DevelopingfortheFuture:

ResidenceProjectEvaluation
26.11.2015

AlexiaAddona
AhmedAl-Own
JonathanBeaudoin
ElricBoisvert

ExecutiveSummary
Bishops University is a small institution of learning, known for its personal
approach and the development of their students as a whole person. Being small has
many advantage for the university, but also many challenges. Limited classrooms lead to
lower enrollment, which then leads to lower income compared to large universities such
as McGill and Concordia. Due to these low income levels, Bishops has had to allocate
funding to emergency causes, this has caused funding to residences to be extremely low
and renovations to be pushed. The University has now come to the point where it cannot
push the renovations of its residences, and all need major renovations. With this time of
major renovations, an opportunity to consider the building of a new 125-bed residence
comes into play.
In this report, two possible scenarios for Bishops are analyzed: scenario 1 involves
building a new residence and demolishing Mackinnon, whereas scenario 2 involves
majorly renovating Mackinnon. Through NPV analysis, as well as various other financial
analysis techniques like payback and IRR, the desirability of each scenario is looked into.
A sensitivity analysis and financial break-even were also conducted to see what intervals
created a better environment for each scenario to be desirable. We found that scenario 2,
that is n
ot
to build a new residence, under the given circumstances was best according to
the NPV of the project. However, due to many different factors such as reputation,
valuation and student satisfaction, we recommend scenario 1 to be carried out.

TableofContents
Executive Summary
1
Overview
3
Goals
3
Assumptions
..4
Rental Income
...4
Cash Flows
4
Amortization
.4
Inflation Rate5
Tax Rate5
Discount Rate...6
Introduction
....6
Description of Scenarios 1 & 2
....7
Cash Flow Projections
..8
Cash Inflow.8
Costs.9
Amortization...10
Scenario Analysis
..11
Discounted Payback
....11
IRR
...11
NPV
..11
NPV Profile.12
Sensitivity Analysis
..13
Financial Break-Even
...14
Final Recommendations
14
Conclusion
...16
References
....17
Appendices
...18

Overview
Bishops University has longstanding reputation as one of the most personal
undergraduate study experiences in Canada, encouraging the education of the whole
person. It had an enrollment of 2,360 full-time students in 2014 (
Bureau de coopration
interuniversitaire
, 2014). Comparatively, universities such as Concordia and McGill had
an enrollment rate of 21,310 and 22,890 full-time students respectively, which is
approximately 900% higher than that of Bishops (
Bureau de coopration
interuniversitaire
, 2014).
Being a small university gives students a unique experience that cannot be found
in the larger institutions around Canada. However, it does come with some consequences.
The idea of less income being a major concern. Due to this, Bishops has had to focus on
investing their funds into affairs that needed to be addressed immediately. The campus
residences have now become one such affair that is in desperate need of renovations.
One residence which requires special attention is that of Mackinnon. Instead of a major
renovation (scenario 2), a new residence of 125 beds could be built (scenario 1).

Goals
1. Determine the possible cash flows, cost amortization and net present value (NPV)
incrementally (taking into account both scenarios) for 10 years.
2. Explore what outcomes of scenario 1 and scenario 2 would create an environment
of economic viability by looking at various possible interest rates and occupancy
rates.
3. Describe in which cases each scenario would be best for the university, by looking
at findings in the NPV sensitivity analysis, break-even analysis, payback,
discounted payback and internal rate of return (IRR).
4. Discuss reasons for choosing one scenario over another, taking into account all
calculations and projections, as well as current facts about the university and its
plans for the future.

Assumptions
To develop our cash flow projections and amortizations, we had to make many
assumptions with regards to residences, interest rates, inflation rates, etc. These
assumptions will be explained in more detail later on in the report.
RentalIncome
1. Residences are rented over a period of 8 months, and monthly rent is to be paid in
8 equal installments.
2. After any given residence is renovated, it is assumed that the monthly rate charged
will be equal to that of the Paterson residence.
3. The monthly rate that would be charged in the new residence would be equal to
that of the Paterson residence.
4. After each of the renovations to Abbott, Kuehner and Munster, 4 additional beds
will be made available, increasing the maximum occupancy from 90 to 94 per
residence.
5. The rental occupancy rate (o-rate) is assumed to be 94% of available beds.
6. During the Abbott renovation, the 90 beds in that residence are unavailable.
However, 30 temporary beds have been made available and are rented at the
Abbott rental rates. A similar arrangement will be made next year if the Kuehner
residence is renovated.
7. During the major renovations of Munster, Mackinnon, Norton & Pollack, no beds
will be available at all, 0 beds are assumed.
8. Inflation is taken into account by assuming an increase in rent by the amount of
inflation (3% assumed) per year.
9. In the case of scenario 2 (building the new residence), it is assumed that
Mackinnon residence will stay open fully at the 94% o-rate until all major
renovations are completed on all of the residences and is then demolished.
10. Double rooms are assumed to be 15% less in rent that single rooms.
CashFlows
Amortization
1. Under both scenarios all of the renovations and/or the new construction and
demolition will all be financed through debt.
2. These long-term loans will be taken individually once each renovations or
construction or demolition begins.

5
3. The debt repayment begins once each project is completed.
4. Bishops University borrowing power and credit history allows them to have 3
types of financing depending on whether it is for a renovation, a new
construction, or a demolition.
a. Renovation: Long-term loan with a fixed monthly principal payment, a
10-years term, a 4.20% fixed interest rate for the term, and a 25-years
maximum amortization.
b. New construction: SWAP loan with a fixed monthly principal payment, a
1-year term, a 4.00% variable interest rate, and a 30-years maximum
amortization.
c. Demolition: Long-term loan with a fixed monthly principal payment, a
10-years term, a 4.20% fixed interest rate for the term, and a 10-years
maximum amortization.
5. These loans cover for the construction costs, furniture and equipment costs,
contingencies and professional fees, as can be seen in more detail in the appendix.
InflationRate
1. Inflation rate is assumed to be 3%.
2. Inflation rate has a yearly impact on:
a. Rental fees
b. Equipment cost
c. Minor renovation
d. Major renovations
e. Demolition fee
TaxRate
1. The Goods and Sevice Tax (GST) Rate is 9.975%.
2. The Quebec Sales Tax (QST) Rate is 5.00%.
3. Given that Bishops University is a non-for-profit institution it beneficiates from
tax refunds both on GST and QST for its capital expenditures and non-capital
expenditures.
a. Tax refund on GST for capital expenditures of 73.77%
b. Tax refund on GST for non-capital expenditures of 67.00%.
c. Tax refund on QST for capital expenditures of 57.87%.
d. Tax refund on QST for non-capital expenditures of 47.00%

DiscountRate
1. The discount rate is assumed to be 4.20%, an average rate of return for risk-free
assets such as Bank of Canada treasury bills.

Introduction
Bishops University was established in 1843 and over the years expanded. On its
campus several well-known buildings and halls were built and renovated which increased
Bishops Universitys prestige. Among them is St. Marks Chapel, Bishops Williams Hall,
the Centennial Theatre, the John Bassett Memorial Library, and more recently, Paterson
Hall, and the John H. Price Sports and Recreation Centre. These new constructions, along
with their maintenance and renovations, helped Bishops University grow in size and in
prestige and allowed it to remain a very relevant institution over the years.
Bishops University is now facing a problem. All of its residences, except for the
Paterson Residence, are in great need of repairs, and would require major renovations in
order to continue to accommodate students for years to come. One residence in
particular, the Mackinnon Residence, is in such a state of disrepair, that it is questionable
whether it would be more beneficial to renovate it or to demolish it and build a new
residence. Given that Bishops University does not have a choice and needs to make
major renovations on most of its residences, it is left with two scenarios that relate to the
Mackinnon Residence. For the first scenario Bishops University demolishes the
Mackinnon Residence to build a new residence, and for the second scenario, Bishop's
University fully renovates the MacKinnon Residence.
In order to help Bishops University to see more clearly which scenario is best, we
will look more in detail into each scenarios and what they imply. We will look at the cash
flow projections under both scenarios. We will do a scenario analysis with regards to the
payback period, the discounted payback period, the internal rate of return (IRR), and the
net present value (NPV). We will also look at sensitivity analyses with regards to
occupancy rates, inflation rates, and interest rates. And we will look at the financial
break-even point for both scenarios. Ultimately we will be offering our final
recommendation based on these analyses, which will offer us a clear idea of which
scenario is best under which circumstances.

DescriptionofScenarios1&2
Under the first scenario a new residence would have to be built, and the
MacKinnon residence, which is in a greater state of disrepair, would ultimately be
demolished. Under this scenario all of the residences would have to be renovated over a
five year period, even the MacKinnon residence would have a minor renovation in order
to accommodate students until its demolition. Under scenario 1, the renovations schedule
would begin in September 2015 with the Abbott Residence. This major renovation would
last 8 months. Then in June 2016, the Mackinnon Residence would require a minor
renovation that would last 3 months, followed by a major renovation of the Kuehner
Residence that would last 8 months, starting in September 2016. The construction of a
new residence would begin in September 2017 and last one year. There would then be a 8
months major renovation for the Munster Residence starting in September 2018, and
another 8 months major renovations for the Norton and Pollack residences starting in
September 2019. After the renovations and new construction are completed, the
Mackinnon Residence would be demolished over a 8 months period, starting in
September 2020.
Under the second scenario all of the residences would face major renovations. The
Mackinnon Residence which is inn a greater state of disrepair would require both a
minor renovation, in order to remain in working order in the short-term, and a major
renovation, in order to accommodate students for years to come. Under scenario 2, the
renovations schedule would begin in September 2015 with the Abbott Residence. This
major renovation would last 8 months. Then in June 2016, the Mackinnon Residence
would require a minor renovation that would last 3 months. The Kuehner Residence
would then undertake a major renovation that would last 8 months starting in September
2017. The Munster Residences major renovation would then begin in September 2018
and would last 8 months. Then the Mackinnon Residence would require a major
renovation that would last 8 months starting in September 2019. Finally, the Norton and
Pollack residences would undertake major renovations starting in September 2020, and
would last 8 months as well.
A detailed schedule can also be found in the Appendix section of this document.
This detailed schedule also includes construction costs and furniture and equipment costs
for each residences.

CashFlowProjections
CashInflows(RentalIncome)1
We used the principle of incremental cash flows for this particular project. This
means that we subtracted all cash flows of scenario 2 from scenario 1. This means that in
our analysis, we would only have one number for the Net Present Value (NPV) of the
project. If this number is positive under the circumstances given, the better scenario to
choose would be scenario 1 because it is higher than scenario 2`s cash flows and NPV. If,
on the other hand, the number is a negative one, the better scenario would be the second.
A timeline of both scenarios of the renovations is available in the appendix to be
able to facilitate comprehension of all the renovations and differences between both
scenarios. With regards to cash inflows, we applied the concept of inflation by increasing
rent by 3% per year. In the case of scenarios 1 and 2, we considered that all residences
who were undergoing major renovations and had
not be arranged to have 30 beds
available during their major renovations would be completely closed. For those who had a
30 bed arrangement, we considered the 30 beds to be at a 94% o-rate. In scenario 1, we
also considered Mackinnon to stay open until the end of all major renovations so that as
many beds as possible could be available even when the new residence was built, so that
students from residences in major renovations could still stay in residence. We also
considered in scenario 1 Mackinnon to be occupied at a 94% o-rate, at its old rate, but
increasing by 3% every year.
We estimated the cash inflows for 10 years. At the end of the 10 year projection,
scenario 1 would bring in a total of $36,454,775.03, whereas scenario 2 would bring in
$34,156,347.79. It is normal for scenario 1 to be bringing in more money in the first 10
years, because they have the advantage of keeping Mackinnon open in addition to the
new residence. However, this increase is not much higher than that of scenario 2.
Costs
The costs for both scenarios can be broken up into 4 categories: construction costs,
furniture and equipment costs, contingency costs and professional fees. With the
information given to us, we developed the tables below with the total costs of both
scenarios.

Full detailed cash flow projections is provided in appendix VI through VIII

Scenario 1

Year

Equipment

Minor
Renovation

Year 1 (2015-2016)

$389,820.00

Year 2 (2016-2017)

$401,514.60

Major
Renovation

Contingencies

Professional
Fees

$3,933,000.00

$393,300.00

$1,179,900.00

$447,923.31

$4,274,500.00

$427,450.00

$1,282,350.00

Year 3 (2017-2018)

$695,670.32

$10,611,304.27

$530,565.21

$2,652,826.07

Year 4 (2018-2019)

$425,966.84

$4,534,817.05

$453,481.71

$1,360,445.12

Year 5 (2019-2020)

$ 532,259.87

$3,915,664.28

$391,566.43

$1,174,699.29

Equipment

Minor
Renovation

Major
Renovation

Contingencies

Professional Fees

$3,933,000.00

$393,300.00

$1,179,900.00

Scenario 2

Year
Year 1 (2015-2016)

$389,820.00

Year 2 (2016-2017)

$447,923.31

Year 3 (2017-2018)

$413,560.04

$4,402,735.00

$440,273.50

$1,320,820.50

Year 4 (2018-2019)

$425,966.84

$4,534,817.05

$453,481.71

$1,360,445.12

Year 5 (2019-2020)

$513,325.43

$6,906,253.74

$690,625.37

$2,071,876.12

Year 6 (2020-2021)

$548,227.67

$4,033,134.21

$403,313.42

$1,209,940.26

Total costs for scenario 1, including the demolition costs of $1,739,509 add up to a
total of $40,009,024.37 over a period of 5 years. Total costs for scenario 2 add up to total
of $29,878,123.73. The $11 million difference is large but it must be taken into account
that the university will have the asset of a new building that has more rooms that can
bring in more revenue. This high difference in costs may also result in results favoring
scenario 2. This is because the new residence may not pay off after 10 years under
conditions given. If rent is changed and operating costs were taken into account, results
may vary. This will be further discussed later on in this evaluation.

10

Amortization
Under the first scenario six different loans will be taken. The first loan is of
$6,046,020 that will be paid in 300 fixed monthly payments (25-year period) of
$32,584.56. The second loan is of $7,908,164.40 and will also be paid in 300 fixed
monthly payments of $42,620.44. The third loan is a swap for the new construction
worth $ 16,738,027.47 that will be paid in 360 monthly fixed payments (30-year period)
of $79,909.90. The fourth loan is of $7,905,434.77 and will also be paid in 300 fixed
monthly payments of $42,605.73. The fifth loan is of $7,034,819.03 that will also be paid
over a 25-year period through monthly payments of $37,913.62. And the sixth loan, which
is for the demolition, is worth $2,016,567.69 and will be paid in 120 fixed monthly
payments
(10-year
period) of $20,608.99.
Under the second
scenario five different
loans will be taken. The
first loan is exactly the
same as the first loan
from the first scenario.
The second loan is
worth $7,679,548.32 that will be paid in 300 fixed monthly payments of $41,388.34. The
third loan is the exact same as the fourth loan from scenario one, which is worth
$7,905,434.77 and is to be paid over a 25-year period in monthly instalments of
$42,605.73. The fourth loan is worth $11,806,064.13 and will also be paid in 300 fixed
monthly payments of $63,927.88. And the fifth loan is of $7,241,363.60 and will also be
paid over a 25-year period paid in fixed monthly instalments of $39,026.77.

11

ScenarioAnalysis
To figure out which scenario is better for Bishops University, three methods were
used to analyze both scenarios2.
NetPresentValue
The Net Present Value was calculated by forecasting the cash flows for a 10-year
period that would incur in each scenario. Once the forecasted net income for each
scenario was found, we discounted the net incomes with the risk free rate of 4.2% to
finally find a Net present value. The Net present value that we obtained was
approximately -6 million dollars. The NPV is negative because we subtracted the scenario
2 cash flows from the scenario 1. If the number were to be positive, it would have meant
that scenario 1 is better than scenario 2. In our case, we got a negative number, which
would mean that using the NPV method only; scenario 2 is better than scenario 1 by
approximately 6 million dollars.
DiscountedPayback
The discounted payback was used to figure out when the initial costs of both
projects would be recovered. Once again, we used a discount rate of 4.2%. For scenario 1,
the discounted payback is approximately in year 2048, which is in 32 years. Scenario 2
has a discounted payback that would occur approximately in year 2045, which is in 29
years. Using the discounted payback method, once again, scenario 2 seems to be better
than scenario 1.
InternalRateofReturn
The internal rate of return is the rate a project would need to be discounted at to
have a net present value equal to zero. The higher the internal rate of return the more
attractive the project is. The internal rate of return that was obtained for scenario 1 was a
rate of 32% and scenario 2 was 42%.The IRR for incremental cash flows was -8%. Using
the IRR method, scenario 2 seems more attractive due to the internal rate of return being
negative.
ProfitabilityIndex
The last metric for measuring performance we used was profitability index.
Anything above 1 is a profitable project. Both scenarios individually have a good

Internal rate of return and profitability index were used to confirm findings from the NPV.

12
profitability index. Scenario 1 has a profitability index of 5.50, while scenario 2 has a
profitability index of 6.51.
The table shows a summary of the methods we used to confirm NPV.
Scenario 1

Scenario 2

The graph3 above shows the movement of the discounted cash flows of the incremental.
As it goes to a negative value it means scenario two is better. we can see that that
scenario one start to stabilize and becomes more attractive starting from the perpetuity.
3

More graphs available at Appendix III

13

SensitivityAnalysis
In order to further understand the factors affecting incremental NPV, we decided
to run some sensitivity analysis. There are two sensitivity analysis that show an
alternation between incremental NPV.

One of the switching points between scenario one and two begins when inflation
hits 3.5% and occupancy rate hits 85%. Oddly enough, once inflation hits 4.5% its
skyrockets towards scenario 2. The reason this happens, is due to the fact that all of the
project is financed by debt. Therefor inflation has a strong impact on interest rates (real
Interest Rate
= nominal interest rate - inflation (expected or actual)).

One sensitivity analysis we choose to pursue, was between rental price increase of
the new Mackinnon building and occupancy rates. To accomplish this, we assume that
the rental price of the new mackinnon building was the same as to that of Patterson. We
then increased the rental price per room of the new mackinnon building with respect to
certain percentages. This means that in fall 2018 the price of Mackinnon in scenario one
would be $693.88x(1+%increase). An example of this, if the rental price were to increase
by 2%. This would amount to 693.88x(1.02)=707.75. We choose to do a one time increase
in price in fall 2018 to account for inflation.

As we can see in the above figure, if the price increases by 10% scenario one
becomes more attractive. As long as occupancy rate does not fall below 85% it is more

14
attractive to build a new Mackinnon edifice. The rental price is one factor the University
can control. The figure helps us detect how much price increase is needed, in order to
make scenario one more financially appealing.
More multivariable sensitivity analysis can
be found in appendix X

FinancialBreak-Even
It can be concluded from the sensitivity analysis that scenario one and two reach a
point of financial break-even within a range of variables. As was mentioned earlier, when
using interest rate and occupancy rate as the main variables to conduct a sensitivity
analysis, we reach a financial break-even point when the interest rate variable ranges
between 3.0% and 3.5% and that the occupancy rate variable ranges between 85% and
100%. Within this range both scenario one and two have equal net present values, and are
equally satisfactory.

FinalRecommendations
Through-out this report, we focused on the quantitative side of the project. Until
now we have ignored all aspect of qualitative data. There are many qualitative factors that
affect the viability of each scenario. We believe before making any sorts of
recommendation we should look at non financial factors that could help in the valuation
of each scenario.
Reputation
An important element for the success of any university around the globe is its
reputation. One of the components used to measure the reputation of a university is its
campus. Fortunately Bishops University has one of the most beautiful campuses in
Canada. When assessing both scenarios, evidently building a brand new edifice is much
more beneficial to the overall charm of the university.
StudentSatisfaction
One of the universitys strengths, is its ability to keep student satisfaction. We
truly believe this is Bishops Universitys main competitive advantage compared to other
universities in Canada. Allowing student to in live in best possible environment is a big
contributor toward students being happy with their university.

15

Quality
Students often make their decision on whether to use residences on their first year
based on the quality of the room. This is heavily shown in the application process of
residences. Most of the students first choices are the new rez (Paterson, Abbott,
Munster, Kuehner), which fill up the quickest. Scenario one will influence students to
stay on residence for their first school year. It will also give returning students an
incentive to return to residences.
External
On this capital budgeting report, we have not accounted for external customers.
During off-school year, the universitys residences is rented out to camps, conferences
and sports teams. Having more luxurious and up to date rooms, could lead to an increase
in rental income.
Valuation
Ultimately, the value of the overall university would increase if a new Mackinnon
is built. Similar to the new gym, having a new residence building will increase the assets
on the balance sheet. therefore increasing the valuation of the university.

However, the university is running on a tight budget. Due to this we have to take
into consideration the financial aspect of this project. Throughout this report with the
help of net present value, internal rate of return and profitability index, we explained that
scenario two was the best to undergo in terms of profitability. Nonetheless, scenario two
is better due to the assumptions that were given to us in the guidelines yet, there are still
changes that could be made that will increase the viability of scenario one.
Finally, our recommendation to Bishops University is to undergo scenario one
(build a new Mackinnon) and increase its
rental price. After careful review and
discussions we suggest increasing its
price by 10%. As we can see in the
incremental npv profile figure, scenario
one
becomes more advantageous
financially when its increase in rental
price surpasses 7.5%.
Our recommendation is solidified
with strong qualitative information. We

16
believe that all the advantages a new building will carry accompanied with a rental price
increase, will make the univeristy more profitable in the long run and create more
economic value.

Conclusion
The need to keep up with larger English universities in Quebec is becoming more
and more crucial for Bishops University to be able to stay afloat, but more than that,
they need to keep trying to build a reputation of excellence in their academics as well as
student life. Without the massive funding that McGill and Concordia have, it seems quite
a difficult thing to do. However, they must gather their resources and be extremely
efficient with their use of them. One of doing so is through the renovation of its campus
to attract students by residence life. By building a new residence, it may encourage
students to stay on campus in residence after their first year instead of moving into an
apartment.
A campus that is altogether is one major advantage that Bishops has and can use
to attract more students. The school needs to be careful though, in its pursuit to increase
enrollment and size of the school, Bishops must not lose sight of what separates it from
other universities: the personal approach. To keep this, more teachers will need to be
hired, more classrooms will need to be found or built. The process of becoming a larger
institution is one that seems very long and very complicated. The building of a new
residence is simply the beginning of a long, but enlightening, journey.

17

References
Bank of Canada. (2014, November 18). S
elected Treasury Bill Yields.
Retrieved from
http://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/interest-rates/t-bill-yields/
Bureau de coopration interuniversitaire. (2014). 2
014 full-time and part-time fall
enrolment at Canadian universities.
Retrieved from h
ttp://www.univcan.ca
/universities/facts-and-stats/enrolment-by-university/
Revenu Qubec. (2015). T
ables of GST and QST Rates. R
etrieved from h
ttp://
www.revenuquebec.ca/en/entreprises/taxes/tpstvhtvq/reglesdebase/historiquetauxt
pstvq.aspx

18

Appendices

19

Appendix III

20

Appendix IV
Scenario 1

Starting Date

Duration
(Months)

Construction
Costs

Furniture &
Equipment Costs

Major Renovation Abbott Residence

Sept. 2015

$ 3,933,000

$ 389,820

Minor Renovation MacKinnon Residence

June 2016

$ 434,877

$-

Major Renovation Kuehner Residence

Sept. 2016

$ 4,150,000

$ 389,820

New Construction 125 Beds Residence

Sept. 2017

12

$ 10,002,174

$ 655,736

Major Renovation Munster Residence

Sept. 2018

$ 4,150,000

$ 389,820

Sept. 2019

$ 3,479,017

$ 472,906

Demolition MacKinnon Residence

Sept. 2020

$ 1,739,509

$-

Scenario 2

Starting Date

Duration
(Months)

Construction
Costs

Furniture &
Equipment Costs

Major Renovation Abbott Residence

Sept. 2015

$ 3,933,000

$ 389,820

Minor Renovation MacKinnon Residence

June 2016

$ 434,877

$-

Major Renovation Kuehner Residence

Sept. 2017

$ 4,150,000

$ 389,820

Major Renovation Munster Residence

Sept. 2018

$ 4,150,000

$ 389,820

Major Renovation MacKinnon Residence

Sept. 2019

$ 3,479,017

$ 456,083

Sept. 2020

$ 3,479,017

$ 472,906

Major RenovationNorton/Pollack
Residences

Major RenovationNorton/Pollack
Residences

21

Contingencies

Professional Fees

Major Renovation

10% of the basic construction

costs

20% of the basic construction

cost plus contingencies

Minor Renovation

None

None

New Construction

5% of the basic construction

costs

20% of the basic construction

cost plus contingencies

Demolition

None

None

AppendixV
TimelineScenario1

TimelineScenario2

22

AppendixVI

23

AppendixVII

24

AppendixVIII

25

AppendixIX

26

27

AppendixX

28

29