DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydroelectric Facilities General Permit (HYDROGP) List Massachusetts Facilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydroelectric Facilities General Permit (HYDROGP) List Massachusetts Facilities ATTACHMENT 1 NPDES - Hydroelectric Facilities General Permit (HYDROGP) List Massachusetts Facilities Facility Name and Facility Location Lat (N) Long (W) Permit Number & ReceivingWater Cosgrove Intake Clinton MAG360001 North Brook trib. 42 23 55 71 41 18 Oakdale Power West Boylston MAG360002 Quinapoxet River 42 23 12 71 48 09 Cobble Mountain Westfield MAG360003 Little River 42 07 1.8 -72 51 52.8 Boatlock Station Holyoke MAG360004 Second Canal(CT) 42 12 41.7 -72 36 8.5 Chemical Station Holyoke MAG360005 Connecticut River 42 11 33.5 -72 36 28.8 Hadley Falls Holyoke MAG360006 Connecticut River 42 12 0.55 -72 35 40.9 Riverside Holyoke MAG360007 Connecticut River 42 12 41.7 -72 35 40.9 Cabot Montague MAG360008 Connecticut River 42 35 15 -72 34 46 Northfield Mountain Northfield MAG360009 Connecticut River 42 36 43 -72 28 41 Turners Falls #1 Montague MAG360010 Connecticut River 42 36 21 -72 33 54 Fife Brook Florida MAG360011 Deerfield River 42 41 5.6 72 58 38.4 Cockwell Florida MAG360012 Deerfield River 42 41 12.5 72 57 43 Sherman Station Rowe MAG360013 Deerfield River 42 43 45 72 55 51.8 Deerfield #2 Conway MAG360014 Deerfield River 42 34 23.6 72 42 26 Deerfield #3 Buckland MAG360015 Deerfield River 42 35 58.1 72 43 59.8 Deerfiled #4 Buckland MAG360016 Deerfield River 42 37 11.2 72 44 15.3 Deerfield #5 Florida MAG360017 Deerfield River 42 41 27.4 72 57 21.9 Gardners Falls Buckland MAG360018 Deerfield River 42 35 29 -72 43 51 Dwight Station Chicopee MAG360019 Chicopee River 42 08 55 -72 38 00 Indian Orchard Indian Orchard MAG360020 Chicopee River 42 09 30 -72 30 30 Red Bridge Wilbraham MAG360021 Chicopee River 42 10 30 -72 25 00 Putts Bridge Wilbraham MAG360022 Chicopee River 42 10 30 -72 25 00 Lawrence Field Lawrence MAG360023 Merrimack River 42 41 58 71 09 55 Eldred Field Lowell MAG360024 Merrimack River 42 39 09 71 19 21 John Station Lowell MAG360025 Merrimack River 42 38 53 71 18 26 Hamilton Lowell MAG360026 Merrimack River 42 38 32 71 18 43 Section 8 Lowell MAG360027 Concord River 42 38 44 71 18 20 Glendale Hydro Stockbridge MAG360028 Housatonic River 42 16 51 73 21 21 Crescent Hydro Russell MAG360029 Westfield River 42 13 17 72 51 34 New Hampshire Facilities Facility Name and Facility Location Lat (N) Long (W) Permit Number &Receiving Water Monadnock Paper Bennington NHG360001 Contoocook River 43 00 11 71 55 30 Monadnock Paper Bennington NHG360002 Contoocook River 43 00 02 71 55 37 Comerford Monroe NHG360003 Connecticut River 44 19 29.3 72 00 1.1 Moore Littleton NHG360004 Connecticut River 44 20 10.6 71 52 30.9 Mcindoes Monroe NHG360005 Connecticut River 44 15 35.3 72 03 34.6 Pontook Hydro Dummer NHG360006 Androscoggin Riv 44 37 4.6 71 13 33.5 Sawmill Hydro Berlin NHG360007 Androscoggin Riv 44 28 42 71 10 08 Riverside Hydro Berlin NHG360008 Androscoggin Riv 44 28 21 71 10 35 Cross Power Berlin NHG360009 Androscoggin Riv 44 27 24 71 11 08 Cascade Hydro Gorham NHG360010 Androscoggin Riv 44 26 53 71 11 14 Gorham Hydro Gorham NHG360011 Androscoggin Riv 44 24 01 71 11 14 Shelburne Hydro Shelburne NHG360012 Androscoggin Riv 44 24 12 71 06 56 Gorham Hydro Gorham NHG360013 Androscoggin Riv 44 23 19.5 71 09 51.7 Garvins Falls Hydro Bow NHG360014 Merrimack River 43 09 51.3 71 30 27 Hooksett Hydro Hooksett NHG360015 Merrimack River 43 06 04 71 27 53.8 Errol Hydro Errol NHG360016 Merrimack River 44.7863431 71.124330 Amoskeag Hydro Manchester NHG360017 Merrimack River 43 00 9.3 71 28 21.1 Eastman Falls Franklin NHG360018 Pemigewasset Riv 43 26 50.8 71 39 31.5 Ayers Hydro Bristol NHG360019 Pemigewasset Riv 43 35 51.1 71 42 59.4 Mine Falls Nashua NHG360020 Nashua River 42.750627 -71.504561 Clement Dam Hydro Tilton NHG360021 Winnepesaukee R 43.4409 -71.5954 Pembroke Suncook NHG360022 Suncook River 43.13053 -71.45396 Franklin Power Franklin NHG360023 Winnepesaukee R 43.447 -71.645 Glen Hydro West Lebanon NHG360024 Mascoma River 42 37 58.9 72 19 2.7 Lower Valley Claremont NHG360025 Sugar River 43 22 24.3 72 21 48.1 Sweetwater Claremont NHG360026 Suga River 42 23 24.1 72 22 36.4 Woodsville Woodsville NHG360027 Amonoosuc River 44 09 15 72 02 12 Somersworth Somersworth NHG360028 Salmon Falls Riv 43 15 15 70 50 39 Kelleys Falls Manchester NHG360029 Piscataquog River 42 59 36.6 71 29 43.2 Rollingsford Rollingsford NHG360030 Salmon Falls Riv 43 14 10.7 70 49 8.7 EHC Hydro West Hopkinton NHG360031 Contoocook River 43 11 33.6 71 44 51.6 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report
    DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report 2004-2008 Downstream of Fife Brook Dam The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 251 Causeway Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114-2119 Mitt Romney GOVERNOR Kerry Healey LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Tel: (617) 626-1000 Fax: (617) 626-1181 Ellen Roy Herzfelder or (617) 626-1180 SECRETARY http://www.state.ma.us/envir November 19, 2004 Dear Friends of the Deerfield River Watershed: It is with great pleasure that I present you with the Assessment Report for the Deerfield River Watershed. The report helped formulate the 5-year watershed action plan that will guide local and state environmental efforts within the Deerfield River Watershed over the next five years. The report expresses some of the overall goals of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, such as improving water quality, restoring natural flows to rivers, protecting and restoring biodiversity and habitats, improving public access and balanced resource use, improving local capacity, and promoting a shared responsibility for watershed protection and management. The Deerfield River Watershed Assessment Report was developed with input from the Deerfield River Watershed Team and multiple stakeholders including watershed groups, state and federal agencies, Regional Planning Agencies and, of course, the general public from across the Watershed. We appreciate the opportunity to engage such a wide group of expertise and experience as it allows the state to focus on the issues and challenges that might otherwise not be easily characterized. From your input we have identified the following priority issues: • Water Quantity • Water Quality • Fish Communities • Wildlife and Terrestrial Habitat • Open Space • Recreation I commend everyone involved in this endeavor.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcanada Hydro Northeast Inc. Deerfield River Project (Lp 2323)
    TRANSCANADA HYDRO NORTHEAST INC. DEERFIELD RIVER PROJECT (LP 2323) LOW IMPACT HYDROPOWER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT C PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Overview TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc. (the Company) owns and operates the Deerfield River Project (the Project) on the Deerfield River, a major tributary to the Connecticut River. The Project is located in Bennington and Windham Counties in Vermont, and in Berkshire and Franklin Counties in Massachusetts. It consists of eight developments: Somerset, Searsburg, Harriman, Sherman, Deerfield No. 5, Deerfield No. 4, Deerfield No. 3 and Deerfield No.2, having a total installed capacity of 86 megawatts (MW). All dam operations and generation operations are controlled remotely from the Deerfield River Control Center in Monroe Bridge Massachusetts, located near the Deerfield No. 5 Dam. The Project area encompasses about a 65-mile reach of the river, including reservoirs. Two other developments not owned by the company are also located within this area. They are Brookfield Renewable Power’s Bear Swamp Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 5 development; and Consolidated Edison’s Gardner Falls Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 3 development. Exhibit 1 depicts the general Project area. Settlement Agreement The Deerfield River Project was one of the first FERC Projects to be relicensed under a comprehensive Settlement Agreement approach executed in 1994. A five-year cooperative consultation process involving state and federal resource agencies, various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the licensee (at that time New England Power Company) resulted in settlement by the parties. The process of reaching this agreement included examination of the power and non-power tradeoffs and effects of a wide variety of operational scenarios.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm39986872-1915-HB-0190.Pdf (210.8Kb)
    HOUSE No. 190 Bill' accompanying' the recommendations of the Board of Harbor and Land Commissioners (House, No. 187). Harbors and Public Lands. January 11. Cf)c Commontoealtl) of Massachusetts. In the Year One Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifteen. AN ACT To provide for the Care and Supervision of the Westfield River, Chicopee River, Deerfield River and Millers River. Be it enacted hy the Senat and House of Representativet in General Court assembled and hy the authority of the tame, as follows of harbor and 1 Section 1 . The board land commission- -2 ers shall have the general care and supervision of the fol- -3 lowing rivers, tributariesof the Connecticut river, namely : 4 Westfield-river, Chicopee river, Deerfield river and Millers 5 river, within the confines of this commonwealth, and ot fi the banks thereof and of all structures therein, in order to 7 prevent and remove unauthorized encroachments and 8 causes of every kind which may in any way injure said q rivers and to protect and develop the rights and property 10 of the public therein. For the purpose of ascertaining promoting the best methods for the preservation and 9 SUPERVISION OF RIVERS. fjan. 1915. 12 improvement of said rivers, and for the promotion ot a 13 interests connected therewith, as the public good may 14 require, the board may from time to time make such 15 surveys, examinations and observations as it may deem It! necessary. 1 Section 2. All persons now or hereafter authorized 2 by the general court to build any structures in said 3 rivers shall proceed in the manner provided in section 4 sixteen of chapter ninety-six of the Revised Laws, and 5 shall be subject to the provisions of the said chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY
    Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY Concord River, Massachusetts Talbot Mills Dam Centennial Falls Dam Middlesex Falls DRAFT REPORT FEBRUARY 2016 Prepared for: In partnership with: Prepared by: This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY – DRAFT REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Purpose The purpose of this project is to evaluate the feasibility of restoring populations of diadromous fish to the Concord, Sudbury, and Assabet Rivers, collectively known as the SuAsCo Watershed. The primary impediment to fish passage in the Concord River is the Talbot Mills Dam in Billerica, Massachusetts. Prior to reaching the dam, fish must first navigate potential obstacles at the Essex Dam (an active hydro dam with a fish elevator and an eel ladder) on the Merrimack River in Lawrence, Middlesex Falls (a natural bedrock falls and remnants of a breached dam) on the Concord River in Lowell, and Centennial Falls Dam (a hydropower dam with a fish ladder), also on the Concord River in Lowell. Blueback herring Alewife American shad American eel Sea lamprey Species targeted for restoration include both species of river herring (blueback herring and alewife), American shad, American eel, and sea lamprey, all of which are diadromous fish that depend upon passage between marine and freshwater habitats to complete their life cycle. Reasons The impact of diadromous fish species extends for pursuing fish passage restoration in the far beyond the scope of a single restoration Concord River watershed include the importance and historical presence of the project, as they have a broad migratory range target species, the connectivity of and along the Atlantic coast and benefit commercial significant potential habitat within the and recreational fisheries of other species.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural, Historic, and Cultural Resources
    Town of Palmer Master Plan | 2021 DRAFT Natural, Historic, and Cultural Resources Natural, Historic, and Cultural Resources The natural environment, inclusive of air, water, soil, and vegetation (and the interactions among them), is an important aspect of a community’s function. It holds tremendous value by contributing to human health and well-being in various manners inclu4ding, but certainly not limited to, the provision of food, respite from urban environments, recreational opportunities, and hazard mitigation (e.g., flood storage). A community’s cultural identity is influenced by its history. This history is manifested in its historic resources, such as buildings, sites, landmarks, or districts, which tell the story of a how the community came to be, including the persons or events that shaped its development. A community’s cultural identity is also embodied in the manners by which its diverse inhabitants interact and for what purposes. These interactions are shaped by local organizations and facilities providing programs and activities that bring people together for a common purpose (e.g., arts, entertainment, education, religion, and charitable giving). Together, natural, historic, and cultural resources play important roles in defining a community’s values and sense of place. Increasing development and intensive human activities, however, can cause them irreparable harm. Accordingly, this Element not only highlights and characterizes the natural, historic, and cultural resources in the Town of Palmer, it also identifies strategies for their protection and enhancement. Baseline Conditions Analyses Natural Resources The Town of Palmer enjoys a diverse range of natural resources, including prime farmland soils, wildlife habitats, and water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield and CT River Project History.Pmd
    HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS INTRODUCTION increasingly complex. While the Depression limited further growth of the industry, a new era emerged In 1903, Malcolm Greene Chace (1875-1955) and after World War II, with streamlined management Henry Ingraham Harriman (1872-1950) established structures and increased regulations and Chace & Harriman, a company that, in its many government involvement (Cook 1991:4; Landry and incarnations over the course of the following Cruikshank 1996:2-5). The first of the 14 decades, grew into one of the largest electric utility hydroelectric facilities built on the Connecticut and companies in New England. The company built a Deerfield rivers by Chace & Harriman and its series of hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut successors were developed in the early 1900s, and Deerfield rivers in Vermont, New Hampshire shortly after the potential of hydroelectric power and western Massachusetts, which were intended was realized on a large scale. Subsequent facilities to provide a reliable and less expensive alternative were constructed during the maturation of the to coal-produced steam power. Designed primarily industry in the 1920s, and two of the stations were to serve industrial centers in Massachusetts and completed in the post-World War II era. The history Rhode Island, the facilities also provided power to of the companies that built these stations is residential customers and municipalities in New intrinsically linked with broader trends in the history England. Chace & Harriman eventually evolved of electricity, hydropower technology, and industrial into the New England Power Association (NEPA) architecture in America.
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield River Watershed Association
    A Watershed-Based Plan to Maintain the Health and Improve the Resiliency of the Deerfield River Watershed Franklin Regional Council of Governments Staff: Kimberly Noake MacPhee, P.G., CFM, Land Use and Natural Resources Program Manager Mary Chicoine, Senior Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Ryan Clary, Senior GIS Specialist Alyssa Larose, Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Megan Rhodes, AICP, Senior Transportation/Land Use Planner With technical assistance provided by: Fuss & O’Neill, Inc., Erik Mas, PE Field Geology Services, John Field, Ph.D., P.G. and Nicolas Miller Franklin Conservation District Deborah Shriver Consulting, Deborah M. Shriver Acknowledgements: Watershed stakeholders provided valuable comments and insight during the development of this plan. This plan also benefitted from the assistance and advice of the following organizations and individuals: Brian Yellen, Researcher, Department of Geosciences, UMass Amherst Andy Fisk, Executive Director, Connecticut River Conservancy Rita Thibodeau, District Conservationist, USDA, NRCS Carrie Banks, MA Division of Ecological Restoration, Dept. Fish & Game Erin Rodgers, Ph.D., Western New England Project Coordinator, Trout Unlimited Michael B. Cole, Ph.D., Cole Ecological Will Sloan Anderson, Franklin Land Trust Photographs: Cover Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com Pp. 2-3 Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com P. 11 Flooding in Deerfield Town of Greenfield P. 39 Crowningshield property Franklin Land Trust P. 45 Dam sites Erin Rodgers, Trout Unlimited Pp. 82-105 Maps, figures and photos Field Geology Services This project has been financed with Federal Funds from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Massachusetts Depart- ment of Environmental Protection (the Department) under an s.
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN ANADROMOUS FISH RESTORATION: Coordination and Technical Assistance F-100-R-31
    CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN ANADROMOUS FISH RESTORATION: Coordination and Technical Assistance F-100-R-31 Annual Progress Report October 1, 2013 - September 30, 2014 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Connecticut River Coordinator's Office Kenneth Sprankle, Project Leader 103 East Plumtree Road Sunderland, MA 01375-9138 Executive Summary Federal Aid Project #F-100-R-31 States: Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont Project Title: Connecticut River Basin Anadromous Fish Restoration: Coordination and Technical Assistance Period Covered: October 1, 2013 - September 30, 2014 This annual report provides an opportunity to organize and document, to varying degrees, all work activities conducted by the Connecticut River Coordinator’s Office, which includes work outside of the Connecticut River basin and numerous activities not funded by this grant. Objectives: Coordinate the Connecticut River Anadromous Fish Restoration Program as a unified effort of State and Federal fishery agencies Provide technical assistance to the fishery agencies and other program cooperators Identify fishery program priorities, design and implement field projects to address issues, plans, and opportunities Administer several different federal grant programs to address fish habitat, fish passage, and research projects Accomplishments: Program Coordination: Coordinated two Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission (CRASC) and two CRASC Technical Committee meetings Organized a CRASC Shad Studies and River Herring subcommittee meeting Assisted in the completion
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study Report
    Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study STUDY REPORT A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation Katie Kennedy, The Nature Conservancy Kim Lutz, The Nature Conservancy Christopher Hatfield, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Leanna Martin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Townsend Barker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Richard Palmer, University of Massachusetts Amherst Luke Detwiler, University of Massachusetts Amherst Jocelyn Anleitner, University of Massachusetts Amherst John Hickey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kennedy, K., K. Lutz, C. Hatfield, L. Martin, T. Barker, R. Palmer, L. Detwiler, J. Anleitner, J. Hickey. 2018. The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study: A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation. The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and University of Massachusetts Amherst. Northampton, MA. Available: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed For a quick, easy-to-read overview of the Connecticut River Watershed Study, see our companion “Study Overview” document, available at: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed June 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield River & Lower Connecticut River Tactical Basin Plan
    Deerfield River & Lower Connecticut River Tactical Basin Plan Green River, Guilford December 2019 | Public Draft Tactical Basin Plan was prepared in accordance with 10 VSA § 1253(d), the Vermont Water Quality Standards1, the Federal Clean Water Act and 40 CFR 130.6, and the Vermont Surface Water Management Strategy. Approved: ----------------------------------------- ------------------------- Emily Boedecker, Commissioner Date Department of Environmental Conservation -------------------------------------- ------------------------- Julie Moore, Secretary Date Agency of Natural Resources Cover Photo: Green River in Guilford – Marie L. Caduto The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources is an equal opportunity agency and offers all persons the benefits of participating in each of its programs and competing in all areas of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual preference, or other non-merit factors. This document is available in alternative formats upon request. Call 802-828-1535 i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 1 What is a Tactical Basin Plan ................................................................................................. 3 A. The Vermont Clean Water Act ........................................................................................... 4 B. Vermont Water Quality Standards ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Waters of Vermont
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 424 SURFACE WATERS OF VERMONT BY C. H. PIERCE Prepared in cooperation with the STATE OF VERMONT WASHINGTON GOVEENMENT PBINTING OFFICE 1917 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BK PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 25 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS. Introduction.............................................................. 5 Cooperation................................................................ 8 Division of work.......................................................... 8 Definition of terms......................................................... 9 Explanation of data........................................................ 9 Accuracy of field data and computed results................................ 11 Gaging stations maintained in Vermont..................................... 12 St. Lawrence River basin................................................. 13 Lake Champlain drainage basin......................................... 13 General features................................................... 13 Gaging-station records.............................................. 14 Lake Champlain at Burlington, Vt.............................. 14 Lake Champlain outlet (Richelieu River) at Chambly, Province of Quebec.1................................................. 20 Poultney Eiver near Fair Haven, Vt............................ 25 Otter Creek at Middlebury,
    [Show full text]
  • Samplepalo Ooza 201 4
    Samplepalooza 2014 Compiled by Andrea Donlon & Ryan O’Donnell Connecticut River Watershed Council 0 Samplepalooza 2014 Acknowledgements: CRWC would like thank the following staff people and volunteers who collected samples and/or participated in planning meetings: CRWC staff Peggy Brownell Andrea Donlon David Deen Andrew Fisk Ron Rhodes VT Department of Environmental Conservation Marie Caduto Tim Clear Ben Copans Blaine Hastings Jim Ryan Dan Needham NH Department of Environmental Services Amanda Bridge Barona DiNapoli Tanya Dyson Margaret (Peg) Foss Andrea Hansen David Neils Vicki Quiram Ted Walsh Watershed organizations: Black River Action Team – Kelly Stettner Ottaqueechee River Group – Shawn Kelley Southeast Vermont Watershed Alliance – Phoebe Gooding, Peter Bergstrom, Laurie Callahan, Cris White White River Partnership – Emily Miller CRWC volunteers: Greg Berry Marcey Carver Glenn English Jim Holmes Liberty Foster Paul Friedman Paul Hogan Sean Lawson Mark Lembke Dianne Rochford 1 Samplepalooza 2014 Table of Contents Acknowledgements: ............................................................................................................................................. 1 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]