative suspensions and other driving disqualifications and associated dates with each; Traffic accidents and dates of occurrence; Traffic offences and dates of occurrence (e.g. running a red light); Whether the first offender relicensed or if not, possible reasons why (for example, decreased or moved out-of-province); and Number of days at the point of relicensing since the most recent eligibility date. The data set represents the driving histories of the 34,861 first offenders at the time of the data extraction (February 2nd, 2006). Events placed on the drivers history on or after this date would not be included in the data set. Organization of report This report is divided into seven sections. Section 1.0 describes the overall scope of the study. Section 2.0 provides an overview of driver licensing in Saskatchewan, focusing on sanctions and remedial measures aimed at alcohol related driving offences. Section 3.0 describes general trends in first offenders in Saskatchewan. Section 4.0 describes reasons why first offenders do not relicense immediately following their eligibility date. Section 5.0 details differences among alcohol and non-alcohol related offences, males and females, and different age groups. Section 6.0 compares the results to the findings of the Ontario study. Section 7.0 has some concluding remarks and recommendations. DRIVER LICENSING IN SASKATCHEWAN SGI is a Crown corporation responsible for driver and vehicle licensing in Saskatchewan. SGI fully supports Road Safety Vision 2010 and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Strategy to Reduce Impaired Driving (STRID). One of SGIs primary aims is reducing the incidence of dangerous driving in the Province, through a series of initiatives that include sanctions directed against dangerous driving offences, remedial measures aimed at reforming offenders, and incentives promoting safe driving. Each of these is discussed below. Criminal Code convictions In the study, CCC convictions relating to driving include: Impaired driving; Impaired driving causing bodily harm or death; Failure to comply with a demand; Over 80 mg alcohol in blood; Driving while disqualified; Leaving the scene of an accident; Failing to stop for a police officer; Criminal negligence causing bodily harm or death; Dangerous driving; and Dangerous driving causing bodily harm or death. First offenders receive both a statutory licence disqualification, issued under provincial law, and a court-ordered prohibition, as legislated by CCC. A first offender may not drive until both expire, though they may be eligible for relicensing once the prohibition expires. Exhibit 2.1 shows the total number of first offenders included in this study subgrouped by offence type. The first group is alcohol related: impaired driving (and impaired driving causing harm or death), failure to comply with a demand, and over 80 mg alcohol in blood. Almost 95 percent of first offender CCC convictions are directly related to alcohol. The remaining convictions are not specifically related to alcohol, being: driving while disqualified, criminal negligence (causing harm or death), dangerous driving (and dangerous driving causing harm or death), leaving the scene of an accident, and failing to stop for a police officer. Slightly more than 5 percent of first offender convictions fall into this second group. The number of first offenders is the same as the number of convictions, 34,861 in all. Exhibit 2.1 Offences of first offenders reviewed in study  Statutory licence disqualifications under The Highway Traffic Act Currently, a first offence results in statutory licence disqualification of one year as set out in The Highway Traffic Act; prior to August 1, 1996, the disqualification was six months in length. Court-ordered (CCC) prohibitions Currently, a first offence results in a minimum $600 fine and a mandatory court- ordered prohibition of one year for alcohol related offences under the CCC. Judges have the discretion of increasing the length of the prohibition to three years. Prior to July 1, 1999, first offenders were given a three-month court-ordered prohibition. Addiction screening program Since August 1st, 1996, first offenders are required to participate in an addiction screening program. The screening is conducted by a qualified alcohol and drug services counsellor who will determine whether the first offender has a chemical dependency. First offenders must complete the addiction screening program in order to have licence privileges restored. If they do not complete the program, they will be ineligible for relicensing. Within the addiction screening program, there are two major components, the DWI course and the recovery program. If it is determined that the first offender does not have a chemical dependency, they are usually asked to complete the DWI course. The DWI course is held over a weekend and the first offender must pay $150 to participate. The course is intended to evoke attitudinal and behavioural changes that will prevent a recurrence of the events that led them to the course. The course provides information on the consequences and harmful combination of drinking and driving and strongly encourages participants to separate the acts of drinking and driving. If it is determined that the first offender does have a chemical dependency, they are typically asked to participate in a recovery program. The recovery program consists of weekly counselling sessions, assignment to a treatment centre, participation in community self-help groups, counselling from other agencies or other actions. The recovery program is considered complete when the counsellor has determined that the driver has a low risk of reoffending. Exhibit 2.2 shows the number of first offenders required to attend addiction screening who were either referred to the DWI course or the recovery program grouped by their year of eligibility (that is, the year in which they would be eligible for full licence privileges). Eighty-two percent of all first offenders receiving addiction screening were referred to the DWI course, with almost all of the remaining eighteen percent being referred to the recovery program. Exhibit 2.2 First offenders referred to the DWI course or recovery program by year of eligibility  Referrals to either the recovery program or the DWI course begin appearing among first offenders with an eligibility date occurring in 1997 and afterwards. A few first offenders with older eligibility dates were also noted; these are first offenders (by the definition of this study) who were convicted before August 1, 1996, subsequently reoffended after August 1, 1996, and were required to complete either the recovery program or the DWI course as a result of that latter offence. The percentage of first offenders receiving referrals peaked among offenders with an eligibility date in 1998 and has steadily dropped in subsequent eligibility years. Early reinstatement Some first offenders convicted on or after August 1, 1996 were able to begin taking advantage of early licence reinstatement. Upon completion of the addiction screening program, they may be eligible to apply to the Highway Traffic Board for restricted driving privileges, if: They have served the entire court-ordered prohibition; They have served less than half of their statutory licence disqualification; and They have completed the addiction screening program. First offenders seeking a restricted licence must demonstrate to the Highway Traffic Board that the licence disqualification is an exceptional hardship. If a restricted licence is granted, conditions will be put on their licence in terms of where and when they may drive. A restricted status ends when a first offender has completed half of their statutory disqualification. At this time, SGI will generate a replacement licence (a provisional licence). A provisional licence grants them full licence privileges until the end of the statutory disqualification. First offenders convicted of over 80 mg of alcohol, impaired driving, or failure to comply with a demand are not eligible for a provisional drivers licence. First offenders holding either a restricted or provisional licence must maintain a zero BAC while driving. If it is determined that they were drinking and driving, they will have their licence disqualification reinstated and will be required to attend the addiction screening again. Starting on July 1, 1999, first offenders could no longer be issued restricted or provisional licences because judges were required to issue a one-year court- ordered prohibition. Ignition Interlock Program First offenders become eligible for a restricted licence with an ignition interlock device starting December 19, 2001. They are eligible if they were convicted of an alcohol related offence (impaired driving, over 80 mg of alcohol, or failure to comply with a demand), the court has authorized participation in the program, the court-ordered absolute prohibition (minimum 3 months) has been served, and they have completed the addiction screening program. The ignition interlock device is a breath-alcohol testing device that prevents a first offender from starting their vehicle if they have been drinking. The device remains in their vehicle until the disqualification has expired. The disqualification is reinstated if the device is removed before the end of the disqualification period. First offenders participating in the Ignition Interlock Program typically pay $125 for installation of the device, approximately $100 for insurance and monitoring per month, $25 for removal, and a $30 one-time administration fee. Since the ignition interlock was costly and not available in all communities, approximately 10 percent of drivers eligible for ignition interlock actually participated in the program. Safe Driver Recognition Safe Driver Recognition was introduced on July 1, 2002. It is a point-based program that encourages safe driving by rewarding drivers with a clean record. Drivers with a positive safety rating may qualify for a vehicle insurance discount, while those with a negative safety rating may be required to pay a financial penalty to a maximum of $500. Every year that a driver has an incident-free driving record puts them one point higher on the safety rating scale. First offenders, of the kind in this study, will have points deducted and will be required to pay a financial penalty of $500 before they may purchase a drivers licence upon relicensing. Before Safe Driver Recognition came into effect, accident surcharges and licence premiums (for convictions) were applied to the drivers licence at licence renewal time. However, accident surcharges and license premiums were based on the last three years of driving. This meant that a driver could avoid paying the additional charges simply by waiting three years to relicense. The key differences between the Safe Driver Recognition and the previous system is that financial penalties now applied under Safe Driver Recognition are more immediate (the penalty is separate from the drivers license and sent by mail as soon as SGI has knowledge of it) and they must be paid before the Auto Fund will transact new business with the driver. REVIEW OF FIRST OFFENDERS The purpose of this section is to present general trends in first offender driving activity, identifying: First offenders grouped by year of full privilege eligibility (the year in which the driver would have been eligible for full privilege licence reinstatement); The length of time required for first offenders to relicense; First offenders not relicensed; and Differences in the above spanning the study period (1993 2005). First offenders Exhibit 3.1 shows all first offenders, grouped by the year of relicensing eligibility. Several things were noted. First, the year 1997 has substantially lower numbers of eligibility dates. The lower number in 1997 is due to the lengthening of the statutory licence disqualification from six months to one year, which occurred on August 1, 1996. Exhibit 3.1 First offenders grouped by year of eligibility  First offender outcomes Exhibit 3.2 shows the first offender outcome. Of the 34,861 first offenders, approximately 72 percent relicensed (as of February 2nd, 2006) and 27 percent of the first offenders did not relicense. The last known information regarding the remaining first offenders indicates their death or they left the province. A total of 383 drivers (1.1 percent) had a death status code attached to their record as the last entry. In addition, a total of 214 first offenders (0.6 percent) had a left province status code attached to their record as the last entry. It should be noted that there may be other unlicensed first offenders who have died or have left the province without SGI being notified. To the extent that this is true, the finding that 26.6 percent did not relicense may be generous. For the purposes of this study, it was decided to remove the 597 first offenders having either a death status code or a left province code attached to their record as the left entry. This left a total of 34,264 first offenders in the study. Exhibit 3.2 First offender outcomes   Relicensing First offenders completing all of the relicensing requirements would have been eligible for restricted, provisional, or full licence privileges depending on the date of the completion of the requirement. Once they have completed all of the relicensing requirements, they must go to the motor licence issuer to purchase a drivers licence. The data set includes information on the relicensing date (to either a restricted, provisional, or full privilege licence) as compared to the most recent relicensing eligibility date. For the purposes of this study, the number of days between relicensing and the most recent relicensing eligibility date will be referred to as the lag period. Exhibit 3.3 shows the lag period required for first offenders to relicense among all who eventually relicensed prior to February 2nd, 2006 (the date of the data extract) and within the entire study group, expressed as a percentage. Among those who eventually relicensed, 44.4 percent relicensed within one week of the date they would have been eligible. Slightly more than eighty-five percent of those who relicensed did so within one year. Exhibit 3.3 Lag periods (first offenders deceased or left province excluded)  The maximum lag period for a first offender was 4,656 days (12.75 years). The mean lag period was 196.6 days (with a standard deviation of 458.8 days). Relicensing within one week A seven-day (or less) lag period was chosen as a benchmark in which to make comparisons on a year-by-year basis regarding first offenders who did or did not relicense within a week of their most recent licence eligibility. Relicensing only occurs when a first offender meets all of the relicensing requirements, goes to a motor licence issuer in the province and buys a restricted, provisional, or full licence as appropriate. Given that the first offenders eligibility date may fall on a day when they would not be able to relicense (e.g. due to date falling on a weekend, holiday, day during which inclement weather was occurring, or due to personal reasons), it is assumed that a typical first offender meeting all of their requirements may require a short lag period (one week) to purchase a new licence. Exhibit 3.4 shows the number of first offenders grouped by year of eligibility with a lag period of one week or less and a lag period of greater than one week. This second group would include first offenders who are still not relicensed as of the data extraction date. The proportion of drivers with a lag period of one week or less remains close to 50 percent for first offenders with eligibility dates in 1993 through 1996. In 1997, when the statutory licence disqualification period increased and the addiction screening program began, the percentage of first offenders with a lag period of greater than one week increased to approximately 75 percent and then climbs to 82 percent by 2005. Exhibit 3.4 Number of first offenders by year of eligibility: First offenders with a lag period of one week or less compared to first offenders with a lag period of greater than one week  The Relative Risk method was used to compare the proportion of first offenders with a lag period greater than one week for each successive eligibility year, as shown in Exhibit 3.5. Each eligibility year starting in 1994 was compared to the first year (1993). In the first three years following 1993, the probability of a first offender with a lag period greater than one week is less than in 1993. The largest change occurs in 1997. First offenders with eligibility dates in 1997 were 1.47 (1.37 1.59 95% confidence limits) times as likely to have a lag period of greater than one week compared to drivers with eligibility dates in 1993. Subsequent probability comparisons with 1993 indicate a similar result. Beginning in 2002, this increases to approximately 1.54 (the Ignition Interlock Program was introduced in the fall of 2001). First offenders with eligibility dates in 2005 are 1.59 times as likely to require greater than one week versus one week or less to relicense compared to first offenders with eligibility dates in 1993. As mentioned earlier, a number of legislative changes were made on August 1, 1996, including increased statutory licence disqualification periods, and the introduction of the addiction screening program (remedial measures). The new legislation would have affected first offenders with eligibility dates beginning in 1997. Approximately eighty percent of all first offenders with eligibility dates occurring in the 1997 - 2005 period required at least a week to get their licence reinstated compared to approximately fifty percent in the 1993 - 1996 period. Given the significant increase in the proportion of drivers not relicensing within one week of their eligibility date for drivers with eligilibity dates in the years 1996 to 1997, it is concluded that the legislative changes had an effect on the lag period for first offenders afterwards. Exhibit 3.5 Relative risk of a first offender with a lag period greater than one week compared to 1993 (Lower and upper 95% confidence limits shown in red)  Accepting that significant changes occurred on August 1, 1996, in turn impacting first offenders with full privilege eligibility dates in 1997, the Relative Risk method was used to compare the likelihood of a first offenders lag period being greater than one week in the post-1997 eligibility period compared to the pre-1997 eligibility period. Eligibility dates in 1997 were not included as it was a transition year. Most first offenders with relicensing eligibility in 1997 would have been convicted on or after August 1, 1996, but some would have been convicted prior to that date and would have been subject to different eligibility requirements. Anecdotally, SGI informed Synectics that initially some drivers did not realize that they needed to complete the newly introduced program requirements prior to relicensing. The results are shown in Exhibit 3.6. The probability of a first offender requiring greater than one week for their licence to be reinstated is 1.61 times (1.55-1.67 95% confidence limits) as likely for those with an eligibility date in the post-1997 period compared to the pre-1997 period. Exhibit 3.6 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offenders not relicensed within week of eligibility (1993 1996 eligibility dates versus 1998 2005 eligibility dates)  Relicensing within one year Approximately 85 percent of all first offenders relicensed within one year of eligibility (had a lag period of one year or less). Exhibit 3.7 shows the number of first offenders grouped by year of eligibility with a lag period of one year or less and a lag period of greater than one year. This second group would include first offenders who still are not relicensed (according the last known information). The proportion of first offenders with a lag period of greater than one year remains close to 30 percent for first offenders with eligibility dates in years 1993 through 1996. In 1997, when the required licence disqualification period increased, and the addiction screening program began, the percentage of first offenders with a lag period of greater than one year increases to more than 40 percent and climbs to 50 percent by 2005. It should be pointed out that a full year has not elapsed for all first offenders with an eligibility date in 2005; therefore, the numbers reported are likely to change and are shown here for information purposes only. Exhibit 3.7 Number of first offenders by year of eligibility: First offenders with a lag period of one year or less compared to first offenders with a lag period of greater than one year  The Relative Risk method was used to compare the number of first offenders with a lag period greater than one year for each successive eligibility year (Exhibit 3.8). Each eligibility year starting in 1994 was compared to the first year (1993). In the first three years following 1993, the probability of a first offender with a lag period greater than one year is less than 1993. The largest change occurs in 1997. First offenders with eligibility dates in 1997 were 1.22 (1.12-1.34 95% confidence limits) times as likely to have a lag period of greater than one year compared to drivers with eligibility dates in 1993. Subsequent probability comparisons with 1993 indicate progressively higher Relative Risk ratios, with first offenders with eligibility dates in 2004 being 1.36 times as likely to require greater than one year versus one year or less to relicense compared to first offenders with eligibility dates in 1993. Again, as in the previous example, the relative risk numbers shown for 2005 are preliminary, and are shown for information purposes only. Exhibit 3.8 Relative risk of first offenders with a lag period greater than one year compared to 1993 (Lower and upper 95% confidence limits shown in red)  The Relative Risk method was used to compare the likelihood of a first offenders lag period being greater than one year in the post-1997 eligibility period compared to the pre-1997 eligibility period. Eligibility dates in year 1997 were not included as it was a transition year. First offenders with eligibility dates in 2005 were also not included since a full year would not have elapsed for some of these first offenders. The results are shown in Exhibit 3.9. The probability of a first offender requiring greater than one year to relicense is 1.55 (1.49-1.63 95% confidence limits) times as likely for offenders with an eligibility date in the post-1997 period compared to the pre-1997 period. Exhibit 3.9 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offender not relicensed within year of eligibility (1993 1996 eligibility dates versus 1998 2004 eligibility dates)  Concluding remarks The above information clearly indicates several trends in first offenders in the province of Saskatchewan. Conclusions that may be drawn are: The number of first offenders have generally been decreasing since 1998; Approximately seventy-three percent of all first offenders relicensed; According to the last known information available, approximately twenty-seven percent of all first offenders have not relicensed; Forty-four percent of all first offenders who relicensed did so within one week of their eligibility date; Eighty-five percent of all first offenders who relicensed did so within one year of their eligibility date; Approximately eighty percent of first offenders with eligibility dates in the post-1997 period were not relicensed within one week of their eligibility compared to only fifty percent of first offenders with eligibility dates in the pre-1997 period; and Approximately forty-five percent of first offenders with eligibility dates in the post-1997 period were not relicensed within one year of their eligibility compared to only thirty percent of first offenders with eligibility dates in the pre-1997 period. FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH FAILING TO RELICENSE Among the 34,264 first offenders, events were captured by SGI within the time period lasting from their prohibition start date (in most cases the conviction date) through to licence reinstatement or if not relicensed, the date of the data extract (February 2nd, 2006). Any events that were in effect on the prohibition start date were also captured. This section will review common place driving events that affected the length of a first offenders lag period. Exhibit 4.1 illustrates how two first offenders convicted on the same day for the same offence and receiving the same sentence had two totally different outcomes, based on the events that occurred after their conviction date. Exhibit 4.1 Sample first offender histories 64 year old male23 year old maleDateEventDateEvent9/10/2000Arrested and charged (over .08 mg alcohol)9/2/2000Arrested and charged (over .08 mg alcohol)10/12/2000Convicted, received 12 month disqualification and 365 day court-ordered prohibition10/12/2000Convicted, received 12 month disqualification and 365 day court-ordered prohibition10/12/2000Referred to addiction screening10/12/2000Referred to addiction screening3/23/2001Placed in recovery program10/12/2000Cited as not paying previous fine5/23/2001Placed in Medical Review prescribed program1/23/2001Arrested and charged with driving while disqualified5/23/2001Cited as owing money to claims2/9/2001Convicted of driving while disqualified; received a 36 month disqualification10/11/2001Last day of disqualification10/11/2001Last day of original disqualification11/5/2001Recovery program requirements met10/1/2002Referred to Addiction screening administratively suspended until requirements met11/8/2001Money paid to claims11/9/2001Medical Review requirements met11/9/2001Relicensed The 64 year old male required 29 additional days to relicense. Reasons for the delay were: meeting recovery program requirements, paying money to claims, and completing requirements of the Medical Review program. Each of these reasons contributed to the delay. The Medical Review requirements were met last (on November 9th, 2001), twenty-nine days after relicensing eligibility. This was the reason that contributed to the full twenty-nine day lag period. The 23 year old male was convicted and referred to addiction screening on the same day as the 64 year old male, yet there is no subsequent referral to either a DWI course or recovery program, or a referral to any other program. It can be assumed that the first offender never attended the initial addiction screening session. At the same time, the first offender was cited for not paying a fine. Approximately three months after the conviction, he was arrested and charged with driving while disqualified, and was then referred again to addiction screening. This is the last known driving activity associated with this individual since October 1, 2002, his licence has been suspended for an indefinite period of time. This first offender will need to serve their second CCC disqualification, pay their fine, attend the addiction screening session and the subsequent remedial measures program (either the DWI course, the recovery program or another program). The two examples illustrate the complexity of reasons that may be associated with a first offender failing to meet relicensing requirements by the eligibility date. The 64-year-old male did eventually relicense, but had three different concurrent reasons that contributed to the delay. Broadly speaking, most of the driving history contained in the data set provide reasons why there was a time lag in a first offenders licence reinstatement, or why they never relicensed (according to the last known information). Some of the more common reasons are discussed in the following section. Factors common along first offenders with delays in relicensing or failing to relicense (at the time of the data extract) were: Subsequent CCC convictions; Traffic offences; Administrative suspensions, including DWI course; Recovery program; and Suspensions relating to unpaid fines. Unauthorized personal identification code. Each of these is discussed in detail below. Subsequent CCC convictions The most common reason why there would be a significant lag period in first offenders relicensing is that they reoffended and were subsequently convicted of another CCC offence. A total of 4,685 drivers fell into this group (14 percent of the original first offenders). Thirty-seven percent of subsequent CC convictions were driving while disqualified. Prior to August 1, 1996, first offenders convicted of a subsequent offence within the look-back period would have served a one-year statutory disqualification. This increased to three years on August 1, 1996. Court-ordered prohibitions for an additional offence were six months prior to July 1, 1999. After this date, an additional offence within the look-back period would result in a court-ordered driving prohibition of two years. Exhibit 4.2 shows all first offenders by the year of eligibility, subgrouped into those who reoffended and those who did not reoffend. The percentage reoffending decreases from eligibility years 1993 to 1996 (from approximately 15 percent to 9 percent), before increasing to 17 percent in 1997. The percentage reoffending remains above 15 percent until 2003, when it begins decreasing sharply. The low percentage in 2004 and 2005 is likely due to the relatively short period of opportunity these drivers had to reoffend. Exhibit 4.2 First offenders who reoffended/did not reoffend by year of eligibility  Traffic offences A total of 3614 (11 percent) first offenders were convicted of committing a traffic offence between their prohibition start date and relicensing (if it occurred). Traffic offences covers a large group of provincially legislated infractions including speed limit violations, failing to wear a seat belt, etc. It should be emphasized that all offences reported here occurred while the first offender was driving illegally (unlicensed). Thirty-nine percent of first offenders receiving a traffic offence while they were unlicensed were cited as Not having a proper licence. First offenders not producing a licence would be able to avoid an additional CCC conviction unless the police officer took the time to verify the drivers licence status. Many police officers in Saskatchewan did not have a means of verifying a drivers licence on site during the study period. Forty-four percent of all first offenders convicted of committing a traffic offence never received a subsequent CCC conviction (due to being unlicensed). Exhibit 4.3 shows all first offenders grouped by the year of eligibility, subgrouped into those who received one or more traffic offences while they were unlicensed. The percentage convicted of a traffic offence(s) decreases from 1993 to 1996 from 15 to 10 percent, increases to 12 percent in 1997 before leveling off. After 2001, the percentage of first offenders convicted of a traffic offence dwindles to less than 5 percent by 2005. Again, the low percentage in 2005 is likely due to the relatively short period of opportunity these first offenders had to commit and be convicted of a traffic offence. Exhibit 4.3 First offenders who convicted of a traffic offence/were not convicted of a traffic offence by year of eligibility  The Relative Risk method was used to compare the probability of a first offender committing a traffic offence while unlicensed among those requiring longer than a year to relicense (if at all) versus those requiring one year or less. Those who committed a traffic offence were 10.4 times as likely to require greater than one year to relicense (if at all) versus one year or less. As traffic offences demonstrate that a first offender is continuing to drive while unlicensed, it is speculated that these drivers are not taking the program requirements seriously (i.e. failing to participate in the addiction screening program and not paying fines) or reoffending (and receiving another CCC conviction as discussed earlier). The results are shown in Exhibit 4.4. Exhibit 4.4 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offenders who committed a traffic offence with a lag period less than and greater than one year  Administrative suspensions Many of the first offenders had an administrative suspension placed on their driving record at some point while they were unlicensed. Administration suspensions that were common among first offenders were: Referral to an addiction screening program, resulting in: DWI course referrals; or Recovery program referrals; and Financial suspensions relating to unpaid fines. Addiction screening program Exhibit 4.5 shows the outcome of first offenders asked to attend an addiction screening session, in terms of subsequent referrals or no referral at all. A total of 22,265 first offenders were asked to attend at least one addiction screening session as a result of a first time CCC offence. Of the 22,265 first offenders, there were 13,187 (approximately 59 percent) first offenders who were subsequently referred to the DWI course (at least once) and 3,088 (14 percent) who were subsequently referred to the recovery program (at least once). Another 5,922 individuals (approximately 27 percent) asked to attend an addiction screening session did not receive a referral to either the DWI course or the recovery program or any other program. It can be assumed that these individuals did not complete the original addiction screening requirement. Exhibit 4.5 First offenders asked to attend an addiction screening session and the subsequent outcome  A total of 13,187 first offenders who received a referral into addiction screening were referred into the DWI course. As mentioned earlier, the DWI course consists of a weekend session designed to educate offenders on the dangers of driving while intoxicated. First offenders taking the DWI course are required to complete the course in order to be eligible for relicensing and are given significant advance notice of the required session. According to the Relative Risk method, first offenders receiving a referral to take a DWI course are 0.47 times as likely to require longer than a year to relicense versus one year or less. Two possible reasons for the relative success of first offenders receiving referrals to the DWI course are noted. First, these individuals have been diagnosed as not having a chemical dependency and not being a hard core drinker. They likely have a stronger motivation to change their drinking habits. As well, first offenders receiving a DWI course referral have made the effort to attend the initial addiction screening program; therefore, they have demonstrated a willingness to cooperate. The results are shown in Exhibit 4.6. Exhibit 4.6 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offenders who were referred into the DWI course with a lag period less than and greater than one year  A total of 3,088 first offenders were referred into the recovery program. Again, these would be first offenders who attended the initial addiction screening session. The recovery program is prescribed if the individual is identified as having a chemical dependency. The individual is required to remain in the program until such time that their counsellor has determined that they are a low-risk offender. First offenders participating in the recovery program are 1.50 times as likely to require longer than a year to relicense (versus one year or less). It is likely that these individuals are less successful than their DWI course counterparts due to their chemical dependency and the indefinite length of the program. Exhibit 4.7 shows the Relative Risk calculation. Exhibit 4.7 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offenders who were referred into the recovery program with a lag period less than and greater than one year  Finally, a total of 5,922 first offenders were referred to an addiction screening session but not referred to either the DWI course or recovery program or any other program. This represents 27 percent of all addiction screening referrals. Since there is no record of a referral to any program after their addiction screening referral, it can be assumed that the first offender did not complete the addiction screening requirement. All of these first offenders would remain unlicensed. Financial requirements A total of 7,150 first offenders (21 percent) were suspended during the period between their prohibition start date and their reinstatement date (if it occurred) for defaulting in repayment of money to SGI. (Some required payments may have been active prior to the prohibition start date.) According to the Relative Risk method, these first offenders are 5.44 times as likely to require longer than a year (versus one year or less) to relicense (if at all). Exhibit 4.8 shows the Relative Risk calculation. Exhibit 4.8 Calculation of Relative Risk: First offenders who were in default of a payment with a lag period less than and greater than one year  Unauthorized personal identification codes (PIC) A total of 1,747 first offenders (5 percent) had a warning code on their driving history for an unauthorized personal identification code (PIC). In most cases, the first offender had never had a drivers licence and a PIC was created and assigned to record a conviction or accident. The unauthorized PIC status is an indicator within SGI to ensure that when the first offender actually does come to a licence issuer, the identification is checked to make sure the person is not assigned another PIC. For purposes of licensing, these first offenders cannot be licensed until they produce proper identification (proper name and birth date) and complete the learners written exam. Individuals with an unauthorized PIC were 161.3 times as likely to require longer than one year to have their licence activated (if at all) versus one year or less. Exhibit 4.9 shows the results of the Relative Risk calculation. Exhibit 4.9 Calculation of Relative Risk: First-time CC offenders with an unauthorized PIC with a lag period less than and greater than one year  Unknown reasons A total of 369 first offenders (1 percent) did not relicense for an unknown reason. No driving activity was recorded after their conviction. These first offenders may have left the province or died without SGI knowing. Concluding remarks The above analysis provides further insight into factors associated with first offenders not relicensing within a year of eligibility. The factors are many and any one or all may contribute to the delay in relicensing or the first offender failing to relicense at all. It was determined that: Fourteen percent of the first offenders reoffended (convicted of another CCC offence); Eleven percent of the first offenders were convicted of committing at least one traffic offence while unlicensed; Twenty-seven percent of all first offenders required to attend an addiction screening session do not appear to have followed through no record was found for any subsequent referral to either the DWI course, the recovery program or any other remedial program option; Twenty-one percent of all first offenders were administratively suspended due to non-payment of a fine; and Five percent of first offenders had at some time an unauthorized PIC status code generally these first offenders were unlicensed at the time of their conviction. All of the above first offenders were more likely to take longer than one year to relicense than to do so in one year or less. First offenders attending an addiction screening session and subsequently being referred into the DWI course were as a whole more likely to require one year or less to relicense after their eligibility date versus greater than one year. Their attendance at the screening indicates their willingness to participate in the program. Their subsequent referral to the DWI course indicates they do not have a chemical dependency. First offenders receiving recovery program referrals were less successful in relicensing than their DWI course counterparts. The fact that they attended an addiction screening session indicates their willingness to participate; however, their referral to the recovery program indicates that they are considered high-risk reoffenders who have a chemical dependency. Their completion of the recovery program is at the discretion of their counsellor. Individuals having a recovery program referral were more likely to require more than one year beyond their eligibility date to relicense versus one year or less. The small group of first offenders did not have any licence information associated with them after their conviction. It is not known why these first offenders never relicensed. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GROUPS This section examines differences in relicensing between groups, excluding first offenders with eligibility dates in 2005. The proportion relicensing within one year or less of the eligibility date is compared between different first offender groups, namely: Alcohol related versus not directly related to alcohol first offenders; Youth offenders (aged 20 years or less on their eligibility date); Younger adult offenders aged 21 45 years on their eligibility date; Older adult offenders aged > 45 years on their eligibility date; Males; Females; and Males aged 21 45 years on their eligibility (considered to be high risk offenders) The results of the comparisons are shown in Exhibit 5.1. The Relative Risk calculations indicate the probability that the group shown will require greater than one year to relicense compared to one year or less. First offenders with alcohol related and not directly related to alcohol offences were first examined. First offenders with an offence not directly related to alcohol represent only 5 percent of the data set. They were at a higher risk of requiring longer than a year to relicense beyond their eligibility date (1.55, 1.41-1.69 95% confidence limits). This was not the case with alcohol related first offenders (0.98, 0.95-1.01 95% confidence limits). The difference may be explained in that even those with convictions not directly related to alcohol were still required to attend addiction screening. This group may not understand the connection between their conviction and doing an addictions screening for alcohol when the conviction is not drinking and driving related, such as dangerous driving. It should be noted that SGIs road safety programming has been over the study period primarily geared against alcohol offenders. Alcohol related first offenders have a lower non-participation rate (26 percent) than first offenders with a non alcohol related first offence (31 percent). Exhibit 5.1 Differences in relicensing (within one year of eligibility) among different groups  Three age groups were examined, youth (<21 years), younger adults (21- 45 years) and older adults (>45 years). Their age was calculated based on their eligibility date. The majority of the drivers fell into the middle group (61 percent) with the remaining split roughly equally between the other two groups. Among the three different age groups (youth, younger adults and older adults), the younger adults were more likely to require greater than one year versus one year or less to relicense (1.17, 1.13 1.21 95% confidence limits). In contrast older adults were more likely to relicense in one year or less versus greater than one year (0.49, 0.45-0.52 95% confidence limits). Youth were slightly less likely to require greater than one year versus one year or less however these results are not statistically significant (0.97, 0.92-1.02 95% confidence limits). A possible reason why older adults require less time may be their relative maturity and a higher respect for authority compared to the younger group. Youth may also be more likely to relicense within one year as compared to the young adults since many of them are still living with their parents and do not own their own vehicle. Their decision to complete relicensing requirements may be influenced by their parents. First offenders who are males aged 21-45 years were also examined. This group was only slightly more likely to require greater than one year to relicense (if at all) versus relicense in one year or less; however, the results are not significant (1.03, 0.99 1.07 95% confidence limits). Finally, male and female first offenders were examined. Males comprise 85 percent of all first offenders. Although they were a significantly larger group compared to females, males were less likely to require greater than one year to relicense versus one year or less (0.88, 0.85-0.91 95% confidence limits). In contrast, females were more likely to require greater than one year versus one year or less (1.65, 1.57-1.74 95% confidence limits). A possible reason for females requiring more time may be that they are more likely to be the secondary driver; therefore, they may have less need for relicensing than their male counterparts. COMPARISON WITH ONTARIO In the previous study, Trends in First-Time One-Year Licence Suspensions in Ontario: 1993 - 2001, it was found that there was a higher probability of a one-year suspension resulting in a licence not being reactivated immediately in the post-1998 period compared to the pre-1998 period among: One-year CCC convictions involving alcohol; and One-year CCC convictions not involving alcohol. The above conclusions were valid for suspensions attributed to all drivers and to males 21-45 years of age. There was also a higher probability of alcohol-related one-year suspensions with the licence still not reactivated six months later occurring in the post-1998 period compared to the pre-1998 period. The Relative Risk method was used to make comparisons between the results of the Ontario and the current study. Several differences should be noted however. First, the Ontario study had somewhat different criteria it still focused on first-time CCC convictions but examined one-year suspensions only, and included concurrent convictions and convictions that were only first-time CCC convictions due to the rolling Look Back period. Reinstatements are also done automatically in Ontario, as opposed to Saskatchewan where a first offender must go to a licence issuer to purchase a licence. Additionally, the study was examining suspensions, not drivers. Finally, the data set provided to Synectics did not allow a complete review an extract representing 3 percent of the dataset was sampled and, from it, inferences were made about the entire population. With the above qualifications in mind, Exhibit 6.1 compares the Relative Risk calculations for both Ontario and Saskatchewan. The results suggest that the probability of relicensing immediately (in the case of Ontario) or within one week (in the case of Saskatchewan) has significantly (statistically) increased in both provinces in the period after the implementation of their remedial measures programs compared to the period prior to the implementation of their remedial measures programs; however, the increase is less in Saskatchewan for all comparisons. Exhibit 6.1 Comparison of Relative Risk results: Ontario and Saskatchewan  Licences that were not reactivated immediately as a result of an alcohol related suspension in Ontario were 3.62 times as likely in the period after the remedial measures program was introduced compared to 1.65 times as likely in Saskatchewan (allowing for a one week grace period), as compared to the period prior to the remedial measures program being introduced. Comparing non-alcohol related suspensions in Ontario to Saskatchewan, Ontario had a 2.16 times higher likelihood of a suspension not being reactivated immediately compared to a 1.09 times higher likelihood of a suspension not reactivated within one week, comparing the period after the remedial measures programs (in both provinces) were introduced to the period prior. Differences among males 21-45 years showed a similar trend. Finally, alcohol related one-year suspensions still not reactivated six months later were 3.35 times more likely in Ontario compared to 1.53 times more likely in Saskatchewan, when the periods after the remedial measures programs were introduced in each province were compared to the period prior to its introduction. Explanation of results The above results indicate that the introduction of the remedial measures program in Saskatchewan, while increasing the likelihood of a first offender not relicensing within one week or six months, had less of an impact than in Ontario. The remedial measures program in Saskatchewan, in combination with other sanctions and incentives, is more effective at encouraging first offenders to complete program requirements in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. The above is supported by a comparison of non-participation rates in Saskatchewans addiction screening program and Ontarios Back on Track program. According to this report, 27 percent of Saskatchewan first offenders referred to addiction screening did not complete this requirement. In contrast, according to a 2004 study by the Program Manager of Back on Track, 55 percent of individuals notified that they were required to participate in the program did not enroll (at the time of the study). There are several explanations for the relative success in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. These can be summarized as: There are more incentives to complete program requirements in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario; Program requirements are more straightforward in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario; Apart from Safe Driver Recognition financial penalties (or accident surcharges and license premiums previously), there are no additional insurance premiums for first offenders relicensing in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario; and There is a higher likelihood of being charged with an alcohol related offence in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. Each of these is explained below. First, there are more incentives to complete program requirements in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. In Saskatchewan, there is a possibility of early reinstatement to either a restricted or provisional licence. This is a significant motivation to first time offenders, particularly among those living in rural areas. In contrast, in Ontario there is no possibility of early reinstatement. Individuals convicted are required to complete the one-year suspension regardless of whether they have completed Back on Track. Second, program requirements are less straightforward in Ontario compared to Saskatchewan. In Saskatchewan, fees associated with the remedial measures program are significantly lower ($150 in Saskatchewan for the DWI course compared to $450 in Ontario). In Ontario, beginning in 2001, convicted offenders are required to attend a follow-up interview at least six months after the end of the education/treatment component, increasing the amount of time required to complete the program. In Saskatchewan, drivers attending the DWI course are only required to attend a weekend session with no follow-up interview. Related to the above is the cost of automobile insurance. In Ontario, automobile insurance costs for an individual convicted of an alcohol related CCC offence are typically several thousand dollars a year. This is likely a significant factor in an individuals ability to relicense. In contrast, in Saskatchewan, apart from a one time $500 penalty as part of Safe Driver Recognition (or accident surcharges and license premiums previously) to be paid no later than licence reinstatement, first time offenders do not pay any additional insurance premiums as a result of their conviction. Finally, according to Statistics Canada, charge rates for alcohol related offences are three times as high in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario, as shown in Exhibit 6.2, despite Saskatchewan having lower levels of alcohol consumption. Drivers in Saskatchewan have a higher risk of being charged of an alcohol offence compared to Ontario, which suggests that there is a higher risk of being caught drinking while intoxicated. The increased level of police enforcement in Saskatchewan provides additional motivation to first offenders to complete program requirements and not continue to drive while intoxicated. Exhibit 6.2 Comparison of charge rates resulting from alcohol related charges in Saskatchewan and Ontario  This studys findings may provide some explanation for the higher level of participation in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. The possibility of early instatement (to a restricted licence), lower fees, and straightforward program requirements (for the DWI course) encourage participation in addiction screening. Insurance premiums are significantly higher in Ontario. Finally, the higher charge rate in Saskatchewan suggests that there is greater police presence in the province, providing another motivation not to drive unlicensed and to complete relicensing requirements. CONCLUDING REMARKS Review of findings Using information provided to Synectics by SGI, this report presents trends in first offenders, in terms of whether: They are completing requirements to relicense; The length of time between their licence eligibility date and relicensing; Reasons for delays in relicensing past the licence eligibility date; Differences among alcohol related offenders and offenders convicted of an offence not directly related to alcohol; Differences among males and females; and Differences among different age groups (<21 years, 21-45 years, and >45 years). First offenders were examined having eligibility dates spanning the dates January 1, 1993 to December 31, 2005. This left 34,861 first offender meeting the study criteria. The findings of this study suggest that 72 percent of first offenders were successful in meeting relicensing requirements in Saskatchewan, in that they had their licence reinstated to either full, provisional or restricted privileges. Slightly less than 27 percent were not successful last known information indicates they are still unlicensed. The remaining group were either deceased or left the province. These first offenders were not considered in the remainder of the study. Delays in relicensing were examined. On average, among those who did relicense, 44 percent did so within one week and 85 percent within one year of their eligibility date. Changes in the proportion of first offenders successful in relicensing were examined by year of eligibility on a year-by-year basis. Examination of first offenders requiring more than a week to complete relicensing requirements show a significant increase between 1996 and 1997. This change appears to be associated with the changes to legislation that took place on August 1, 1996 and would have affected first offenders with full privilege eligibility dates beginning in 1997. First offenders in the post-1997 period are 1.61 times as likely to require greater than one week (if at all) after their eligibility date versus one week or less to relicense. A one year lag period was also examined. A similar significant increase was noted between 1996 and 1997. First offenders in the post-1997 period are 1.55 times as likely to require greater than one year (if at all) versus one year or less after their eligibility date to relicense. The data set allowed for an examination of events that took place in the period between the first offenders conviction date and relicensing, if it occurred. Reasons for a first offender not relicensing in a timely fashion are complex. Often there are multiple overlapping reasons. First offenders more likely failing to relicense within one year of their eligibility date either: Reoffended (convicted of committing another CCC offence); Convicted of committing a traffic offence while unlicensed; Did not complete addiction screening requirements; Failed to make a required payment; or Were unlicensed at the time of the conviction (unauthorized PIC). First offenders participating in the addiction screening program that subsequently were referred to the DWI Course were more likely to relicense within one year of their eligibility date. Their attendance at the screening indicates their willingness to cooperate. Their subsequent referral to the DWI Course indicates the counseller believed that they do not have a chemical dependency. In contrast, first offenders participating in the addiction screening program that subsequently were referred to the recovery program were more likely to not relicense within one year of their eligibility. The fact that they attended an addiction screening session indicates their willingness to cooperate; however their referral to the recovery program indicates that they are considered high-risk reoffenders with a chemical dependency. Their completion of the recovery program depends on the discretion of their counsellor. First offenders with recovery program referrals were more likely to require more than one year beyond their eligibility date to relicense. Different groups were examined in terms of their likelihood of relicensing within one year of their eligibility. First offenders with alcohol related and not directly related to alcohol convictions were examined first. Only first offenders with convictions not directly related to alcohol were at a higher risk of requiring greater than one year to relicense (if at all) beyond their eligibility date. Females and those aged 21 45 years were also at a higher risk of requiring greater than one year to relicense. The results of the study were compared to the results of the earlier Ontario study. Comparison of relicensing in the periods before and after the introduction of remedial measures programs indicate that while there is a greater likelihood of first offenders requiring additional time for relicensing in both provinces after the introduction of the remedial measures program, the difference is less pronounced in Saskatchewan. It appears that the introduction of the remedial measures program had less impact on delays in first offender relicensing in Saskatchewan as compared to Ontario. The above is supported by a comparison of non-participation rates in the remedial measures programs in both provinces. In Saskatchewan, 27 percent of first time offenders referred to addiction screening did not follow through by attending their initial session. Research in Ontario, suggests a non-participation rate of 55 percent. Reasons for the difference in participation may be the incentives built into program requirements in Saskatchewan, their straightforwardness, the prohibitive cost of insurance for Ontario first offenders, and the higher likelihood of being charged of an alcohol related offence in Saskatchewan compared to Ontario. Further research The data set provided by SGI has a wealth of information. The second study by Synectics, Driving While Disqualified in Saskatchewan, evidence of first offenders continuing to drive while unlicensed was examined. With respect to accidents, Synectics will examine who was at fault and whether the first offender was more likely to be at fault than other drivers. Given the extensive information contained in the data set, Synectics was able to conduct a detailed analysis of first offenders. Several follow up questions that have merit are: What is the relationship between participation in the addiction screening program and driver age, sex, offence type and place of residence? How have participation rates in the addiction screening program changed over time? Is there evidence that they are improving? Why are certain groups requiring more time to relicense than others? Are there differences between urban and rural areas in relicensing? Recommendations for SGI In the previous section, it was shown that first offenders in Saskatchewan were more successful at relicensing than their counterparts in Ontario. Incentives and disincentives were identified that could provide more motivation to Saskatchewan first offenders to complete relicensing requirements. However, the overall impact of the remedial measures program (in conjunction with other legislative changes) has been an increase in the likelihood of delayed reinstatement. In addition, 27 percent of all first offenders referred to the addiction screening program show no evidence of participating. The Province should consider measures that will further encourage first offenders to meet program requirements, including participating in the addiction screening program. Currently, SGI sends out a single letter to first offenders immediately following their conviction date informing them of the program requirements, including the requirement to attend an addiction screening session (including the location and a phone number to call for their appointment) and the possibility of early reinstatement. Given that the letter is sent out at the very beginning of the disqualification period, some first offenders may need to be reminded about the program requirements further into the disqualification. It is therefore recommended that as a matter of routine, a follow up letter be sent six months into their licence disqualification, reminding them of the program requirements and key eligibility dates (for early reinstatement to a restricted, provisional, or full licence privilege). The letter may be customized to identify additional requirements the first offender needs to fulfill, such as a fine payment or personal identification. With regard to the issue of first offenders not participating in the addiction screening program, it is recommended that all first offenders showing no evidence of attending the initial addiction screening session be contacted directly by phone six months into their licence disqualification. The purpose of the call would be to remind the first offender of the program requirements and to let them know that they are being monitored. Deterrent strategies This study also identified first offenders who reoffended under the CCC or were convicted of committing a traffic offence while they were unlicensed. Strategies that have been implemented in Saskatchewan to counter this are: Increasing enforcement in selected areas; Providing the police officer with direct access to licence records; and Creating and distributing hot sheets. The above strategies can be implemented elsewhere within a short time frame at a relatively low cost. Increasing enforcement in selected areas has been shown to have a general deterrent effect on unlicensed drivers. Jurisdictions having highly visible and repeated roadside checkpoints targeting drinking and driving and unlicensed drivers can be effective. The general rationale for its effectiveness is that it increases the perception on the part of the unlicensed driver that they may be caught, therefore increasing the likelihood that they will not attempt to drive unlicensed and seek to complete relicensing requirements. Police officers have not always have direct access to licence records. In this study, thirty-nine percent of all first offenders (unlicensed at the time) were convicted of Not having a proper licence. Forty-four percent of the first offenders convicted of a traffic offence while unlicensed never received a CCC conviction. Creating and distributing hot sheets targets first offenders who are continuing to drive. This strategy has been widely used. With respect to this study, first offenders not participating in the addiction screening program past their relicensing date are clear candidates for a hot sheet. It is understood that Saskatchewan has currently implemented these deterrent strategies, although they have only been in effect in the latter years examined in this study. Appendix A groups excluded from study Groups excluded from study Convictions not meeting the criteria presented in Section 1.0 were excluded from the study, in order to eliminate confounding factors that would influence the trends observed, as described below: Repeat first offenders - Saskatchewan uses a look back period in determining whether or not a conviction is a first offence. For the period of this study drivers having not had a conviction for the past five years were considered first offenders. In this study, it was decided to examine true first offenders only. That is, to exclude subsequent offences not matter how far into the future they were. It was felt that a repeat first offender could behave differently than a true first offender, as they would be familiar with the relicensing requirements. First offenders with eligibility dates prior to January 1, 1993 or after December 31, 2005 Due to data base purging over time, early driving history for the period of this study may be incomplete; only after 1994 is completeness guaranteed. Synectics compared the numbers of first offenders with eligibility dates in 1992, 1993 and 1994 and determined that 1993 and 1994 were similar to later years, while 1992 was different. On that basis, first offenders with eligibility dates prior to January 1, 1993 were excluded. First offenders with eligibility dates occurring after December 31, 2005 were also excluded from the study since many would not have had an opportunity to complete the licence reinstatement requirements. The data set provided to Synectics represents driving activity as recorded up to February 2nd, 2006, the date the data were extracted from SGI on February 2nd, 2006. Non-Saskatchewan resident convictions Saskatchewan driver histories may contain CCC convictions that occurred before the driver became a Saskatchewan resident. Since these first offenders may not have been treated the same as Saskatchewan first offenders, they were not included in the study group. First offenders receiving additional CCC convictions on the same conviction date First offenders can be convicted of other CCC convictions on the same conviction date. These additional CCC convictions (depending on the number of additional offences) would be considered to be second, third or subsequent offences and would require the offender to lose driving privileges for the period of the longest disqualification. It was believed these first offenders could behave differently than a true first offender. Therefore, it was decided to exclude them from the study group.  Suggett, J; and Malone, B. (2004) Trends in First Time One-Year Licence Suspensions in Ontario: 1993-2001  Under The Highway Traffic Act.  Suggett, J; and Malone, B. (2004) Trends in First Time One-Year Licence Suspensions in Ontario: 1993-2001  To SGIs knowledge, based on the driving history now available, the offender had not been convicted of a first offence previously.  Five other program options exist in Saskatchewan: Driver Improvement, Defensive Driving, Medical Review, Commercial Driver Training, and Alcohol & Drug Education. Only 71 first offenders were referred one of these five programs (0.2 percent of all first offenders in the study group).  First offenders with a death status or left province code have been removed and will not be included in the remainder of this report.  Further information on the Relative Risk method can be found in the 1998 Transport Canada publication (TP 13238) by D. Stewart.  A Relative Risk value of 1.00 means that there is an equal probability of a event (first offenders with a lag period greater than one week) occurring in the two years being compared. A Relative Risk value of greater than 1.00 means that there is a higher probability of the event occurring in the current year compared to the first year. A Relative Risk value of less than 1.00 means that there is a lower probability of the event occurring in the second year compared to the first year. The Upper and Lower 95% values provide confidence limits to the Relative Risk value. If both the Upper and Lower 95% values are above 1.00, statistically there is a 95% level of confidence that the probability of the event occurring is higher in the current year compared to the first year. If both the Upper and Lower 95% values are below 1.00, statistically there is a 95% level of confidence that the probability of the event occurring is lower in the current year compared to the first year. If the Upper 95% value is above 1.00 and the Lower 95% value is below 1.00, statistically it cannot be said with certainty that the probability of the event occurring is higher or lower in the current year compared to the first year.  Excluding those first offenders who are deceased or left the province.  Some individuals (reoffenders) were referred to an Addiction screening session more than once.  Sixty-eight individuals were referred to one of five other existing remedial programs.  First offenders with an eligibility date in 2005 were excluded from the calculation.  According to a 2004 presentation at the OCCID Countermeasures Conference, by Rania Shuggi, Program Manager of Back on Track.  Starting in 2001, there was also an ignition interlock requirement (for the first year after the suspension) with associated fees.  Statistics based on Juristat data, Table 4: Number and rate of persons charged with impaired driving by province and territory as part of the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey.  According to recent statistics compiled by the Brewers Association of Canada, the annual per capita consumption of beer, spirits, and wine among adults in Saskatchewan was 15 percent less than Ontario.     PAGE   PAGE iii Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 . PAGE 20 Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 PAGE 32 Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 . PAGE 34 Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 . PAGE 35 Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 . PAGE 44 Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 . Trends in First-Time Licence Disqualifications in Saskatchewan Report to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Canada April 2006 >N " $ 0 1 ? @ p y z  ¸xe%jhi|h?5B* UaJph hLh? h*p\ hsn5hlVUh%5 h%5h% hlVUh%h%^JmH sH hlVUh%^JmH sH hlVUh%5CJjhlVUh%5CJU h|\ h?f\jhiUmHnHuh? hsn\ hi\hihi\!@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!S $$p^pa$gd%$$ `a$gd% tgd?f$a$gdi $da$gdiG TWX  # $ % & ' ( ) * + !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -$`a$gd%-$8^`8a$gd% -$8`8a$gd% -$^a$gd%-$8^`8a$gd% -$`a$gd%+ , - . / 0 1 > ? @ A V p q r s _  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!k$a$ tgd?f$$8^`8a$gd%-$8^`8a$gd%      ˼˼xexQeFeˆh5B* ph'jBhi|hn]5B* Uph$jhi|hi|5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph*jhi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* ph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph%jhi|h?5B* UaJphhi|h?5B* aJph ( ) * + . / = > ? Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a } ~  ӮӚӋwbwVw?,jhi|hn]5>*UmHnHuh5mHnHu)j<hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu,jhi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu ȴȟzzlUzȴ,jhi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j6hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu     - . / 0 3 4 T U ֱ{n{X{E{7hi|hi|5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph*j hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* ph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHu)j0 hi|hn]5UmHnHuU V p q r s t u v w x m_mHm4m&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu,j!hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uphh5B* ph'j*!hi|hn]5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph$jhi|hi|5B* Uph v ^ ' @W p>ZH g !  < = > X Y Z [ ܻܢzlzUzz@ܻ)j#hi|hn]5UmHnHu,j"hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j$"hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu[ \ ] ^ _ ` | } ~  ӿӫӫwwbVӿӫh5mHnHu)j$hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu,j#hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHu    ! " # $ % & ' ( ) E F G H K L _ ` мpdШмV?м,j%hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHuh5mHnHu)j%hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu,j$hi|hn]5>*UmHnHu` a { | } ~  죏{m{V{{A)j'hi|hn]5UmHnHu,j&hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j &hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHu  :;<=>?@Aӿӿ쿋wbwVwC%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uphh5mHnHu)j(hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu,j'hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHuAB^_`ade~λ񚇚shO;'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5B* ph'j(hi|hn]5B* Uph$jhi|hi|5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph*j}(hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* phǮޚދwbwVw?ޚ,jq*hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuh5mHnHu)j)hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu,jw)hi|hn]5>*UmHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphuhi|hi|5mHnHu456PQRTUVWXYuvwx{|ܳȧȎzlUz@)j+hi|hn]5UmHnHu,jk+hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j*hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu    +,ƲƞyƞjjUƲƞ)j,hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu,je,hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuh5mHnHu,-.12MNOijkmnopqrмpdШмV?м,jY.hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHuh5mHnHu)j-hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu,j_-hi|hn]5>*UmHnHu죏|m`mJ|m7m$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph*jS/hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* ph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j.hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHu789;<=>?@\]^_bc}޿ެl^lGl3l&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu,jM0hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uphh5B* ph'j/hi|hn]5B* Uph$jhi|hi|5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph}~ܻܢzlzUzz@ܻ)j1hi|hn]5UmHnHu,jG1hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j0hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu789STUWXYZ[ӿӫӫwwbVӿ?-jhi|hi|0J!B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j2hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu,jA2hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHu[\xyz{«kSkDkhB* mHnHphu/j3hi|hn]B* UmHnHphu,jhi|hi|B* UmHnHphu#hi|hi|B* mHnHphu,hi|hi|B* CJOJQJmHnHphu-jhi|hi|0J!B* UmHnHphu2j;3hi|hn]>*B* UmHnHphu hi|hi|B* mHnHphu$hi|hi|0J!B* mHnHphu ϼ|d|U|ϥ<0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuhB* mHnHphu/j4hi|hn]B* UmHnHphu,jhi|hi|B* UmHnHphu#hi|hi|B* mHnHphu,hi|hi|B* CJOJQJmHnHphu$hi|hi|0J!B* mHnHphu-jhi|hi|0J!B* UmHnHphu2j54hi|hn]>*B* UmHnHphu !=>?@CDtuvƭvavUv>,j)6hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuh5mHnHu)j5hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu,j/5hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu  %&'ABCɵɠ{{mV{ɵA)j7hi|hn]5UmHnHu,j#7hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j6hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHuCEFGHIJfghilmƲmZL9L$jhi|hi|5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph*j8hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* ph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuh5mHnHu غuggSغ'j9hi|hn]5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph*j9hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|5B* phhi|hi|0J!5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uphh5B* ph$jhi|hi|5B* Uph'j8hi|hn]5B* Uph   '()*-.DEF`abdefghiӮӚӋwbwVwC4hi|hi|0J!5B* ph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uphh5mHnHu)j:hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu,j:hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuiλ䚇shO;'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5B* ph'j;hi|hn]5B* Uph$jhi|hi|5B* Uphhi|hi|5B* ph$hi|hi|5B* CJOJQJph%jhi|hi|0J!5B* Uph*j ;hi|hn]5>*B* Uphhi|hi|0J!5B* phhi|hi|5B* ph9:;<?@ǮޚދwbwVw?ޚ,j<hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuh5mHnHu)j<hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu,j<hi|hn]5>*UmHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphuhi|hi|5mHnHus.Whi67yz  !"!"! !"!h !"!E!"!"!"!-!"!K!"!-!"!h gdq'$a$gd ;fgd ;f$a$gd ;f$a$gd}%gd}%$a$gd}%gdL@PQRlmnpqrstuܳȧȎzlUz@)jv>hi|hn]5UmHnHu,j=hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphuh5mHnHu)j|=hi|hn]5UmHnHu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu   '()+,-./VƲƞyƞjjUƲHA hLhLjhi|h?5U)jp?hi|hn]5UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu,j>hi|hn]5>*UmHnHuhi|hi|5mHnHu'hi|hi|0J!5B* mHnHphu&hi|hi|5CJOJQJmHnHu0jhi|hi|0J!5B* UmHnHphu&jhi|hi|5UmHnHuh5mHnHuVWi'*4@Xgm|w 7@J||xh>hhh#ch(]h]$hh*phq'hchuh ;f6huhu6jhu0J,6UhqIh ;f6h ;fh ;f5B* phh?5B* phh ;fh ;f5B* phh,h}%h}%5B* phhLhLaJ. /UW9;  :DF   $ ( 2 F K R ` o t  !!!!/!0!!!+"""""""мидаЬ఼h#hS9fh/hvhbh*phZhh^Q/h- Wh#7hNh#ch#c5h#chsshss6huh ;fhq'hh3hhuhG&hyh;Qh]$hjhS9f0J,UhS9fhvh#ch/hvH(((|)))p*v****.+/+1+c+d+e++++,, ,2,@,F,L,b,,,,,,-$-%-(-)-.-7-9-V------------8..½hh hh5h 5H*aJhLh hq@H*aJ h H*aJh>hq@h hq@5 hv5 h 5h h 5H*aJhG&h;Qh0:huhAhvhv5hvhxJh]$6++++,q"[ E[ "[ $$Ifa$gdq@l'kd?$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la,,,3,L,q [ "[ "[ "$$Ifa$gdq@l'kdF@$$IflF ,"   t06    44 laL,M,b,,,q"[ "[ [ E$$Ifa$gdq@l'kd@$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la,,,%-V-q [ E[ E[ h $$Ifa$gdq@l'kd@$$IflF ,"   t06    44 laV-W----qh [ E[ h [ h $$Ifa$gdq@l'kdQA$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la--8...qh [ h [ h [ "$$Ifa$gdq@l'kdA$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la....1/u/qh [!"[![![!$$Ifa$gdq@l'kdB$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la........0/1/2/t/u/v/w//////d0l0m0q0s0v00000000111111 1P1111222ŭ~vhsshA6hsshss6jh}0J,6UhqIhA6hAh 0h? hXgh?hX!h]$hhhhorhhqI hv5 h 5h h CJaJh4CJaJh h CJaJh h 5 hh5.u/v/w///r0111 122a4b4 !"!"!"!h {v!"q!-v!"v!iv!"gdAgdd~gdXg L^`Lgdgdq'gkd\B$$Ifl,"" t0644 la 2333L4]4b4|4~4444444444444444556575d5s5555555666G6L6M6N666666667787轹˵˱ϭ襝譙hUka hR5h:h:5hXghVTh^hG&hG&6hG&hR6h:h7lhQ)h?vjhR0J,UhB|Ohi{h]4 h:h]4 h:h^ h:h''hRh''hsshvwhd~h?"2b4448555N6668797:7;7J7::::O;;;B<k<!E!"!"!E!"!E!"!"!h !"!"!"!!"!"!E!"!E!E!"!"!"gddngdUkagdVT & F 0^`0gd: & F 0^`0gd]4gd''87;7J7t7u7w75878:8Q88889)9a99999~:::::::::::::::::N;O;p;x;;;;;;1<4<5<@<A<<<<+=;=?=M=Q=Z=\=======༸బ hG&6h&hG&h`8hhhhhh6hhVTh hdnhcwhGhsshHhhssh?"6hsshss6hd/hUkahQ)Bk<<<>=?=+?,?:?@@@@@AFBqBB3CCCrD!E!"!E!"!-!"!!i!"!"!"!"!E!h !"!"!E!"!"!h  & F gda; & F 0^`0gda; L^`Lgda;gda;gdXggdHh & FgdHhgddn=>v>>*?+?,?`?c?????????@@J@k@@@@A AAANAVAeAmAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBoBpBBBB3CBCIChC路ݟhhxhfhh]{mH sH hG&mH sH huha;mH sH h&Ph?"6h&Ph&P6 hcwha;h?" hcwhhcwha;hvh&PhsshHhh ;hCCCCCCCCCCCCDDD D D2D3D6DoDrDDDDDDDDDEEEEEEFAFCFNFFFFGGG/GDGEGFG컷 h^95 h^9h h^9h^9hh5h`8h`85h`8hdhdnhXg5hdnhhXghhB:h&Ph&Ph!H*h?" hR ha; hcwh! hcwha;ha;hhuhhcw1rDDFGGGHGiGjGIIIII&JIJfJJJJJKCKDKWL!!9!"!"!"!!!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!  & FgdeXOgdrogdgd3gdPgdPgdHhgdXggdd~gdXggdXgFGGGHGLGNGTGUGhGjGmGnGsGtGyGzGGGGGG'HWHaHcHHH'IkIlIzI|IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJڽڲګڲ蟛諓{hh3hAyhroh&Ph&P6h&Ph1 6h`d]hhF|'hR[ hdh!l hdhF|'hh&P hdhdh'H hdh! hdhP hdh3 hdhcwhPhdhihg-h''hUka/IJeJfJJJKK"KBKCKDKSKKKKKKKKL L L-L8LVLWLXLcL~LLLLLLLLLLMKMLM}MMMMMMMMMMMMN N%NeN{N𱩱ҝhO4?hVZh7%wh&Ph'Hhsh]~h]~5h]~hW.} hdhf`oh hdh" hdhdh&Ph&P6 hdh!l hdheUheUhdheXOhrohh9WLXLLLMMOOOOOPPPIRJRKRLRhRTTVVXX!"!E!"! !"!K!"!"!.D)!"!!h !!i!"!"!"!!-!"!!"!K!"gdY*gd3 & FgdrogdeXOgdeXO $ & Fa$gd]~ & FgdeXO{NNNO O5O6OhfZEhNh,h4EjhL&0J,Uh>hW.}hL&h hUJmH sH hUJhm# h h!l h h/h]$hh/AW W WWWW4W=WDWJWSWZW[WuWvWWWW XXXAXBXdXgXmXnXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYYY YYYY,Y.YBYYYYYYYYYYYYǿػطسطثثؤثh: hcbhfZEhfZEh>hW.}hhIXhBQhM5 h\5hBQhBQ5hL&hBQh,>hUJh hT2h]$hhNh/h,?YYZZZ&ZEZNZUZWZYZcZdZeZtZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ[[8[E[`[o[[[[[[w\x\}\\\\\J]L]þȶգ嘔h Kph\-hgh7~h,hW.}hL& h\hnbjTIh\h\Uhcbh]$5hcbh5 h>5 hW.}5hcbh,>5 h\5hcbhBQ5hcbhBQh]$h hcbhfZEhNhfZEh>2XXZZZZM]a]u^v^^^3_4_D`E`jaka b b'c(ccce!K!/!"!9!! !"!"!E!"!"! !"! !"!E!"! !"!h !!KgdUJ & Fgd9gd9$a$gdUJgd'Hgdz+gdL&gdnbgdcbgdY*L]M]a]f]u]]]]]]]]] ^^^n^o^^^^^^^___)_4_C_____ ```R`]`e`t```````aaUaeagaiajaaaaaa bb\b^bfbtbپپپٶٲ£ h hvhvhW.}hehvwhhhI h heh h~~h!lhIHh9h]$hhghT2h;@h'HhUJ hBQhL&@tbbbbb c ccc%c&c'ccccccccccdpdtddddddeOeXedeveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeff"fBfFfIfKfffffg̵̼̟hq h hehgt h h h hhksGhhW.}h~hh;@h/hwhUJhUuhT2h]$hh~~hh'hv>eegggghhWkXkll=n>n?nYnZnnneooo p!"! !"!h !"!h !!9!"!i!"!i!!"!"!E!"!h !"!"!"gdgda;  & F gdggdnbgdXg & FgdIgdPgdPgdY*ggg"g8g9gAgBgKgLgggggghhhhhhi iii i%i/ifigioisiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijj$j%jFjNjOjSjfjgjjjjjjjjjƿ͸شʹh h h$q h h h he h he?hU)he?hhIhkhh~hhhh~~h/Gjjjjjjjjkkk$k(k1k9k;kIkTkVkWkkkkkkkl lclul|lllllllllllllmm`mmmmmm=n>n?nInXnYnZnnnnnnnnnn¾ݺ h ha;hh ha;hNhzVh**hE>4 h$qhIhXhhIhPhW.}hhhksG h h$qh$qhIhhBnn>oModoeoooo ppppppp&p45 h}5 h 5h(h(5hnbhRhOhRXhE>4hE>4hE>45hIh`h h''hha;h h ha; h h$q0 ppvqwqqqquuvvvvfwgwxx|z}zzzz!!i!"!"! T3!x(!"!"!!΃!!!i!"!i!"!K!"!"!a!!"gdm]$a$gdq}$a$gdm]gd``gdf$$a$gd}gd``gd}$a$gd&?LgdZgd qqrr'r(r)r*r3rOrQrXr\r]r^r_ror}r~rrrrrrrrrs!ssssssBtttuuuuvvvvvvvǼǸǼǼǼǼҼǴ{h h h}jjh h Uh h3h}jeh3h3U h175ha^h}5hAh h"Xh}hW.}h} h}ha^h3hhH*h h}h h}h_ Mh{ha^h<hCO/vv v7vBvVv[v]v_v`vhvivlvvvvw w/wCwGwbwcwdwewfwgw{w|wwwwxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxyy$y.y/yByȽĵ̤ēhm] h~-5h%bhm5hm h>~5h>~h>~5h>~hx' h<hx'h[BhBhgh&|Wh- Wh3h<hh9hyh%bhZch6h7Jh 0:ByDyiyjynyuyyyyyyyyyyyy#zBzSzaz|z}zzzzzzzzze{x{{{|{{{{{{{{{{{ | |Ž͕͕͍~z~h7JhF h<hRhRhx :h>~ h<hL hm]hj4jphm]hm]U htz5 h>~5 h~-5hj4hj45hAh%bhZchvhpjh- W0J,Uhmh`h[Bh^hm]hm]hm]H*.ze{{~~de "#67#%&_`/0!E!!"!"!9!!!!l+.!"!x(!"!"!"!!2!"!"!"!"!!gdRtgdK_dgdcgdNdgdW.}gd``gdRgdgdm] |1|A|L|`|b|n|||||||||||||},}=}M}v}z}}}}}}}~~-~6~7~E~h~k~l~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o~*bftͼѸѸh:hZbhDh< h~-5hRhR5hRh~a6h hx' h<hx'hZchm]hRhFhvhphE܀ $4AQRZ[cdeop !"#T^gpqr̂ւׂ؂قڂ&ϻ𘐋}hoqjh`50J,U hdz5h[vh[v5hch<h7 h|hG;Cjvh|h|U h~a65 hF5 h75 h<5 h~-5hFhF5 h&?L5hx :h"Phm]h~a6hZbhDh]$hhZc1&Rft׃ 349:<Gqބ$%'EGIXdil456û覢hNh%bhRthlhl5hKsh!hg* hH5 hHhH h[v5h/ph/p6 h|6 h'$>5 hW5h[vhoq5h[vjhl0J,UhO6hBXh~a6h'$>hoqhl4ʆΆ*?Nydx܉݉#$%wNj`azƲzhkhk5hYhYEh|hrphk h|hK_jh|h|U hK_5 h[v5 hYE5 h~a65 hc5 h{Z5 h75 hdz5h[vh[v5hx'hYQha+ThNhh]$hh7h<h:0',:ƎΎ/012=BDEHIO]_o~ƏΏļ{wsh~a6hYEh 9h:Jh5 hLh[vh hWhi|jhWhWUhi|hc5 h}5 h 95 hi|5hi|hi|5hYhi|hWh t hW6h th t6h hW5hkhk5hYQhk hk5-02Os/12[\]^_`abfgi!{!!Z+!!z.!"!x(!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!!w2!"!9!"!!!{gd**gdi|gddzdgdcdgdYgdTgd[vgdRtΏЏяۏ܏ݏ.2Xab|ّڑ(OS`jklz’ʒ֒ڒ !rst~Ͽϧ磛뛖 hYE5 h 95hFhT5hYhh~h1hHukhdzh]$hh:h5 hRthYEhYQhO6hUah*h 9hT hi|5hRhT5hK_h~a69/012r{|˔Ք֔ٔ ,-3fj23:<?ko{ї2Zߺߘߘߐߘߘߌ׌׌h/hhlhHuk5hH hHukhHuk h N6h/phHuk6 hHuk5 h N5h[vhHuk5h+ hi|5h[vhT5hYEh 9hThHuk h|hLjh|h|U hYE5 hT52Z[\^`blmnoȘژۘBR(ĚΚњ!%')*+-/24JR_jܮhO6 h%=m6h th%=m6h t h N5h%=mhkhi|5hYQhHhi|h| h|hdzjh|h|U hK_5 hT5 h75 hYE5 hi|5h[vhT5h|h&?LhjhT h[vhT2jț fghij|}ŜƜ  )*Vcdmqѝޝߝ ÿ÷~vhth`5h} h 9hx' h 9h`jhO60J,U hO65htht5h`hYEh34h 9h_ MhTh/h%=m h Nhi|j.h Nh NUhi|hc5 hG5 h}5 hi|5hi|hi|5hjhi|-ij} V !ԣգ#!"!!E!"!"!"!E!E!E! ! !"!K!"!h !"!"~"j"$$Ifa$gd+ l'$a$gdcgdtPgd[Bgd/gd_ Mgd/gd/gd%=m  *:@JXY_Ҟ   !+12@AJOXfvġ#%,28fk~ѵѱݵűѱhvh%lh%lH*hhCh%lhh/hwT&hi|h34htht5h}hth`5h 9hth}5h`h|ohYE h 9h`h=Ң  ptңӣգ#$%/3:;IVcdno{|h]$CJaJhCJaJhO6CJaJhcCJaJhIHCJaJhxdhcCJaJ hc5hxdhc5 hsbu5heshc5hes h 9hxdh ]hChxdhxdhxd5h}h}hc5#$)/4:"q"q "q"q "$Ifgd+ l'zkd($$Ifl0,"VB t0644 la:;Epy^"KK !KK !$Ifgd+ l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 lac^!KK KK $Ifgd+ l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 lacdo^KK KK$Ifgd+ l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 lať ^KK KK !$Ifgd+ l'kd($$Ifl\,"h  t0644 laϥХإߥ ^_ 67AKLMNOP¨ $RSTUɩʩ˩̩/̼ȼԯh}h}H*hph]$hh9hYEhesh}h&?L5CJaJhesh&?L5CJaJh&?Lh&?LCJaJhch34CJaJh]$CJaJhCJaJhO6CJaJhcCJaJ8 DN^!KK !KK !$Ifgd+ l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 la^!KK KK $Ifgd+ l'kd>$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 la-8^^KK KK !$Ifgd%l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 la^_i^!KK !88 C $Ifgd+ l'$Ifgd%l'kdT$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 la ^C KK 8j$Ifgd+ l'$Ifgd%l'kd$$Ifl\,"h  t0644 la 56p]] !J$Ifgd+ l'$Ifgd%l'kdj$$Ifl4F,"h `B t06    44 la67ALMp!]] J$Ifgd+ l'$Ifgd%l'kd$$Ifl4F,"h B t06    44 laMNOܭݭǰٰpk!"k!Kk!"k!x(k!"k!9k!"f!"f!"f!"gderZgdtPkdd$$Ifl4F,"h B t06    44 la /2@MNV`ĪȪɪѪت'7BCDLVvʫ˫׫٫ګޫ34<F_oŬ !"2OPXb̸̼h34h346h34h?"6hO6hehb(h:h>hqg9hDhPh4hwh>h34hYEh]$hh1@hph}Bĭۭܭ1?P[ik"*4DKr)*>?S^ijwxzǰΰ𼸼𸰸 hDaJh34h?"6h34h346hlpthWherZh-h1dh7hYQh91h*7khwT&hYhqhJ> h>h]$hhDh}h>h34:ΰٰ  7Flqrs{ʱѱ%):=`acxz}DzɲղϽ󥚥󥭵}h?"hhcho. hc5h}h5h tM h 9hhh34h34h346h34h?"6hwT& h 9h%l h 9h th th-hDh 9h]$hh>h oMherZhYQh 9herZaJ1 !Grs ҴӴݶ13DFGHI&!"!"!"!"!"!"!!i!"!K!"!-!e5!!K!"!!"!"!"!!"!EgdgdWgdYgdVgdwT&gd tgderZ & F gderZ Wc޳+.KǴʴѴҴӴݴ޴ߴŵƵs|ܶݶ޶012ŤjhUhUU htI5htIhtI5hYhWh}hch5 ho.5 h915ho.ho.5 hwh*y hwho.hIHh 9hQ@Mh*yhho.hhD923:;CDOQSVWqɷԷ6zŸӸڸ -<=XŹѹҹӹչVXܵhsVh?"6hsVhsV6 hhW hh@fhbchWhYQh%$)h'oh:h hhhdh1@oh6 h65hGhW5hWhwT&h hUh:XEGISTUow»һӻ A¼żԼbqȽս׽&ƶ੡ϡ h5 htI5 h%$)5htIhtI5 h!r5h%$)h!rhuhh@Oh1@oh:[ hW5 hB8 5ho.hW5hYhWhsVhXhy6hsVhsV6hXhyhhW9&'()z)09>BIKwͿۿ !"#$./b}̸̬~w hkhkjhkhkU hzX5hVExhzX5hzX hu5 hB8 5htIhtI5htIhiThiT6hiThv6h]$hhZuchvhYQ hk5hhVhhuh6 hUh_Ej4hUhUU.&()#$D`a!1!"!\!"!!"!Q!!h !"!"!"!"!"! !"!"!"!! .!"gdQUdgdcgdxgd&0YgdV & F gdxgdQUgdVgdwT&dgdzXgdugdW'<VX#CDMW_`akl >?GQRZvܶܡܘh}_ hs5hQK_hx5h3ohc hB8 5hchc5h&0Y hg?h)i hg?hVhg?h>hQUhxh]$hhYQh:h)ihhVhwT&:vwy  '*8AKMT^_gn~ !)0Exݳݯhhvjhv0J,Uh]$hhYQh>h>hsVhHhsh}_jhW10J,UhxhsVhx6hsVhsV6C$'*;?l,<B`fܾ{hthk h4hQhJ> h>h]hsV hs5hh}_5hQU h>hL&jh>h>U hx5 h]$5 h5 hYQ5 hRZ5 hB8 5hchc5huhxhh]$hhYQh}_0+168:;ACV\l=Rvz"#+5=>HI}Ͽݷϯ h>5 hb5hVExhb5 hJ> hk h915 hJ> 5 hB8 5htIh915h91h]$hhshrhg?hWbh]hjh]0J,Uh4hN3'h ht5 hsV5 hN3'5h>ht2;<>?BCnoq!< /!"!!!Q!"!\!"!!"!@.!"!-! !"!-!"!!"!!gdVgdTgdggd0NgdegdwT&gd\kgdtgdzfgdbdgdcgd91:;<=>?JLOwx4GMWn /5EOPghiֱֵҵҭҵҩh-hT hsV5 hzf5h4h hK~hh4[hah]$hh] h]5hhzf5hthzfhsVhb5jhsVhsVU hc5hVExhb5 hb56ijABCMN !"*45=`fjkszƳ}y얁}yh]$hh4[h: hk5hh\k5h\k h]h] hsVhsVjhsVhsVUh] h]$5 h5 h45 hb5hVExhb5hth{ hB8 5h{h{5hh>hU(Zhahhb/z'M[`dpqrz=N)/>CEGHNܱı䢦 h&0Y5 h5 h{&5h-h&0Y hehghe heh{h3h{&h%mt hk5hh{&5 hehehgh4h%$)heh]$hh4[h:h\k:NPu 8mnopq',3BUdvzʿhvhuh]7h~r h4[5 h5huhlpt5herZh?_phlpt h>hTjh>h>U hTh0N he5hVExh0N5 h0N5h0N hj5h{h0N5h>h&0Yh-4 Gmnsxy./0:;xa'Ҽůҟ}y}uhZV<hRLih>h`8 hwT&h{hkh>h{ h>h]jh>h>U hf'5hVExh]5 h]5hlpt hj5 hS5h]h]5h]hhk hu5 hk5hvhuherZh]7h-hS./0@,PR_`!%!"!!"!#!!h !! !"!E!E! !E!h !"!E!"!K!"!!"!h !"gd.gd.gdAAgd{gd`8dgdcgd]gdlpt'*IJMTY^bu(134=>?@FVefwx&,.{ǿ糯h>h*sh:h]$hh4[h"nh8Nf5h|h.hZV<h1 h1 6h1 h?"6hh"Xh"nh8Nf h4[5h%$)hvI{h>hRLi> %*+,0<KLP]#5OPQRalnopx = ԼԸԼԴ̰hauhAAh1 h>hDh>h.[h&h"Xh"nh"nh"n5h.hZV<h|h]$hh4[h8Nfh*sE&ETdjMg;D\_d,-./;T_n #hA#h,N h_hU7h&?L h_h`8h`8hth]h** hAAhAAh1 hKHh h.hauh&hh>h.[h"nh]$@-./34|GO\*+-bc!"!"! !"!"!"!"!"!"!"!E!"!h !"!Z+1"1"! !"!-gd$a$gd1gdy & FgdU7gdU7gdgdXg#2345Kckqvz [.X\#')hEqhC6O5h4YhC6O hz@6hEqhEq6 hz@5hEqhEq5hEqhuh )+hR[h* hU75hU7hU75hExhmh.[hA#hU7h`8 h_hU7;)GH+*+,-!"$'(-/Eu1R`mqsvw-ź hz@6hEqh6 hz@5hEqh5hh.h h1 hAAj3 h1 h1 Uh h1 5hAAhAA5hyhmh%$)h4Yh]X.hY8hC6O hC6O6hEqhC6O67:;[\Iyz :;<!"!K!"! !"!K!"!h !"! !"!"!"!"! !"!"!"!1" & Fgd:a & FgdRgdRgdNgd$a$gdgd-.<v9KYij1457ABXuzFgilmorswxh ĽĽĽĹĽĽhRh(]hih.# h_h5I h_h hzV<h hz@6hzV<h6 hz@5hzV<h5h^Qh)hhh_B T"$%RTUXxOXr{,-/a"0;<D'79:;<ξ¾κʺʺʺκhqhq5h+h5Ihlhl5hlhY8h3yh1 hRhGhhOh(]h.h1 h1 6h1 h?"6hNhR h(]6?WZ[MQRW0EGJ '357%9RS rĿп̴̴̰ị̧̧̧̄hv0h%$)h4Rh>h>hAh"hghx hT5hRhY8 hqhr hr5hqhr5hr h05hlh1 5h1 hgj h0h3 j8h0h0Uhqh5=55lm56BCfgo p !i!"!i!"!"!"!i!!K!"!-!"!E!"!E!E! !E!"!"!"!-!"gd@Rn & FgdOgdg & Fgdr & Fgd1  & Fgd:a&0yzs X[CQSg;U l m n o p    ¾ƶ²¶ƶh}jh00J,Uh0 hu ahOhQhOhhlahu ah@Rnh4Rhv0jh7 0J,Uhh7 hv hR h]$hh]X.hxJhWh(<  * + = I J O P k l     ; <            & 8 i j l u y       % * 1 T    !"#9MRܼܼ临h7 h7 5jh~0J,5UhWhW5hWhQphrh$h0h@Rnh0hksG6h0h06h:EhksGhR hOhvuh>hSh]X.h4RhQ:p   "#78K^N0-.!!"!!"!!"!!4!!"!!E!"!"!"!"!E!"!E!"!h !" & Fgd:hgd:hgd:hgd:hgdrgd:Edgd:Egdr & Fgdr  CJ`at>  -y#-e| '678JŻŶݟݛݟݟݟݟ݌hi h~h~ h:Eh:Eh]$hh>h]X.h%$)h:E5j h%$)h%$)U h:E5 hR 5 h]X.5h~h~5h~h@Rnhbch_+hnDhr( hW5h:Ejh7 0J,Uh7 h} 2J$,AMdoVX,.n'W`bcdmsTdVdkz *BENAh> hR 5 hf5h5=h:h5hfhR 5hfh:h5hR htzh:h5h$htzhR 5hi $hA?h]X.h:hF.QRmn)e  !#"#&%'%t'u')!K!"!h !"!9!"! !"! !"!E!"!"!"!"!"!"!"!i!"!9!"!-!"!!"!9gdX!gd:h & Fgd:hAaj(-8)7=@Rdm'(0:nt/ 5       ! !$!-!s!t!|!!!!!!U"V"^"e"p""""""##a#l##$$B$H$$%#%h~X hjUh>h]$hhmh$h:h6h$h$6h$hA?h:hP#%&%%%G&R&&'0'?'K'''',(-(5(?(((O)))))**I*h*******^+w+y++++&,-,b,c,k,l,m,,,,,,,,,, - --5-6-M-c-d-мидаܬذаhp6hhhFh_hg\hbh8$hph%$)h%$)6h%$)hSdh\3h)h]$hhhtzhR 5htzhX!5hjUhX!h:h?)*x+y++,,,,6-{---/0000044_6t6U7V7777!!i!"!h !"!E!E!"!"!!!"!h !"!x(!"!K!!h !"!"!"!"gdH5gdAgdyTgdgdg\gdSdgdSdd-l-m-x-y------..;.F...../////////0r0000000111111*22222344 4O4a4444444565c5d5l5v55 6踭̭̦ h2ph2p h2ph[h|Ah2phh[h>hh]$hhphR 5hph;5h;hjUhhhhg\hp6hFA 6^6_6s6t666666666667 77$707V77Y8i:j:k:l::;;;;;;;;;<<<=====>>>>>>???ƾʺƺ⢛h h'hR5hRhR5 hRhRhRhXRch 6hXRch$q6hph$qhtzh51hXhyh hH5hMNhS`hS`6hS`hjUh h2phAhAh[ h2ph2p577X8Y8k:l:;;<<=============>>!"!E!"!-!"!i!"! !"!!!!!!!! !k!k!h !"gdRgdRgdRgdyTgdXhygd  & F0^`0gdH5?3??-@@@@@$A%A'A2A7AHAIAJAKAfAgArAwAAABB?CGCKC}CCCCCCCCCCD DD4DADHDIDJDcDoDpDqDrDDDDDDEE䥼hNrhNrhk6hNrhNr6h6hR5 hRBhRh3h3H*hkh DhRmH sH  h Dh3hX h DhR hXghR hR5h3h hdbhR h'hR9>@@BBIDJDxEyEGG%HFHH7IVJWJJaKMM+PuPP0QQRR!-!"!-!"!i!"!i!"!!"!˳!!˳!˳!c,!!˳!˳!b!!!˳!!!˳!˳+gdv+gdlgdL&+gd}+gdyTgdREEEwExEyEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!F3F5F6F7FBFFFFFFF GGG,G3GBGCGDGGGGGGGG$H%H&H-HDHEHFHGHcHjHŽhS9fh%6huh%6 hh36 h%6hh%jh%0J,Uh;hNrhR6hNrhNr6 hcwhRhNrhNr56hNrhR56 hR5hR h DhRhNrhk7jHHHHHH7I8I9ISIiIjIIIIIIIJ JJ!J1J@JHJSJUJWJXJJJaKbK+P,PuPvPPP0Q1QQQRRRR?S@S T TTTTTTTTTT T!T)T߷߯ߟjh%UjhIzUhIzhO6jhO60J,Uhcbh%CJaJhL&h%CJaJh%CJaJh%jh%0J,Uhuh%6 hG&6 h%6>R?S T TTTTTTTTT"T#T$T%T&T'T(T)T,T-T:TyTT!˳!!l#!"!"!_*!l#!l#$a$gd@%gdorh]h&`#$+)T*T+T-T.T4T5T8T9TTTTTTTTTTTTT7U8UCUEUFULUMUOUPUUUUUUUUUUUUUNVOVZV\V]V^VaVbVhViVkVlVVVVVVVVVVVVj~h%Uj/kh%UjWh%UjhsnUmHnHujDh%Uhsnh`(mHnHujh%Uh%jj0h%Ujh%UmHnHu@TTTTTTTU7UCUDUEUQUUUUUUUUUVNVZV[V\V`V!l#!l#!!l#!l#!l#!l#1l#1l#1l#1l#!l#!l#!l#!l#gdsngd]$$a$gd@gd(`VaVmVVVVVVVVV:WjWvWwWxW|W}WWWWWWWWWW1l#1l#1l#1l#!l#!l#!l#!l#!!l#!l#!l#!l#$a$gd@gd(gdsngd]$VVjWkWvWxWyWzWWWWWWXXXÿh;h$hIzjh%UmHnHuj]h%UhsnjhsnUmHnHuh%jh%UWWXXXXXXXXX X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXX!"gdyT 1h/ =!"#$% 1h/ =!"#$%4001hP:p*p/ =!"#[$T%h101hP:p}/ =!"#[$T%h-1h0:p}= /!"[#$%*1h:p}/ =!"#[$%h-1h0:p}= /!"[#$%*1h:p}/ =!"#[$%*1h:p}/ =!"#[$%Dd V  C 2Asm_syn_logo2R=@kDF=@kJFIFC    #%$""!&+7/&)4)!"0A149;>>>%.DIC;C  ;("(;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;w" }!1AQa"q2#BR$3br %&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz w!1AQaq"2B #3Rbr $4%&'()*56789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz ?*( ( ( )Yj̃՛oƍFTYW X( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (EPh(( 3E|f&HOb9ӊ頿pmN6>1jŚ(AEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPmQ@PM/YE\ r}j+;YngmD8VJG=[xAO8&&E_Vz=2#lb~~urZUa{"N{ʵ{jIżWP<ƲE /0}Ez}r}뫢kc,!jmE DAa|VBSQQop)߈Y%⹯xv]F4ܦe9G;}\~#c8;"3VWPAdz;=z_Nx_4drYG?V2-X(Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@Q@(V(e0!Y'  @pqVU|awȒ3%ԑGR@0cVn Bc^"ܰ, s z -˼kf *t5tI$$~Z9eJW~Yo?cW<%.kgkEUJ`\AjwQ@Q@Q@gzͶa,}? '&aHI<דMm?H6i{!F8v'?n*ݨ' J6\{+?Uη5KKE~KJ$p  n朧.#݌p9k~jڍ/.nfZc·ϐӵzUwQEP(((((((((((((QE?~My~e!qYx WTW6uV2*.IjwF 9>YR}ɶs&袺RQE(((jm\G*p]2{}4%p,QY4J,'DSB3C[UleG (dۢ'ӳBM=(VW@AVwvm$ʓ\!FN>MEQ4/<\C*+7 ʌu$T>&5 ͝ ώCW${ 빫EGZN?ɉY*=Ȥz m-:+3O&}yȆX)W:kF QTkMUMpgTdU;m0.a P $$lYεgZ.n)[ g~gmK($aI%2*XH{T$[܋nV<-Yi78fhpfIŸBQHۭ^ӵ;Vp2TE7 %v̹ESԵ{ &4{ۅ8D Y*%L5;W.w!ethQQ`=\׶u{4QE!(5E -nYɆc0c++jWr {W9S~/8uif! ze̠e=Mj+6 \ehnUe9-Յ*QEQETWwPKup" c8#&խ` ~UC;TNj#?2ᶵܩsT%\[".*o^A[i$E#S<=A_ i6o`C1.I'v=Lcg I􍍊( (((+SOm򼉾ͻ2훱ʺ};Xmz 1;;-:\.akY-3"02yw(k_?jni᫫+mR'6Y^GKeO#1U ֡F7W:C\r]~f[FgP5UsMk鲤]ѰdeaЂXԩ 7l{yDf>'&)+i|TRoAXDo/UPnH/OZѻ9rJԠ/*؃~r|{lixv{XdiY 6dN?Iȿפ_j6x:$pn"^׸MI5j4v YՏ#c)?)o6e|aks6D:G *1d;+y#fKt(8jUk"}J HŲ 2F6qW{S^TwU.vN2z{*#({Q旮V7iYc DC.\9_zi$i⸵&]> bFr FjḄsa4&pv9'p;Ns4]v!::(4EP+}mƒ2q|QoV׈,7%|GׯX\xph䳐LS\H5H\ 4年lw)l%P~QGn{Gki-Rh8Dgw/{-}a r'sU=j04kofݐ[ZTTyRVGQEdS%(eP{=BWc3Һ QE09WA3OBfʃW9xt+G Wc$_YZew!8y Oa'К bNM\—@ԊGjuhm1eg{qEܛHax]Ymm [o9"$!g$zb%t+yķ8X[ 8URrMv5VNwf\ņ,NG~*QD-4ĵ/Vf!.֮HH-mhmUm`HCT NvbXD.y; <6=vjM gw#kZČZ#dsض=r)97$q◲i7iҪxfo4gAޚ6|-G]aعf`?*}ny WML:ukoo#\cΤV0ZD#g*MGNMGd5\.s}XZVRYBA(ãwڬQEجaǣVj"־{e'l>5 F]F0Dm*pZUs\ɾM@ZmX^2bHQzddpAq=7ƣmC>T(+Y8$gkf9`CEW7x>)>*ٳJ!>#EKq Ԥ_W1 p}gIjw6d(TpXç̾ WmP[_@`9?Q}C΃T-.Sqp;>.hJ/pH 2=I^,8)6_@RZ)9m# =֥l4G׬Kt*~W5y&a1ּR@tr|{>C-.'f$8{W/+hzݞbͧ 0R%pθFOz WT8uasɯ"Eme$0FpA%GC38+4vfMBX~<}Dc$zRSi$ݓ9߱k5s[qc yum4bI>g#Ԗ` EiF$excDӟ} wl)-? ԢQ@ڝĐO-[|Ƞlן^Fm{ߊ{ -ꌅ]f^Tmk*z+(s;Xo{$ͻnH:2mϹb?6n?XԨГEK_ՃV?ܑro2#URmV9;[Y`4m@$~`Kd5wWY `@9ҭN,!dY$~@QN dZkI&o,Hو3Zu}4z1F߹Bqy!9AV0Kmc(MȤ\UKn#g1g>hP^652U=QF}M2xt>k4I!FcJjp =:$y#en0Ib:{V˱=Lndt)?V[U[{+B[>b:V]Xʬ҄3~;Χλ TqO՚xX.^U eZ[kKzn䅝b1(  '$~׶V wdf'IW\ıGW`9v'~eq,Gsv:lUBd*q9kPY[fKvfˌAO=W4 [[TQEjH( ( ( l$4R8*!Q@#> Oʊ:{wׯOd/omor#Ookը]فO ggq5$E_o~QZ (`QEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQEQE:((((((((((((((((((((((((h}DyK _Toc131984964}DyK _Toc131984964}DyK _Toc131984965}DyK _Toc131984965}DyK _Toc131984966}DyK _Toc131984966}DyK _Toc131984967}DyK _Toc131984967}DyK _Toc131984968}DyK _Toc131984968}DyK _Toc131984969}DyK _Toc131984969}DyK _Toc131984970}DyK _Toc131984970}DyK _Toc131984971}DyK _Toc131984971}DyK _Toc131984972}DyK _Toc131984972}DyK _Toc131984973}DyK _Toc131984973}DyK _Toc131984974}DyK _Toc131984974}DyK _Toc131984975}DyK _Toc131984975}DyK _Toc131984976}DyK _Toc131984976}DyK _Toc131984977}DyK _Toc131984977}DyK _Toc131984978}DyK _Toc131984978}DyK _Toc131984979}DyK _Toc131984979}DyK _Toc131984980}DyK _Toc131984980}DyK _Toc131984981}DyK _Toc131984981}DyK _Toc131984982}DyK _Toc131984982}DyK _Toc131984983}DyK _Toc131984983}DyK _Toc131984984}DyK _Toc131984984}DyK _Toc131984985}DyK _Toc131984985}DyK _Toc131984986}DyK _Toc131984986}DyK _Toc131984987}DyK _Toc131984987}DyK _Toc131984988}DyK _Toc131984988}DyK _Toc131984989}DyK _Toc131984989}DyK _Toc131984990}DyK _Toc131984990}DyK _Toc131984991}DyK _Toc131984991}DyK _Toc131984992}DyK _Toc131984992}DyK _Toc131984993}DyK _Toc131984993}DyK _Toc131984994}DyK _Toc131984994}DyK _Toc131984995}DyK _Toc131984995}DyK _Toc131984996}DyK _Toc131984996}DyK _Toc131984997}DyK _Toc131984997}DyK _Toc131984998}DyK _Toc131984998}DyK _Toc131984999}DyK _Toc131984999W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 W$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V'l t65 G$$If!vh5"#v":V'l t65"Dd m0  # A2+ڊڜ@ BU `!ڊڜ@ T R;((xXQoT>ފh4o]+J4i"ؚj-: &/q[ 'Rw: $+uxO^`VDD6m̹'vnBJ!sϽ߽|@<9`^Q,jSդǡ*yct8aw[حhHRz!`Fo!zQw=U{:r/ C'+kFY/ceQaATL+ax J lg߽\ w NCgrLh[cf7S@^'Yfaw 2L/ڏA;G1OGZR_ ?Jl^ S-5g%SÞS5uL/j%F7dKX2披Z-W;CU+qJ G6uS/ZU/yk2UU >\! 2emT $^LwYql?EVJ31u6Dua+'!G8Z'V@<ҜgVܞY*Ҽd5H~ X‡scE4f 3eG+f3B~2eMoâHUZ:obκ= p֝M|_AfDd X 0  # A"r!ȴY-\ IU @=r!ȴY-\ X(4:P,x {ao&/F( g_@$XRjhA))\P`]SE@ B FS)*z_]ro~3sb&BJBB\gD! Q6B8Wh.XOR >Ni`X@b82HP0v_H-{gS)͐!AaыX3=P۱ڐ,+,s?'dZ>[$v{{8{C:" &nWBǢ>JGC[/Fۧ7EQw.c uB6j Ywݦr4Ǔoue[@ Vl+lȯٛyw³K[ʦhg/;/s_s(]-&9<p/f#k3\Av9mB[J+ [x>T6Y̒ vs»|'✏s _ԫdp-OqU}wx3eOk;d`8X*8ucqG\٣qAvKyh}ֶ{kZ? vjyx:dPWcN1}x0c1Wvx?Pxg/ `?yHO 0>vE *eC 1<#h!-vz=bzrws7nnxCs.qV (ֺ H@| p0ʼ-j^cTcG/Pﲌqo]LW2J&_䋙똼ɫ|"^z7xφ+ 'g }V(ݶ1}Ÿ|eոz~} H_@ZM߅r¶+J5k`Y&]W;IM [m2ʼ!HG5aQ\ve^;p8tyL.l2#SM?<yL.l2Ao |%¶+J5:g)1kRJ78B ۮ+Š2|?/v^<&]OuWk+leZ z됯YyLVuIj; leagLyCrמk5ZX {yL4fسM&WfMimgLlmj_kGak\^jmggk|yLlWFww\^1~kGCcre{ż6|ߢ_|yLlWFGjs6cre{ż61_cǐ__Z\^WkF6MyLlO%dre{|W7wecGxp2s5cʪyw1.&䛙|%dL똼ɫ}ysD|y![9&g1,&c(G;m{2< c"l9^ԨUUJ3sp>pТOi9ʷ<Z[<×k ?N8:A89I8xq'ZU?7CS\%]IŖ^+gn_ٽ Qy|| v2ѮxoƼdB&fHbb]%\Grh71ڛ%4>`x1|{s ҿEjŖ18]KzɏȏSH`Te(ߑ#eQqK^#E##5gpϔĨ d7*|RH#sh4}U-&F Bik|d`t-M.)#ed:7#$75|F*?\0Imq-&FȧQ,|V󉑺G+'Y-&FK@6ŠKٜ˗ȗRh5Ϝ +}[6qg F<)kh%_#_j>1R\0J|O˂udUߞF8rg9>p 8b3lA7'iP(_l9Ͷl~)/)$Udo[m5f^La^H2XJVL,JUkO,WfV}!ˏxxP3VuT񨡎,ꨰ8TlCS?TC-ꨴ8Tǥ:[gPe:ΰ8HwO{>ْB&Gx#ԱR2?&1q1 $c&ՁkiABk^u@a$s~c 2k5P j2k u1uk.Յm_ydE>ud0՗OITs{~rT5Huy71y+2n`LޏԏcL>'04& |!?ߟɛ[}^g6gNk!}1߿{ O֮lW}(~̉Oc|}>ÉOwRU%;3Mcbq ̓ ;YOz/жCama2e=2_@y;{2JѴvMdK%-7 Xs%3 8miUXrMc;8r’aqÖĸprl90C_sP2X^Uj<5r\"Clb#*S-1b2I}I%WU@*-LY3* `b4b%;iͤƒQyaBb̒C_Y1CL̅9NI[zl&+ꦘ{Q[ڲα_l"څŶ*Ấ3ƏSCqh䰕|b՚CzOea%=Yr8p|aK01RYC:sJV cWlx$cs!5XbT'^OZ{%/[ƫ0`f5& L6Y2Lj₀Al$j`3`[L߿109AU]i4ch?>*v6_t\c N lyF$sMzClTTZ ÊMX;o6`f6IlFHqЧu\: z6l耍ŚD$l,"?m`ȚM, QZa< Ǜ`fV 6lfMu~Om&u"=_ l޳dS-o*>Mt;N6gk;Ƅq!})16d6^!NEel7 l7fĶ*`1j}%o펌z?g]ۥ ۃۃ ., [ ?|U2;# bh%lr]w)>lö5̈m;,N$~Ndޛ_5AK^؎HZ56l leĶ"8o`Bƥ,.'~ lgĶ2`k.mn ~nȈmU Ld\ʒvNz]~P-ټsJ NiP(M)x~?z6?M/'=sCm+Sm V}~3PyzZ!''q_M6Ygb%H = Dd k:0  # A" A /:{ [U @= A /:{Y'}F*[ x\klTEnVa! nP &.E|%i@Dm0cT~G1HDb!>FFb1jt4Zfwv 䞙s33sەBm@D_I!fU:!jvRT*D7( vD NbP Tƥ|%Pr uotģ͊OH`xDۊR,I~Hӈ_4l9)aW])Fnnn/F|8>F;]B} :N#lkkgQ\-(Z =R7l:zS ,]bؤ؁;āUb&Z-J?HǶV~{ ~$H| 2JRzʥ~a{'\+^=.5ס{̏}26J/7\>/W mbc<žjt;僿CX@ccc_;sb?ӊL=-Q+x1u.m q7x| 'Č)":<_nsa}X?> >1W[?^p&Px5vQV= iG Mːs.5xb_P_t agnn]6L~w2N&| /aj&`i^yD"E㠬2q?891b9m}IArJ_c׺zہڊy,PU^ѿ2G-QM xF1g?5/kR+]6oS_ZoCQM xF3?5).ic 5hR+]6ܥ8eJB.2^_zb/ˡWlW`鯖AIt㻤MpaoWl5p~D2^ uK%H xF?@&|ŧk[ۘ|b~&gCL~>?y@@H3h?į>} V^?$b4__g2q>YE9om #b̚wN뀽@>B(Qgt{j<|YOz}N.F{M^$dNpӹI7I}OL43[趻H[,Hń H$!D} l ȫ_`>Sxטhni/dws9Y> K.4A " `/Q6,N;|9BMx=%o1n3Y^Ci,ͺyQ|GW/QV6Z)byP:P7= ;կݟpX[~uPD]K`pPӔJQ)FQ+GAŋ^=oB0 w,"^YFp> yZTDLr~#Ѻz 9юbڟh%k[YQlKز0{R\.)oö$bHӿߞ Byɤuv>7Ճ< Yފ*x<35=%1XsaggrQEȬTݜ[3!d:nlyߣf]Nn<)N!{r"8&GAy eZy[’ek+ ʳ|Ͳ$j[Zy(ԓZy6`{LlcX*o5ӫfi'Zy?~7kE/w-9ms8;4l܌0EPٮQ7d^ֽݱ cc|N?7sϏ^^KlJ Svkґ+CsMnn{Dev.\l7p^䮕4]Q럯fkEG_YP5*^ѥDd M 0  # A"!-L8Yn:[d 4\jU @=-L8Yn:[d 4"G xZ]hU>wvMjt}Z&M1N"nME"FI HkZR}hhRAA%A tP>&̜s{33;MRȄ9ss= x)tYǺ\i@L0Z\[y- L@ІFBuDFZًZ?AͲ-Y_Sȷ[eOۛ3b"  |McW)yI m=;N~0ZrTbpWe nۓa#ڪTwU^e?4.lÿ|+ 0 p]0O0kaIcD=|5W >[z4^'g] ΧK$^PWcG~jQ,u{:9 3by%)Iuea+*Qԟށ>;UxYlIfD`g'ZpT$m\ :>O3ȓE<ɋ3͉|,w ~{w_6>! /I#;7j8x>mPhd8_oMs{Sv=BfsрNuwyy"o(ɭom7OKoKiJLJ eܧ 1v\5ʽqg  't#?}CXv_tUZ(Bأ#0&~\P{j9'o_nޠ6na'x4`oa gó>MO[oK9Wk{H#}tJۧxŎ?ABdЭa3o͸jۼ)2Y~pۄ3KxpJ˺R1ڎűr^)(Y]=ǵ:3 ƤFfr%SBƶc#!bk轞cXCCkh}修,oD!]B%Èf:oAzg[~^fR]g>RYm-#H#"=tN.063A锏^YK1`^xZE-1P[}$hkh{Ra\U N+Y.WǀyJri!߅eR̹%fsma߆bI.0E59W$<5%UcKBmR9-Nk{(wڣ_+Gy<`1q1W0sR`gTc>ǹsB`#w=#3l bF7p a3"JnWڜWӖJ(哵vb*>)mE=F3YR:ϼ|~q?dž~1ZvwqCmj.JҰgDd ? 0  # A2H"bF\־$qU `!"bF\־Ԥi I0 x͘oDǟv6i6iKY̮b\7qjW-m%. Zn6%{ ?X-̛8$a+$f<3yGp}I$XBk V.+j u]f/ D,fG3[\(/ڿG.;Ex%JP?qGyy<}Bn5jukϳ>5hÃs!L`ilE/BR,bz՞SoExҺHuyM͈:r >L6D[+&V6 sHK6lW2sBWeJ|9v[%XiygvqɃruºo$+(;"-] q*sy QwDZ/aB_χ4HK{_H8tf~o4 \ׄ4$n lw*]| QwDZe= #uzLzj5, z[B^1-.yV<+2KpGWLK{l?P? G>iimt?uzi(hFqab?? iGWLK{l?kqH8bZc }3 iGWLK{lݸدݐFqD{Ŵ6ߠدBӰ}@̟4#+=}ݭ iimyؾCo`˦.^sg#6jXq'3σT^MWwhMߪ[5}\5$üe&ry!~߫;4}o>(K9O]p-{pNxѮ%een~ rE Je-w۔ *2("%f%ݬWJ:uެsSx9pMqL1 ćebm ?ΠFg] k5rq?{xo 痑./l~ ]=!2z9@4LF/g`H^=0#9g'ׁ|@2u11zG[W7)Bd$`oW~/#YY\r]%n=_SHYh,o&v0ɺEyrxH/ȠzSH#h&1a{0ɺ [?'Lٔ!2j"dԜ|B[`=뻰!O8Tku8`wG&L=&LaV[";2d~k& Or=#L X3_MA?wG&b~J~ǃ:󺧴>sG,y\}>Cx4ۑG̒tytK "bX;Xlc|Gc5Ǝ<6Z|&Ku"v5Fi^ZyUp=w#Kϟ2x̺T'GQcH\yK>rίyeL=C~knL]}$ƿ'XlK>gAi.3<F3kf(G󙓙M/d/6/bS3M$`3d!J6l$M1 %Ǵ:D!l|B:O,4*cZ82IDiM† ?lΛM=O s(Oذ$TZi6Ccе(Uذ9\_l~cnu 6K,fSlF0lج!f5~ zF3lMnK6w=m6af;ĂߞQ}?fSwoaey>ܺc|`w+m\ll"nNF}ilwlv(>jv?{v/ϔlv(j-[661s6l?|~Ug{Ơ!P|׆-}:[c mbX%JWk`[mS616l!~ lϱd+= | +_Vq- d _ 6kmEmm6kmn'~{ lb[ÚZw/k|Oz_C2wTe=N&~ƄEX9.ϛG-y;^ء3ydSn }W~3sm4'x4/luVka؞~ 1wBTc#=O޺4 Dd z 0   # A " ߜ{LfB ňU @= ߜ{LfB#FJ*R x lgg[&E\C1ܳ9;- %"F _峲&JɢTEI+*"R!~ViNu6!U1jơEP9=]gnsϳ{o|쵳hyoofv?;!R)y"m`5c3V}v8;}OV0V;x)x);>/DlH"xbH$i= fUP߼xBQڏC™\bq[8b`?Ntf~HE&҂cӦJh15k׋DŽī g8NC[B`DŽrQoĵMpZ7[ڢsߎ"8r4xV5o/y#v$ܗe2D^K ^tI)qlQ6rMM}|ұ-U?fܯ?>QttIzOZŸDv]u-y[<6&uT"&<))@"}(cmZ m)X@2\m+[!׹a b[Z\mi=1mY}'W[=W-۠jf]~>my❫-sGwxm h[\m830n,@hp b[sŗX_̾,e3ߒzo[Z&eaېф3c-GC?7Oѣ~7?J_ X{=[<a!B _?h~b^|[vC-c@ ;6?X?[f*Yj@Et^%϶|._7C'!_F>cAk :dC6doCNdDȾ{}_hYK/[ n^*Ԛ/}ʿo@zq]ƽvy+y76!H@_||7v}l; E6m{rR$^e_B2 eZ !{H_/Az}Tgx;&=D'qL_N/CD&B_30yym;I/C%"a&ÖI^| @ܯ`*X&f_$ qⓙ}OblE$l"\,&wq' LƤ]|&kL&QL箰eK0$2Y qh`2ɋ/dI}I+f._"n&ݾI̎_zKD&G Lb4IL_I?I/&v2'|09q_LZ̈́}8&}[j5wrRt9o oGOO"G]]*<#.v0]$բ75e|W} ig2fA_N@?ZUU U+^TlL%"a&ÖI^| LƈLF LF|0ie: *I.u1zܲj1LNek L25_"JLbIeGar}}I^|&L L|][*6&II7in_O= .؞Ŷ)mز: ({ﺁ{6q[; Z7m M٦|]am4$wrb[em{w zV˶~tc vm;mcעY\-۩Y HZoþ6dq-ldM! :6AA_l-D&(lve[5$/_ؾm̲-ZI(lߛ6eq-k(~2߿P>O+>~Z>?U~n%\V7(d\]^$>Ӿ̄&ہ 8']7Dd j%0   # A  2s 8nsV@OU `!G 8nsV@Y\@xWOlTs+mr`VICA*.T& 4ng5ģԉ!qN \tMq(N*}8.s}}ｘ @x2X$Xs1"Z2PF|挃ԛd߫_p 42I)GʿO.7?e w U;;;m::?~ V`Cɐq+GJw渵R)wo(k`^ʚ|vW=m̝yW0ӓb;h_9Ӌ -}cD}<<㾟ȾbA9 ˹%xG_?Go^VM<Z^$t?C ocw\b/K?+ FvczJhڒMcE}T=']})noFp!cÎ$(2-'{`sN<{ɣs3W?/E<ᷕx̳}eNFFvcz@~ mRutg)<Ώ0?r9_=Kz_nL:b/šiږtkaB3Z쵖^ mka~a~[18U+؜.^71}u!14QuCs/ P{AɁ#x[LmĶ\@m+\) ,]+EhŚ|&u|&ɇjouܫv\u677q>\t?8 30?~sN49Amxvm`1FKϬ (л!QAK0M r r ^꿌 ːs@iGR<:99v/?ډgsRiGR?~6_<iGR$譆XE$_ <iGR2譂d x$ҎLg?%ȁ#xHF/@_z񛢿? <iGR#譇VE#_<iGR譅~E_ <iG#sO:uaGkQi>zE>:蠢r rDE^cPއ1P#+Rrr:9"/F_(=y}t\'*c_Gz9oy}n)#9"/XG_}A诋|1HKTvE+]#V|죏~H~{Do]6}ܞ9ۨ1aYƯy5y&o-|&_4y&'i}[˾N}.y&ouΣ)ڟGߗwmy:,&8[vս6-4 G_ZOj z)qMV5בk׉JC;U^1@]ۢhm])_CGOeV}qj ϧ3#LF9TyƑńu ||q$ʺWS{b$m1at)~`Е+!G~%T`(j#i :]cЕzM^#3#y nHbUt./#D֤p=D5h6xZmU>c"-xXjVMޮ5!M~HwhM=@h M^k4y&_h|&_k]|&ןk\ؼ;s3øٴTހfk<*Π8lc4#aK;rc=>&&u(I[:Ȗ(s<>ģ v |? }>wCc=[t0d$؀RAXb2~0=lK a2Lf{- 45`h= lj-K 3`"&$'.'LvZ7ߟ1`"e~*X'*#k%mœ، x#EII9+Hߑψ"(Kno$SbI_uI {swܽxo@@q,:t럷_e<Ԗe4f0{NKL6߷0`Y8q#&[b֘̕tȵ Ϸ4#[{<}xO<El7ܑۦez/B%]W }é|3tƐI D0/<tAmYFH+_Ϙo}Aޝ+ :r$M{M+afF.6-)ݥ|Q&+Ħ۹D.K`=ؔ6% l!6t>a ؼb9s\` tl>F}/<Ӽ,r|Nec#e{\o&væ_M\:_f&T65T7`Se KCl,2r,Z<6ؔ6U!6gtaMl}ZF.m`bf56^#8l@afC lpxu-~شiĦL6]b!6]mT]ݬ3?{j;'~L=g7v;4RWM&/b+7Ma[b 1k6ؾDɀK-m46-1o6!>2`{$텘C`)i@VbwmŸ: J텘Cal~l¶*Ķbŗm"3`[e-۴-N1`;=/6-gŷmm 3`p™Cql 7`@ lKBl{mi9a[b g&~ض~mo<lPt[zVjnzf?HqUsy?j6L-c1*Ul}g&mrŴV3vQ}SLO%s;dV2 Dd 0   # A  " #;Q4k _U @=c #;Q4HKyE)1 xlgg;v F8mP]~Di+P- "&qh,J\M? F2(&EPF- P!j*EP~DAUȕ{{{ Vgۛ{>3{]YBr1]5 \˄ĊB/#&xD+\qdzX@b2H\ ? Rhek1c[!}E,hGBv[aѐ?l 7"!'@43u쐮l1{ﭾ_#qm6'mؗd1!%SkПݶ=l!=m'ظM*k?:{^9V"l*`rjI<=ZPȃՖQ[yFUvuP~r'@~D|=Mv ʅ/";3*ëψtֶ*oo*,y= vb/vO/V?g"""uJeY~VJK2>^>TJ sn[*2/;eI6Z/^ޅc+O%v~'&Y;ۢƒJchse3S6ԛzSoM7XO-LZW(^A 6ihr|HdqS\4RUh"SRugO<9BмPy/zx<>HS!} ư?#Kcvtơ[Ԍ e=׳e-ύ e'~^֗p\\`оt1E. 0y-˛pܷa=}9c'[_Nq߄`ŗ/T;1}ɦ6W3?t RH?(Z"c'p[mkںf>O ߯i%f5_oӴ,/Wh_l?2MWjc< gby14= j?L쇉4&+~؋[L_N^OB-Nľ{7w{/;ո~k:|r?{6V^3}#<t[.˽Dң8'Ծg(EH/CJWVa}m?[AlD,C j6D*`u* R\c%כSseURC-'~}5w&KCz plaCd$a41) cL&q֗&14L>d!50Ir}g2c&qdT|G_3{5J3/ya%+&dOrk0$K92g2q_a22d4|G&-L&M&MTkaW_ZI;I+}I'&Ն/dI Ljy6L|كLL:15L:=͓ybSt#^&Q OLjK&'<]5# 1~?N߮֜{N@N[DIDeF]"Lg]] 2]n2Qir#yH}/qJ-szU40IUqŸ_09IaAWaǸadA$MWa2q/F2d2IjxixI1^ϔ3Sı.~1)G&L&1u&-/̓ j<&J &L*}UddҊq߬aꉉzxcҎL0t`witx`RmIF]5ZI'}I'K72e20Ĥ̓ j}09q?arUh&\]URL-51-uކ}K - ,ky2Zjv-5L-Qh}LN>_?w&&9gRq`aB$P|h}FK] ;Z/w81ۨWc۱eoGwf=NiĶڰA[a{]Ұ=mM۰a;&u uQ۫UOlkͼA뎡a;Mxb[4$i:6EfP尝a;: ?1m#[ad[iZ$a;6b?sخA~mk<]5ǰ{ 1Ա9l!<4և{19l_D~iؾma=߻=6l}W{st{֤qooP_>hoXC>y>[|F>QBdkS}m!ٲ-fо:Xڼl!f /*&L2d< _jHDd%.Ƥ[UDd j%0   # A  2vz<Ƌ#嗋w0RrU `!Jz<Ƌ#嗋w0Y\@xW=lE~3{^R6LAV罟aL"Ɗ,H 6$#ѹ@Cd$ *H,-ov{2d'EbY8(#%׊h Gc{G3֯Qoy^s@a"{潨?E5h策{]p"$ cjgJǵno=֛9s Cnl(r.W6F(fjvFêMi,a/,ȟEyX,jo7/gن{ oc}q5gij56zrqմVjhwmdX6Ji8lb7mwM\!B_+X b[VW!M=#SWLBF]k dϹ/ً\{]#RrB̘5tLVH`1:E_O"hpՈԫh;bl٣faY8œ, ^j]΍"S*DOm>^ɋ{\%.ߺfR֒ݰZִonOCbB٠ҌAIb"e@]6?S};MWO#$ nw v 鏯_dҸcd%qDFw[O{7gJEXTSԴ^Z:yi]yI\;+%x.e_O<:rKczYl{siS FD$=X{Nʂ@/Nr[/|7/]O{~^%㌐cPnTq, loc7#>vq7VHƱvuja ~Kr z'䗵vSvw_ǿ|z]$$If!vh5V5B#vV#vB:V'l t65V5B$$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 $$If!vh5h5 55 #vh#v #v#v :V'l t65h5 55 {$$If!vh5h5 5B#vh#v #vB:V'l4 t6+5h5 5B{$$If!vh5h5 5B#vh#v #vB:V'l4 t6+5h5 5B{$$If!vh5h5 5B#vh#v #vB:V'l4 t6+5h5 5BSDd k0  # A "*?,܎8e%U @=*?,܎8e4}F,qx] U{w!r <. "%a%6PKy(PWCj@)PZ %5]W|P&(Ғ޹ss\s3y9crNqFcxƆ`lm5Ռq~Xao{dQղ\_Ah7WqV@G?ğ B{&0F-=⪐[VEU-}#K{S]G@(]40۪˧kБ+5`8_8kDz(J"/네4pSuדmu[v?8>Н~͜G8 ^_y{ ͉tw-^?+Wa%[XSy7^G6Vi7?Lyr*/7>r{%_wAá8M><p[fW3_IeQݘЍs m'jvOmXu cC&]l!Xl Vnžǰnݯ[?1lGKӘ'|/x}Ϣ|ɾ@wXoiy{qTvnLοBda)]k6wt~m629 =|tczt9gع9Ә'_#Ĝ3T|n)xڦjv>9@BwW'۶>V,9)얿\a{I:1|omͷƍdT1pI"Η"·aqI?$:QGQuߨL+'%75yvqaaR.?Bs/oB^@qySL;zQ;t-bd/`MJEUoU䍊QVy"Q1ESyNK7d V@LpUH%Ҏ Jk8I7@qy?ǯy?@qy?NP,M'Gr _\%/'Gr zy<iuzjvW>>ry~Iwq+B@%cs%m }^ӒI9WEo/B.9n{E^c |>H^Fx-E#9n{E^cc?ymq8OǁGr6$C#9n{E^c}Bx$m -#9n{E;{2olĥ}FA21:H7)&E~@P[VEިlE>[(ES1E[+X5GϺcO#Sw*򝊼Q7*|"Ǧ} whu؂z߀g,{lgScN(zY];POouuKm<<]'=hH<ΣHTy_ &yl:e.bR"ױWj1cO?#_Fg]˾ yk9^y$>hi`$la>@J!_#Hg#Fg@/`TnP-:^f:^ }Rو3g"Hآ OREg#Fb~FS=q [ta\jFW?ZBc*?1kL`/W@KHآ| G>FV&0. pi [t9>qz=lI5>!&6o?> &lM.9GRQmMG (KQ #GqDJy)+ E]oWAE"GQgyHy+"c<'*򉊼V*|"ߠ7(r9l/L{n'3 ڕP&3 bڳACq9r1USVfB0{#7R^XAߟ ]B,$[pA]͞ nB*A+Wzeٲ5<Q *-ɖx"xޖdK!Gq--g h!bG?QMǫ]_y2Ii?J,Z[j x%ikG̮1=2ҺSg{׵l[^YEJ &5Tc2IYnIzb&A~n:#"%Ix~_P|YG5 0v='ƀv 9ߔߗ>]16|sK>693c%fDlŶbۢvu lK-v(j ~ /ymbh{!l¶N;5;9vBm sl¶N;9?b+df؎vBm/1ĶEm!+p(.mm9w@zwh^~!5 5-* ߑ@`;+1m'u ]F`,N+mv#ۍ-|WJ۾ڒ亽޿~h?; ^7irW;[36|D݋Teʿͧߊ^>@V5#GT16qJ PU#9u%Dd -GI0  # A"1]هu;xU @=1]هu;05 J,x] pU}yɓĴ@(^~!iѠ3Rg3(VFD( ł5jc5: VZhKu:l޾{lcwϞvϞo޳{_8cl1P6ї8<]X ϝ )M52v>Q,ƮSE7fQbB (n,lEmů"Bݟ]Hê7G{z8!(+*ICch5kOgJ3)#@CYÒm\jHn8#~gԖɰ|U'cPdu6vɴ:[`d+ ?R.9;.M`~]}O[yěyt`z&n-ACSo m+|:"vKiiQk";z„{עi#K}?`>^1܆O=i Mea--^)nLӋs mɥ{E}T='\})Ζ/jX-Xx A$(2Wn s4vkIc%[<_zN5w+OmM,Y~L~bܭ I}{+\wu~4a)̗s,kjskZkƎk-SZȣk-+|Ls?-\kaZhלa~a~[18U+؜.^71{v!2ԍRuq Ź1&4 t= #9voiWC7b?-ߠ|ocJq@+c&ߥ7k͚|&_h|&5y&v^긡6np-VZWWgbQx,GU1+-ϑN- 1wb޹lռz~cu@^9uH; Qѿr6 r ^?G g Ҏs_r r ^{ayOiGRs<9D8iGRLkE3y+HKqtLr rDE^c o#|6HK}sZsGrDE^c]׳Jx$GW>ѥp!_ <#+R pJ_oy}t\Po勀GrDE^cA-#9"/?)M#9" =wq;gr2kQcʲZf^&ߥwi͚|&_Wi|&ɧirM^}.B(YW34>M]o4*M>Kgk=ڷ/Mq.[-8v1[WuZV9v spp5k<{_)<γm # S ^ylMq=[-*n\ bЕr n#_E姳_k5^$>H@FF؏4Jfzt#Lg"FOFM֧Yb ń8&tǎ=ȟ3iohF/jsEӁ?>$(FFGJq(5K:0 >ZHb¨V6O 7yf(Frt(O#A10 R>'*n>!T~&b$wi_.(FFe<16]>T~&b$Ӂ<¦'ֺA10t| /3#HFuPpt#i y♦%?xo3#+JF mpmFF@Ǡ+[||+]:0ϱ{x96(FFOs+y9M|7Ie-b[Ж̷ϸl\}M[zI0m>ҞzʛẼZRQ&T@ܘR\R\VE}/SXGul3ԱΪ :VPXaQGE;.:j u\fU;PbQGE; u[ߎ~TG~u3dc$e~8,£VG3񒡎f:*; p쨧~¨8?$+85y&ߡwhfMެ[5y&?ɏk>9>Fkњ|&gj|&_4y&o䍚\?gg3hY|~2g0O֮Μys_|s>cvP.ecS5<]#sHeW7|V7tVuuw–edK=F罟t;xʼI[-`s$/JJ8^uq@[F[OX2#\_mMxLc<{<#?̶L&[Q h*XGҖrK<ϗcG !ɖG%78 BЀn-k_y-}){*.;$%~OsL 4Xc2fҔz>m0yǀ֘LUlYxx)nɳ 5OtLN{򎘜O*'1|`O H͹  1Wϧ &IL1)>|`2~)֘$$5OuLf߯2`2Aj|=+$%ƞO1vLV4`"U2n)n:v&1}<±+5֞O`ـc0ɾOQdw/BKl]Nhw1 !ۡ1~1 }m]wEc]Wxȿ#JۜIgFTWAmYFcB=Eq1YuѾXc9K'zf%6w26!6hF6rli!f%&6-9DȀ!klJpL(lNqaapه(}lpaC3CaSrdظG~ 6Ily&7E/aM R65qݟ( L֓߷0YoI%`R'!&'[0i"5`dIyIUmS;k;s,6}?a1& 9XRf&amk -톘COl la~76}1m6ض~m mexvCLܡ o~ ؾ } 1u6~Fo~ۉ} 1y9 ~ JU!w(~c7ɀm%7Cl|Os Sa~;6}{ űmE-3`;+} {m7`{} lBlaá k l¶<ĶJTm@},)~ݞoPt[:Sjneƒ?_jG"'nmZFzj$*Sn.}W~3ֈ=N;}W7 KP2]CDuNX1c4Dd t" 0  # A2[PfG(Tɩ0&|_7U `!/PfG(Tɩ0&|_\pvUX_xXOlTi[1i&R*jhA%Nj-R*N4&qC%vˤsE`RMP|I8It=;B'- !6L EMksq]KBD b{.jt{$x>Ǥo[3{Rp/yrg@gimyY31=K L,oێ\x\+H3:~Lj{;l7z~E}_E4>VYܟ^qp {se;,JL8z:VX4b^Nb$x! g^qIp4jIގlQ7υ6ߗ*SWU`WԟeWRͫA;Gu?nVVL]!66bA<=7!J͟A_-Mf*jm5eLnA^&Afc$[yL\I[kfU920Q̭ihjFQa ћ#%%z#wZV29@aN 1*#=Yո%qU)m*`zTF-(6u٠gkf!ʙ}Wl`nw:5ȕ ,P3nka&iJ2r\'vwWZ@6G?onA`nwl[Fpi_MQZ*]˛0>1'W}z7|9߃||jIa,on ,6A8^H;vYpe Y<ݷRE+\M Z,ʟQ^:B}6\ fӶT5Ou+=::$_ |9];|!8t]8Hs$C#{PkހXmg3^ vqv2xb1!XH%dj2CcOX"N xgeFȻ[=w7;J3/lݩûݯû]Kbg^F*v{mJ?_Ծ;ϭ)^ #]3Dd 0  # A":9W$p(T}uQ뀭:C0!TqB`R[  D&DIF %!YHwK&؍? WfΛsgno:v0}==?߹?oED㠄QuGd"w$ E[5= kѭ ;;=?>#k]:^7SЇ xw5nTo:#|R]/ ZJe+~uu)} }l}A;Q_uw׭[liu[S跿>v)~X!X W_ z *guV1z˫V\. Gk,~:eo90.|zc﹪m{ 3,_קt^s 7r7s(Y͢| |2}1u?g}.2{Qx9慭+=_K{@|?)~<|h|kb9Wa9D ߫~.y -M7 XomBc \>): NK)ێ-^Bm!r"öRQ~E-b?s9O0d_[1mhe>$|o٬.&qq\q*"GQEy1@~(F k*-'9xlt]L<6[ Z1r,;nS'i}l+ ދ`aS9u9V׉^Sg gh6fm~{StaԾfGG?:UT%wO9ނ=KQ||?qmƞ\ 6{wب$;J H^ލK~P,f{S,Qq⃥B{n,~`bK8oc, n(:jt0Y?AK\Q˽ByJ,J=f`{gFv"v^";ǔ$ (o5;p]QQ||YrkǸ a4='6Dr{ F@/ͧ `Y3hreʍߍOsllt#wO[c4!Oێ'Bog'!={̙-0»);:5c=J&H~38zK.hA>Nzoua`DX&0U `!>a`DX&0P|H4V`MUxWkWVdEZ *e!CHr-i 1q)i{WuV*%P ЃRCȡ)TB*Λ]ɶ0ef~3f \qX`{K_,zS|匃4e5:wD ߤg3?!w[P7mkK]2f B3\|v?Ɔ+փYtP.WY?ĮY/i7~@e| ob[N~gbt:iƭՖjjI C,y@9eA'MOb-jI2?֢1ޖM£1`dU۰T{F60*Z%lyrħ1yvg$Kx^' L9]mZ[5utT˨e(ZFͼc`oZfên<4Gү7Ӽc-Fh3O"* oh-&LI/iʏiZy[_Wy92Gxo?DDh,#$Gg>ZGϺ);&*ϴk2)(:h~Ң^[=mOuSY:Ut6YN^>:If`KX \@eϷ[M/Wnod[Ѫ;f#Q ExI\+Z[#Xc77] jlכkFfFPDJ&D٠S}WhLc1R0 /߇45b~:x?_yi^b?K,7N|DE~~{Vڂї_:;&r ǣoݰױ+ƣWsy~(' 7/x؊www5/jZLHMM jEM(M$_94S>QfX,U^}Ow)=<z)<7w{hٳz!Qg2_ .%Gyk@G9!L_g7Y \ak؝C;!4|[u-7ſpzCJU?\Íx88 C%>hɮVE"wrEᖅH 2e@ -HcqY I~w\%I{: ZMWHG;nJhܘX]ɽdQ:ݘݟvϑݏpT(olإ[&\e'[vŃr%i(_][Vԑ:)"v,#:>*x6(nssU'ѳu֘F` y̬S\Tj6c5PoGMVuчve,W;eI>kY_7g ̵̛ c;W*z&eNkznM;[9ؓ5OI&pdIBWt¯moc11zҺ-ΖVjꆴf|!_DI\t_*?(_D,߯???p{Q K4>`kx;-Q {vMz,զV$}Z 8Z.vh n Sp>s+xICN&3c` NΛIb6fX067 [Fj(R)_(Sk[GCVSa-l0x14BJt\3LA~]db$8_SȘ33f 5eN+5M~5jV{QT_M -jo>jJD[Àzh#?~^H#0,GQny/Ȏaȓ mQa_|GxkJΓvEN컀B]_0T}԰,>vu$g3==hvwJf^ׂRc%g3iVr_"m3{ /7!oV/@Dd $ 0  # A2)oDaĨԵU `!oDaĨԵ"H HZ(xWoVHŲ>Bbl*l$WVb NlNH8@-QDWv![CC3/Zk;x #%[*|_{{G(N * C(3]MFs{G*Shty^1Xp'К{V]x"~ bɪ;][tHk8`ZO|E*$vJ Cj;:y/'Gm6^uZpjjX#DFC)&M3Yu'q4w4RUI65pOyYs0~K`of]&ܭbݑ˸+dS<\[s,}{ t޲]ܴ%tFW;SJ'K1)l:IOɃts%~7>Owv~~d;E"]LD;`R*3'?q<:A\b\x6ۢSgk28UbJY̦l^O/Lf.߲3Lp&E wϪm`b˖xj[b#Mb,GIn"=ev73rGr&mf &s;`y?Y5s^$˭KdE3Rt-Q=Ytt:&TV EVNu.Y KT'[/RČ +9P,H5_u/0ך:k ܩ ,* F[W7}ڭ}qXޚZy^)UvvwE _~®l:KXlTvJVL# 3aN}#x?{jxTjVH R?'Pֲv  gHTH)Ve_ JkPuJAwB NV\Ɯ *;s6U|k4F☙{X{7y-R45FGܫ]#1o|t Dh #?y_Y7BdM1ýe/ufj$s^A1VD}/A|oJ1XЎXǾ,7u _ͯbc l&%۱M~v73|0VJcؽ!ؽ.U Jv&{^=Bau7!m>&Ӯ Dd 6p0  # A2Q<!Y^tZ5۝/-yˋ^{)iTFh 9G p|:U/w_EgsG_%A~w̧a XR?y\;ޢc82q4M _U+v g|cr-;*eā7n=`ꝉ'ɔ 'wk$X-fV289>whMȻj+ ,6i盝_jM.X Ze8Nt%ޕqۼ4<7y1YV˗p1;ALL?jL My~kvXԚ#z_[3Y9:JJr;"qJa6*kVɪHƱ5[S!6+FIC/hWt+:Cou:%1{KL0=XϯJ밞)?ﮃ~H1A\KͅVkEcZQ&>gM?r#V@4-N~K^rCne^I,hCwQ{aDBXNmsBCWK-o))ScvN˲ 4q YI,i72;'0f ;9!i7tc0[7o]݆N"o-9=c5yT ەkrz#fu7pmYwНX-x~u`:tEnŴtE0ֈ3,c,\1VK"c˻diS0 0a4bػ[`&5akh, J`eaei4LkG Ofyr[ޝ㍧>߿Φ.ޛ?̂A^E"=s,Ef= Dd :[[0  # A2E $I*oiPß! |U `! $I*oiPß&1W+xZo.MJfXcEEZ\}6@RUDHh5vʪ.P@siz=h襗z)|0FFl}\.$ {3y{ofwA?B(ȟ_9GQ(JDBj Jj,"uD^ )Fvm1P~[P? ':"JtfyW̚UAdBa{;H$E'Hҙ-3טݬVj:z}x_I ͨqo/,ofMBY|05g0񻖻'޶=f99tihpsMj! -Rcо&_&3-|<B%uOf-y>7R'[gbWnnv,КFHKg[}KeF09gV+c~҈0QsefũbNE LCX1L=8 5&[SyޢWAߦW Ӗ xC' ͊ee|u U,e3s ӕ 4)(5$m@NtRo#9bxtg>ǬZ׬Vh I+@mBԍʮY?#3ڰ)K=xM*Yd*ri f$2NI|%1/C u %LiF] ˃~/6+Q #O~D|~2P2=}cUd^y S$ \3΃ ul!6rcD>_()чgɿH~LDL[OetPSa312ƔfS>s/8*~ gc}4è{1(v1iDs/BItF}xznrk9wD05ĝgN_+.@ky4t#ޙO'e&ٝ}>X?c]y%Q\eMQk8noi87&|oX5כ5_YkmT%lbwe۵۝–]n-$uSv٬\ 9*FioZvĆ]kUZXiV3mKt5UV)JIt֡EIheJ$YIn~L2M$Vfj+qE‚騴d@*ƙebJrk MG0O3 =i8BIcR{떋]ofOvgcImM߅87)$33B PnZƎmM\%, ?qG+pS9k o7V$8&@oYΧ?1[>lt 0wu2wxY[7jS 0xL}Ҽ^[iLF 9vVǛ9!"}R`9Xd`\ xvbzD|/+>TG}'X^R' q(§kZJ6$y0^w'F;\~!ᾢD_cmv\8NˢVlfV{Z<. -q?R-ݖŸ)%acI#ED;ق>)a<팇ٶy $PF ˓hB}ZOxs!t+Th6>m}bˑDo{ۓ=)u%Ͷw|;=l؎vDnK4mo{nۛt%Ͷ__%Z_%f̣܉ği>~/f?_1.Bl5CiDd k0  # A"'TVKjILPE U @='TVKjILP,4}F,x]lE}﵏h"%Mz+rISjj pژg5zrA J,BDQAAc4!hr(g㡽뼏y}vɰ;;b),JG,!$f 1LjBXB!MpyV2T,($@R1$7ɪx8 )0S1GA&%uteddE|PGH7adK0 (a{yc&zX.dڵ**cPy Yp²8%Mۓ$_'VŢW"[-M<Ȍw-; ({a9G. yhGl]!2gQ0,_nzvQfA>+f@ԈZõ`2l--Vl۰\-77*GP\-}}!2Gw [߷Q'7߇@qR+*-|/ (>1g.S|y,0.`/=Q'7g)ǣ_v~aó5sם៻Ќ6c6jVOpó8rN9Y̜gknTbR?v%53tbz:yΈjJkNMuA=c S/ySN:mD[ ȖӰ/+ddAoc6gzb*73>QGax>nV;*NObHXcI~U(@NPeg^ax2 ÷1|3|=W1|Û (ã 0mԕx 'pʑY #Vr?s"tzE$?9tp4ՊI?cRI]tMcJ|+>8w`_xD;/vzFK6YC~>g򽇗ˈze[y yv>mrlĹ/"X E7LQ򲱓9nٸ ng򝛗8w\Jsĕd~k)~%|&٘)|?̺n|]N 9 ~x1o&&a;>n>&yx%)LSRܰF^7'{Y#US<%k O0B#a'gu2^wGѯlUo}4y,NY/q٘H Vd`BQ|4؆:"l͈ 0`ʍ{_W#jSJcT6ͥw?7G g%Gn8n{ k?VAKm0/$`o~ S )Ag+ #Sr )uzay9LUx5}%liP7^^؟l}VlWOjςXsron ;Mw8I:<6<q{ :|_UBc"WG t%Db bgLd.1,ia666E::geW-5XO=R+F_+tYà~'~ؚQ̾21<(c /0|w0 VkeK>gwZ6'ϻNty-oȯ3_qtvgs>3=(W9㱌g=H(5٨Is/43ʬMO>@-Cin{h,p貎to./ry 6q(1K%He;rȐ]>vQ)wp2H|&11]YѯI%2yu&ߤ.8gA]&~.*;Fq.eGԐr |Lc>g%>6䣆|>OGYH|qU})Qpwuw>K*huyaF (A.;~]L"˘7:tqK0^0Rc4nN,2wX_ڈim6c(hu=̴-x!/1 8$b |CĎ>6&Pڿ/LoX1޵ Ná:oP_D뿦XbLs!C>vheGXHSP0N>?18e8e)K s*d&NiT;NSP0N9Sχc%qJ>ʍb?|4\ ?*>nr&|,!jXbG%NY@qJ>Okh7(W|$) (Ni>^6c>A||dn>vQ}> WWv9SE*}7V 4ڵļ~McOA{M&\V~~Ȑ۝nw!' R')q;vbk{e)ܞJiI܆|n%NKoMu Қ!έ̸z)d Wmo ~mMߝnoJ*A,uo3䶉{HmSJN&!k5>bdZQs;1^͙p{]톔-O5s;(V#Cn&>pvJN>{,¿)}K;}O %wLn|Ueӟ́2!dҹr:g:p[ة 5IeB\/6>ҍQ{4yĕ ՗Dd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_0F]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbٗDd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_EDF]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbٗDd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_WF]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbٗDd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_skF]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbٗDd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_ F]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbٗDd|L  C (Alogo_72R]=辱(m_F]=辱(m_JFIFHH,Photoshop 3.08BIMHHAdobed       S  s!1AQa"q2B#R3b$r%C4Scs5D'6Tdt& EFVU(eufv7GWgw8HXhx)9IYiy*:JZjzm!1AQa"q2#BRbr3$4CS%cs5DT &6E'dtU7()󄔤euFVfvGWgw8HXhx9IYiy*:JZjz ?N*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWbXלyfM2Ә-dU**]Eb/n,F|wiDg(iWӊ1_ > _L1LO,mY.ICUxP݃aSZhhiVWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*Һ8|A<濝@ռѧi׺9iO/; y)Z5 w58F98Mtx~UyY{8&c;n(˻0U1EG32O!^-voדe\h*0Ͳ,Wbwo: 9cm# 28o,m;ZųGHX\בڽRN+&Jnot]Fm4;;8(S'=I͈)&ѸPUثT^M|i6ND(JǸ;&!1E&cߔQ_4·PyN"<VeVn t6 4A;3\Wb]IB+;O;Vy}K> ~,jhthi㈢NG r|%նI3j8RDF`ޕڴ8E D)}5%4QTRIUf2YIMKl`VX"r~+CyoAd#[^EqAL ao)R(d-2Uj' d?zU[ٵ#\]9_Ј1捣"jEhرQcuCu1i%g!bYgG@ij% *£/rV; !޲CHe Ĉn>+E*em(˹56g=ͤQB"dh 6Z Xi%ybbxF"XZFy)jd,9K{[;M'$ZxCq<6U641$z;)$"t;o[P-ƒq K !#be!?Ic?- :] 3M3 ʫq/|%28oi7H$6Z[M}ԁ_V1Ҭd*E+A8t,Ml}ksCm[>IHW=⍨:mău/?LZ1)ߒ ӡTc$\N#ct˿+,nUklb,{_(0&xPl6 VjQ1 ~FSb+( hﴷnQne8BWDI1DMjMz JԑMF,; 1fEt#GFp~?F_/)ڕV\mHWbVr#G"=80"mQ 8DUӀXwAd>z`2-J. t1YzNq51;;8 \4,q݊v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb]v*UثWb.T@T XgNormal$d a$ CJOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH @ Xg Heading 1d$ & F$d  %d  &d  'd  -D`@&M N O P Q 5;B* CJph`@` Xg Heading 2 & F@&B* OJQJ\]^JaJphd@d  Heading 3$ & F<@&6B* OJQJ\^JaJphDA@D Default Paragraph FontVi@V  Table Normal :V 44 la (k(No List TOT Title on Cover5B* CJ0OJQJaJ0ph6O6 Firms$a$ 6CJ \BOB Heading5B* CJOJQJphXO1"X Table Bullets# & F P^`P<O2< Table Text CJOJQJ4 @B4 Footer  !hORh Header and Footer !d6B* CJOJQJph`Ob` Annotated Bibliography Title 5B*phZOrZ Style1 !&`#$6B* CJOJQJphNON Appendix Heading$a$ ;CJ0aJ0RYR  Document Map-D M OJQJ^JNON Table Title TextB*OJQJphZOZ Annotated Bib Table Title 5B*phPOP Annotated Bib Row Header5T0@T  List Bullet# & F 0^`0@@@TOC 1  ! 5mHnHuL@L LTOC 2$ ! ^a$ 5B* ph.@. TOC 3 ^6U@6  Hyperlink >*B*phZ^@"Z Normal (Web)"$ddd[$\$a$ CJOJQJ&O1& texhtmlDB@BD Body Text$d5$7$8$H$aJ4@R4 Header % !<P@b< Body Text 2& B* phv@sv Z Table Grid7:V'0'$d a$dOd text 2-column#( 7d5$7$8$9DH$ OJQJaJ.)@.  Page NumberFV@F FollowedHyperlink >*B* ph>@> L Footnote Text+CJaJ@&@@ LFootnote ReferenceH*F>@F %Title-$da$5CJOJQJaJK)5-Lqz{~m P l~&r w N S V 6     !"#$%&'()*+,-./l~~~~~&&rrrrrw N S S S S S S S S S V   !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345 P            W)-<5P"Dzܖ7c6 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z v !z "z #v $z %z &z 'z (z )z *z +z ,z -z .z /zW1#);/,7H?ELJYR3W_?fin t#zatbjOsޮI$)q,-<8 ",$-55>P:H !  b n$>-S^ !W"p#$%&'()*z+T,@-.f/01~2345@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNO  #$%&'()*+,-./01>?@AVpqrs _v^'@W p> Z  H g s.Whi67yz  01/#0#1#f#k#s#####$$$3$L$M$b$$$$$%%V%W%%%%%8&&&&&&1'u'v'w'''r())) )**a,b,,,8---N...8/9/:/;/J/2222O333B4k444>5?5+7,7:7888889F:q::3;;;r<<F?G?H?i?j?AAAAA&BIBfBBBBBCCCDCWDXDDDEEGGGGGHHHIJJJKJLJhJLLNNPPXRRRRMUaUuVvVVV3W4WDXEXjYkY Z Z'[([[[]]____``WcXcdd=f>f?fYfZfffeggg hhviwiiiimmnnnnfogopp|r}rrrressvvdyeyy z"z#z6~7~#%&_`/02Os/12[\]^_`abfgij} V !ԛ՛#$)/4:;Epycdoŝ DN-8^_i 567ALMNOܥݥǨ٨ !Grs ҬӬݮ13DFGHI&()#$ҹۺD`a;<>?BCnoq/0@,PR_`-./34|GO\*+-bc:;[\Iyz :;<lm56BCfgop"#7 8 K ^    N   0   -.QRmn)e!"&'tu!"x#y#+$,$$6%{%%%/(0(((,,_.t.U/V/////X0Y0k2l2334455555555555556688::I<J<x=y=??%@F@@7AVBWBBaCME+HuHH0IIJJ?K L LLLLLLLL$L%L&L'L(L)L,L-L:LyLLLLLLLLM7MCMDMEMQMMMMMMMMMNNNZN[N\N`NaNmNNNNNNNNN:OjOvOwOxO|O}OOOOOOOPP00p00000000000000000$0$0p-0-0-0-0p-0-0-0-0-0-0p-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$00000000000000000000000000 0 000000000000000000000p000p00p00p00000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 000p 0p 0 `0 00)p0)p0)p0)p0)p0)p0)p 0)p 0) 0) 0) 0)p0)p0)p0)p0)p0)p 0))p0;/p0;/(0;/p0;/p 0;/p 0;/p 0;/ 0;/ 0;/p 0;/0;/0;/0;/p0;/p0;/p 0))p0,700,7p 0,7p 0 ,7p 0 ,7p 0 ,7p 0 ,7 0 ,7 0,7p 0,7 0,70,70,7 0))p0r<0r<p0r< 00H?p0H?p 0H?H?p0Ap0Ap 0Ap 0A 0A 0A 0Ap 0A 0A 0A 0Ap 0Ap0Ap0Ap0A0Ap0Ap0Ap0Ap0A0Ap0Ap0Ap0Ap 0H?H?p0Gp 0H?H?0H0H0H0H 0H?H?p0LJH0LJp0LJp0LJp0LJp0LJp0LJ0LJ0LJp0LJp0LJp 0H?H?p0MUp0MUp 0MU 0MU 0MU0MU0MUP0MUp0MUp0MUp0MUp0MUp0MUp0MU0MUp 0H?H?p0[0[0[0[0[0[X0[p 0H?H?p0`p0`p0`p0`0`0H?0=fp 00?fp0?fp0?fp 0?fp 0?fp 0 ?fp 0!?f 0?f?f0 h0 hp0 h0 hp 0?f?fp0ip0ip0ip0ip0ip 0?f?fp0n0np0np0np0np0np0np0n0n0n 0?f?f0es0esp0esp0esp0esp0esp0esp0es0es0esx0esp0esp0esp0esp0es0esp0esp0esp0esp0esp0esp0esp 0?f?fp02p0202p02p02p02p02p02p0202020202p02p0202p02p02p02p02p0202 0?f?fp0j0jp 0"jp 0#jp 0$jp 0%jp 0&j 0'j 0(j 00p0p0p0p0p0p0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00p00p0p0p0p 0)p 0* 0+ 0٨ 0٨ 0٨p 0,p0p0 0p0p0p0p0p0p00p 0p03p03p03p03p0303030303p03p03p03p03p030303p 0p0p0p 0-p 0 0 0.( 00Dp0Dp0Dp0D0D0D0Dp0Dp0D0D0D0Dp0Dp0Dp0Dp0D0D0D0Dp( 0p0p0p0p0p0p0p 00q0qp0qp0qp0qp 0p0p 000 0/ 00 01 02p 03p00p0p0p0p0p0p00p 00p0p0p0p 04p 05p 06 07 08 09 0:000p0p0p000p0p00p0p0p0p0p0p000p0p 00p0p0p 0;p 0<p0p000000000p000p0p0p0p0p0p 0p00p000p0p 0= 0>p 0?p 0@p0p00000p00p0p0p0p0p0p0p0 0 08 8 p0K p0K p 0AK p 0BK p 0CK p 0DK  0EK  0FK 0K 0K p0K 0K p0K 0K 0K 0K p0K p0K p0K p0K p0K p0K p0K p 0GK  0HK  0IK  0JK  0KK p0K 0K p0K 0K 0K 0K p0K 0K p0K p0K p 08 8 p0!p0!0!0! 0L! 0M! 0N!p 0O!p 08 8 p0%p0%p0%0%0%0%p0%p 08 8 p0p0p 0p 0p 0p0000p00p00p00M9000p0p0p0p0p0p000p0p0p0p0p0p0p00p0p0000p+0+0+0p+00p+0+0p+0+0+0+0p+0+0+0+0+0p+0p+0M90e0M90!d0M90!d0M90!$d0M90!\d0%0M90 !3d0M90 ! 4dM90 M90!De00000M90!8-?0M90!??000p0p0pM90!C?000p0p0pM90"!pD?0M90$!EA000p0p0pM90*!FA0M90,!@000p0p0pM902!@0M904!@000p0p0pM90:!@0M90<!@00p0p0pM90!dM90 dM90("dM90 d  888888OOTTTTkkpppp U [ ` A,}[ C i@V"(.287=hCFGIJ{NPRWYL]tbgjnqvBy |&ΏZj /ΰ2X&vizN'#)-  JA#%d- 6?EjH)TVX  !"$%&'(*+,./1235689;<>?ACDFI+  +,L,,V--.u/b4k<rDWLXe pz0i#:c ^ 6M&p .)7>RT`VWX    #)-047:=@BEGHJX *>Z\]_   /Uqstv=Y[\^~"$%'G`|~;=>@`5QTUWw   -Njmnp 8 ; < > ^ ~  8 T W X Z z     ? u  & B E F H h    ) E a d e g ;Qmpqs (+,.P X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%X%̕  '+8?BT[^!!!!!!!  k??"$Z§q\ l\y"$/4Z:e’+ R$]=辱(m_@ j(  ZB  s *DԔB S  ?X>@(  HB  C DHB  C DHB  C DHB " C D HB % C D HB , C DHB 4 C DHB 9 C DHB : C DHB ; C DHB < C DHB = C D HB > C D P|$T*AO]l4Lt"U,!ULt"U9!U:!UL1U;!UL t" U<!U"L1U=!U%L !U>!U$ _Toc131984964 _Toc131984965 _Toc131984966 _Toc131984967 _Toc131984968 _Toc131984969 _Toc131984970 _Toc131984971 _Toc131984972 _Toc131984973 _Toc131984974 _Toc131984975 _Toc131984976 _Toc131984977 _Toc131984978 _Toc131984979 _Toc131984980 _Toc131984981 _Toc131984982 _Toc131984983 _Toc131984984 _Toc131984985 _Toc131984986 _Toc131984987 _Toc131984988 _Toc131984989 _Toc131984990 _Toc131984991 _Toc131984992 _Toc131984993 _Toc131984994 _Toc131984995 _Toc131984996 _Toc131984997 _Toc131984998 _Toc131984999);/-7r<H?AGHLJMU[`?f hines2j3Dq8 K !%_.P  !"#)I/97<h?AHHgJ`U[`XfhinsM|Cѹ_,J ]  "%s.Pl9 Z [< |< d #` h"l; |#`"D ¦æ Ħ Ŧ Ʀ  ǦȦɦ\ ʦTA ˦̦п ͦ|C ΦZ"Ϧ Ц Ѧ ҦӦlԦN զؼ ֦M צ ئM ٦\N ڦ ۦܦd ݦ! ަߦ"মl᦮ ⦮㦮4 䦮Ԥ#妮L#榮LM#禮t 覮l 馮Z"ꦮl' 릮L즮L  G 瑩G 6L D\#u * 4 ,[\f"< \#\ K#P ( M# Lx  l      , , D   x  ,z #dO ,O    |  R    ! $    N |  |8 ,T , + l t, , 0 P )Ĥ!# , K   t" t    | ܝ d     \   S "D#  # 9#Tϼ  :l"t"^  ҹ Լ  !1  l |#T  #t]lT l |o  d0  d  #Ġ#| @ B E  < d ( RD d L lv\Sd[  T"!z"t# $%|&t' (z ) *| +\=,z -dX .\\/ą0o 1k 2, 3 ' 44#5 6;7 8 9Ġ :L"; <T =$> ?\ @̌ A B C| D n _  \   ?t \ $  Y x 4  \ )#   n_ \ T/>\?\???HInJU4[]\`eiEj8qz~U)ΔΔڔ;pdD-_ 7)?HHWWmyyV==t880ddqqYYmmS l l ^ ^     /llNjj  &!u!!!!&b&b&&&3/3/446689: ;;4<r<<<.=.=@@@@]A]A4C4CKLLlLlLLLLL0M0MMMMMNNGNGNNNNN-O-OcOcOOOOOP      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcedfghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~     >>~~  MRR^++R R !!""""""R#R#r#r###B)B)))))-*-*----X/X/222255;5;566(7(7 <0=0===??h?h???HJ~JU@[n\asiWjJq~c7֔+DxnĝM7h@7KTT^^tbDD+??<kkxxee  &tt_ s s e e     =ssZqq  2!|!!!!"&i&i&&&?/?/44669#9:;<F<~<<<:=:=@@@@iAiA:C:CK L LxLxLLLMM6M6MMMMMNNMNMNNNNN9O9OiOiOOOOOP  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcedfghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~     _*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-regionhttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/>*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsdateV*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplacehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/Z*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceNamehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/Z *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceTypehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/i *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState0http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags 110111219199319961999220002001200220052006233315789DayMonthYear                                                                                                                                                     FMir ",3`i!,:Dtit?"J"##$$<'D'''n)u)++++s-z-//#0*00011;3B3p3w3333333Q5Z566S7\777'8.8J8U8 999999::R;]; >>^@c@mCtC-D8DDDGGBHIHKKLLMMnOyOOO:PDPvPPQQTTUUVVYW`WWWWWXXXXXX YY#Y*YZZFZMZZZ[[*\1\/gh|w|>g?bkauuyA?quxdEqv}N~4)BRCVzXIzi_y8:|A4EIXQp^Zp`ef}JtGQ^2 J> ~X k >!""$"4@"6I".#$i $8$]$G&H&L&wT&N3'x'F|'`(b(%$)Q)U)$ *CM*Y*g*+ )+H:+_+-,5-B-\-g-]X.!/A/^Q/d/z/ 0v0}05191W1K72B 3338D3\3h3E>4]4H5]e5y66O6~a6p6]77E.7E7DS7U7Y8)8ks89\9qg9x :0:;m`;a;<"<LU<ZV<zV<5=X=)^=>>'$>,>v4>?O4?T@;@z@f@q@ AKQAcABB[Bu*BRBb C:CG;CJHCV}C D D"D@%DnDYEfZE!G\G\GksGKHdsHtIqI5I5GI[IJS%J7J:JUJxJ+ L/2L&?LCLELM_ MQ@M oM tMxM0N NN,NMN?O+OC6O@OGOeXOB|O(}OP"PcPQ^Q}`QsQ4RSNCSTS*Ta+TmTQU7V8VCVlVsVzV- W&|W&"X-X9XBX]X&0Y.eYZVZU(Z7ZxBZRZjZerZ{Zx[.[:[O[R[:\N\z] ]m])]I]`d]a^:6_QK_q_}_``H```Ih`u a:aUaUkahla3bZb#cbcXRcZucd!d1d6deezfS9f ;f?f@f8NfUfffXg:hmhi)iRLi/j:jgjk*7k\kHukQl~+k|k%&1@IRVT~rz+8;|8 3[q;Q`}'|otiTKsk;BQRq' J('v"Xs(G*YQ} 1r{D~\s>RRXWb$q_Gx ' X:f\S`i|,05KUcborvv|+ >[("NNyr("+6[v%%''f'Vd "{&4>]U|**Hf3;^9GCmK_w{17&PoqRR_aq7 @#07K3orAADF_/5_E$q7 2Vqu!l 2p5C"'H [!1n2OZc|{T*Yo.rph~h (FNW"a9LZq ~3U(]ccO<-IHR; [ A&pu&)+Bsnx~-<SdZjW:fHhu%tPdg34xb%bmWif#k#s#####$$$3$L$M$b$$$$$%%V%W%%%%%8&&&&u'v'82ԛ՛#$)/4:;Epycdoŝ DN-8^_i 567ALMN? LOPP @' P@UnknownG: Times New Roman5Symbol3& : ArialE& Century Gothic5& zaTahoma?5 : Courier New;Wingdings"qhFF$F/6D/6D4d?? 2qHP?a xTDevelopment of Winter Severity Indicator Models for Canadian Winter Road Maintenance Jeff Suggett Chris George<         Oh+'0 $0<L dp    UDevelopment of Winter Severity Indicator Models for Canadian Winter Road Maintenance eve Jeff Suggettf WeffeffNormalg Chris Georgef W2riMicrosoft Word 10.0@@j7%X@4^%n@4^%n6/՜.+,D՜.+,< hp|  TSHD?A UDevelopment of Winter Severity Indicator Models for Canadian Winter Road Maintenance Title  8@ _PID_HLINKSAD 1_Toc1319849991_Toc1319849981_Toc1319849971_Toc1319849961_Toc1319849951_Toc1319849941_Toc1319849931_Toc1319849921_Toc1319849911_Toc1319849901_Toc1319849891_Toc1319849881_Toc1319849871_Toc1319849861_Toc1319849851z_Toc1319849841t_Toc1319849831n_Toc1319849821h_Toc1319849811b_Toc1319849801\_Toc1319849791V_Toc1319849781P_Toc1319849771J_Toc1319849761D_Toc1319849751>_Toc13198497418_Toc13198497312_Toc1319849721,_Toc1319849711&_Toc1319849701 _Toc1319849691_Toc1319849681_Toc1319849671_Toc1319849661_Toc1319849651_Toc131984964  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F@u%nData L1Table.WordDocumentSummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjj  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q