Split (1)

train · 4.66M rows

mime_type stringclasses 2 values	score float64 0 9.99 ⌀	identifier stringlengths 36 454	text stringlengths 50 1,000k
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.sec.gov/comments/3-20381/3-20381.htm.json	Company Filings Skip to Main Content - About - Careers - Commissioners - Contact - Reports and Publications - Securities Laws - Mission - Divisions & Offices - Corporation Finance - Enforcement - Investment Management - Economic and Risk Analysis - Trading and Markets - Examinations - Office of Administrative Law Judges - Regional Offices - All Divisions and Offices - Enforcement - Litigation Releases - Administrative Proceedings - Opinions and Adjudicatory Orders - Accounting and Auditing - Trading Suspensions - How Investigations Work - Receiverships - Information for Harmed Investors - Regulation - Rulemaking Index - Proposed Rules - Final Rules - Interim Final Rules - Other Orders and Notices - Self-Regulatory Organizations - Staff Interpretations - Education - Investor.gov - Five Questions to Ask Before You Invest - About Investment Professionals - Check Your Investment Professional - Investing Tools and Calculators - Investment Products - Understanding Fees - Investor Alerts and Bulletins - Glossary - Filings - EDGAR Search & Access - Company Filing Search - How to Search EDGAR - Requesting Public Documents - Forms List - Information for Filers - About EDGAR - News - Press Releases - Speeches and Statements - Spotlight Topics - Upcoming Events - Webcasts - SEC in the News - SEC Videos - Media Gallery # Comments on Proposed Distribution Plan: Securities America Advisors, Inc. ## [Release No. 34-94995; File No. 3-20381] \| Submitted Comments \| \|--------------------\| \| Jun. 24, 2022 \| Jenice L. Malecki, Malecki Law \| \| Jun. 24, 2022 \| Robert Knuts, Sher Tremonte LLP \| Proposed Distribution Plan: Securities America Advisors, Inc. How to Submit Comments - Regulatory Actions - Rulemaking Index - Proposed Rules - Final Rules - Interim Final Rules - Concept Releases - Interpretive Releases - Policy Statements - PCAOB Rulemaking - SRO Rulemaking and NMS Plans - Exchange Act Exemptive Orders - Investment Advisers Act Notices and Orders - Investment Company Act Notices and Orders - Other Commission Orders and Notices - Public Petitions for Rulemaking Modified: June 29, 2022 - Accessibility - Budget & Performance - Careers - Contact - Contracts - Data - FOIA - Inspector General - Investor.gov - No FEAR Act & EEO Data - Ombuds - Plain Writing - Privacy & Security - Related Sites - Site Map - USA.gov - Votes - Whistleblower Protection
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.12-2126.37.0.pdf.json	RECORD NO. 12-2126 THE LEX GROUP  1108 East Main Street  Suite 1400  Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 644-4419  (800) 856-4419  Fax: (804) 644-3660  www.thelexgroup.com In The United States Court of Appeals For The Fourth Circuit SWATCH AG (SWATCH SA) (SWATCH LTD.), Plaintiff – Appellant, v. BEEHIVE WHOLESALE, LLC, a limited liability company, Defendant – Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA AT ALEXANDRIA PUBLIC FINAL REPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANT Thomas P. Gulick COLLEN IP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. The Holyoke-Manhattan Building 80 South Highland Avenue Ossining, New York 10562 (914) 941-5668 Counsel for Appellant Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 1 of 34 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ........................................................................ 1 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................. 4 A. The SWAP Mark is Merely Descriptive ............................................... 4 1. The Standard of Review for Descriptiveness is Clear Error ............................................................................................ 4 2. The Prima Facie Presumption of Suggestiveness is Not Conclusive ................................................................................... 4 3. Evidence of the SWAP Mark’s Descriptiveness was Not Properly Addressed ..................................................................... 5 4. Beehive Seeks to Perpetuate the Clear Error of TTAB and the District Court .................................................................. 9 B. A Likelihood of Confusion Exists Between the SWAP and SWATCH Marks ................................................................................. 13 1. Beehive Conceded that the SWATCH Marks are Strong and Distinctive .......................................................................... 14 2. Beehive Concedes that the Parties’ Goods are Identical .......... 15 3. Similarity of the Facilities ......................................................... 16 4. Similarity of Advertising .......................................................... 16 5. Defendant’s Intent ..................................................................... 17 Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 2 of 34 ii 6. Actual Confusion ...................................................................... 18 7. Sophistication of the Consuming Public ................................... 19 8. Similarity of the Marks ............................................................. 19 a. Beehive, the TTAB and the district court placed too much emphasis on the disparate meanings of the SWATCH and SWAP trademarks ............................ 19 b. The TTAB and district court did not consider the similarity of the marks in the commercial context ......... 20 c. The identical nature of the goods warranted a lessened threshold for finding similarity ........................ 23 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 25 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 3 of 34 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. L & L Wings, Inc., 962 F.2d 316 (4th Cir. 1992) ......................................................................... 20 Century 21 Real Estate, 970 F.2d 874, 23 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1698 (Fed. Cir. 1992) .................................... 24 Clark, Inc. v. Resnick, 219 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 619, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10302 (D.R.I. Oct. 8, 1982) ................................. 3, 18 Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ................................................................... 7, 9 Communications Satellite Corp. v. Comcet, Inc., 429 F.2d 1245 (4th Cir. 1970) ....................................................................... 18 Doe v. Menefee, 391 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2004) ............................................................................ 8 Exxon Corp. v. Texas Motor Exchange, Inc., 628 F.2d 500 (5th Cir. 1980) ......................................................................... 24 George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm’t Ltd., 575 F.3d 383 (4th Cir. 2009) ................................................................... 17, 20 Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc., 710 F.2d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ..................................................................... 22 Humphrey v. U.S. Attorney General’s Office, 279 Fed. Appx. 328 (6th Cir. 2008) .............................................................. 15 In re Amer. Soc’y of Clinical Pathologists, Inc., 442 F.2d 1404, 169 U.S.P.Q. 800 (C.C.P.A. 1971) ...................................... 11 Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 4 of 34 iv In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ......................................................................... 4 In re Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 102 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1217 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ................................ 12 Landrau-Romero v. Banco Popular de P.R., 212 F.3d 607 (1st Cir. 2000) .................................................................... 14, 15 Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon v. Alpha of Va., Inc., 43 F.3d 922 (4th Cir. 1995) ..................................................................... 18, 20 Murray v. Geithner, 763 F. Supp. 2d 860 (E.D. Mich. 2011) ........................................................ 15 Nautilus Group, Inc. v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 372 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2004) ..................................................................... 23 One Indus., LLC v. Jim O’Neal Distrib., 578 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2009) ....................................................................... 21 Petro Stopping Ctrs., L.P. v. James River Petroleum, 130 F.3d 88 (4th Cir. 1997) ..................................................................... 1, 4, 5 Pizzeria Uno Corp. v. Temple, 747 F.2d 1522 (4th Cir. 1984) ......................................................... 4, 5, 11, 19 Recot, Inc. v. Becton, 214 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000) ..................................................................... 19 Renaissance Greeting Cards, Inc. v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., 227 Fed. Appx. 239 (4th Cir. 2007) .............................................................. 20 Sabinsa Corp. v. Creative Compounds, LLC, 609 F.3d 175 (3d Cir. 2010) .......................................................................... 24 Sally Beauty Co. v. Beautyco, Inc., 304 F.3d 964 (10th Cir. 2002) ....................................................................... 22 Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 5 of 34 v Sara Lee Corp. v. Kayser-Roth Corp., 81 F.3d 455 (4th Cir. 1996) ................................................................... 1, 4, 11 Smith v. Guilford Bd. of Educ., 226 Fed. Appx. 58 (2d Cir. 2007) ........................................................... 14, 15 Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Nationwide Independent Directory Service, Inc., 371 F. Supp. 900 (W.D. Ark. 1974) .............................................................. 11 Swatch S.A. v. Beehive Wholesale, L.L.C., 888 F. Supp. 2d 738 (E.D. Va. 2012) .....................................................passim Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2004) ........................................................................... 8 U.S. Search, LLC v. U.S. Search.com Inc., 300 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2002) ....................................................................... 7, 9 U.S. v. Wooden, 693 F.3d 440 (4th Cir. 2012) ........................................................................... 8 RULE Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(1) ............................................................................................ 19 OTHER AUTHORITIES 2 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 11:64 (4th ed. 2001) ......... 7, 9 3 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Comeptition § 23:20.1 (4th ed. 2003) ........ 24 Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure § 1209.01(b) (Oct. 2012 Ed.) ........... 11 Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 6 of 34 1 INTRODUCTION Swatch respectfully seeks reversal of the Eastern District of Virginia’s affirmance of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) Order, and its dismissal of the trademark infringement, unfair competition and dilution counts. Swatch S.A. v. Beehive Wholesale, L.L.C., 888 F. Supp. 2d 738 (E.D. Va. 2012). SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT The trademark SWAP is merely descriptive. In addressing the district court’s analysis of descriptiveness, Beehive espouses a higher standard of review for this issue beyond “clearly erroneous.” A district court’s determination or affirmance that a mark is not descriptive is reviewed for clear error. Sara Lee Corp. v. Kayser-Roth Corp., 81 F.3d 455 (4th Cir. 1996). Despite Beehive’s arguments, determinations of suggestiveness and descriptiveness are not conclusive and may be rebutted. Petro Stopping Ctrs., L.P. v. James River Petroleum, 130 F.3d 88, 93 (4th Cir. 1997). Swatch provided substantial evidence in the district court and the TTAB rebutting any presumption that the word swap only “suggests,” rather than describes, a feature of Beehive’s goods. The district court ignored Beehive’s own admissions in deposition testimony, in advertisements and in discovery responses. Additional evidence establishes third party use of the term “swap” to describe interchangeable watch faces and bands. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 7 of 34 2 Swatch presented evidence and arguments that both the TTAB and the district court misapplied the test for descriptiveness, by focusing upon the generalized recitation of goods in the SWAP Application rather than considering the actual and specific goods to which the SWAP mark is applied—watch bands and faces that can be swapped. Beehive argues incorrectly that only reference to the general goods is required. The foregoing constitutes clear error and merits reversal of the district court’s findings on descriptiveness. The district court erred, as well, with regard to likelihood of confusion as applied to its substantive rulings concerning trademark infringement and dilution and affirming the TTAB in allowing registration. Both Beehive and the district court erroneously place too much emphasis upon the purported meanings of the SWATCH and SWAP marks to find that the marks were dissimilar. Stressing the distinct meanings of the marks, Beehive tellingly avoids any discussion of the term SWAP, avoiding the descriptive application of the term to the goods. The district court neglected to apply the lowered threshold, which is mandated when analyzing similarity between marks applied to identical goods, and failed to give greater weight to similarities in the marks. Consequently, the district court’s determination as to the similarity of the marks is clearly erroneous and merits reversal. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 8 of 34 3 The issues of advertising and facilities were similarly weighed against Swatch despite evidence that the parties both use similar channels of trade, including gift stores, department stores and the Internet. The district court failed to find any bad faith intent on Beehive’s part despite its knowledge of the SWATCH mark for watches prior to its adoption of the SWAP mark for the same goods. Beehive cannot save itself by asserting that designs, taken from its 2006 catalog, predate those submitted by Swatch, from a printout of Swatch’s website, because Beehive fails to account for the core collection of SWATCH brand watches which remain the same from year to year. J.A. 636-637 (82:13-83:19). Beehive’s mimicry of Swatch designs shows bad intent and the district court erred in overlooking it. The district court too heavily weighed actual confusion given [ ] Clark, Inc. v. Resnick, 219 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 619, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10302, 16-17 (D.R.I. Oct. 8, 1982). The district court disregarded the sophistication of the consumer, a factor which favors Swatch. The district court’s likelihood of confusion analysis is fatally flawed and merits reversal. The district court’s holdings on trademark infringement, dilution and affirmance of the TTAB decision are all derived from the district court’s clearly erroneous likelihood of confusion analysis. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 9 of 34 4 ARGUMENT A. The SWAP Mark is Merely Descriptive The word swap means “(1) to trade one thing for another; (2) to exchange; (3) an exchange of one thing for another.” J.A. 446-449. Nothing in Beehive’s arguments overcomes the errors of the TTAB and district court. 1. The Standard of Review for Descriptiveness is Clear Error A mark’s placement on the fanciful-suggestive-descriptive-generic continuum is a question of fact. In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 964 (Fed. Cir. 2007). A district court’s determination or affirmance that a mark is not descriptive is thus reviewed for clear error. Sara Lee Corp., 81 F.3d 455. Beehive alleges that the standard is even more deferential in situations involving review of U.S. Trademark Office decisions. (Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 8). However, no case cited by Beehive offers support for a further heightened standard of review. 2. The Prima Facie Presumption of Suggestiveness is Not Conclusive While the U.S. Trademark Office’s determinations as to descriptiveness are to be accorded deference, the Trademark Office’s pronouncements are “not conclusive.” Petro Stopping Ctrs., L.P. v. James River Petroleum, 130 F.3d 88, 93 (4th Cir. 1997) citing Pizzeria Uno Corp. v. Temple, 747 F.2d 1522, 1534 (4th Cir. 1984). Rather, “[t]he fact that the PTO does not view a mark as descriptive serves Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 10 of 34 5 only as prima facie evidence that the mark is suggestive.” Petro Stopping Ctrs., 130 F.3d at 93. Beehive’s suggestion that this prima facie presumption is somehow irrefutable and “dooms Swatch’s argument” is false. (Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 28). A prima facie presumption of suggestiveness may be rebutted. Petro Stopping Ctrs., 130 F.3d at 93 citing Pizzeria Uno, 747 F.2d at 1534. Swatch presented very significant, substantial evidence in the proceedings below rebutting any presumption of suggestiveness including (i) admissions made by Beehive’s principals, (ii) Beehive’s advertising, and (iii) Beehive’s responses to discovery. (Swatch Opening Brief, p. 44-55). The district court’s failure to consider and address this evidence was clear error meriting reversal. 3. Evidence of the SWAP Mark’s Descriptiveness was Not Properly Addressed Evidence as to the descriptiveness of the SWAP mark is considerable. The evidence included deposition testimony of Beehive’s principals who testified under oath that the word “swap” plainly describes a function of their goods. The evidence also includes advertising touting the interchangeable trait of the SWAP watch dials and bands, as well as Beehive’s own discovery responses, the dictionary definition of the term “swap” and evidence regarding third party use. Neither the TTAB nor the district court accorded this evidence due consideration. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 11 of 34 6 The TTAB disregarded Beehive’s admissions of descriptiveness, claiming that Beehive’s officers merely “followed the language used by the attorneys who questioned them” (J.A. 287) and that “the contradictory statements of [Beehive’s] officers demonstrate[s] little more than a lack of understanding of the significance of the term comprising their mark.” J.A. 289. The TTAB went on to speculate that “[Beehive’s] witnesses are not sophisticated in trademark law or the significance of particular words as they relate to trademark principles.” J.A. 289. But there is neither testimony from Beehive’s officers nor any other evidence to support the TTAB’s assertions on this point. No facts alleged by Beehive corroborate or even suggest that Beehive’s officers lacked an understanding of their testimony regarding their basis for adoption of the SWAP mark. Beehive’s officers repeatedly recounted, in sworn testimony, that the mark SWAP was selected specifically because it described the interchangeable function of the products bearing the SWAP mark. See J.A. 227-229 (11:13-12:21); J.A. 246-248 (24:18-26:7). Even the assertion that Beehive’s principals were unsophisticated in trademark law is irrelevant to the inquiry, since the colloquial meaning of the word “descriptive” is almost identical to its meaning in trademark law. Beehive has provided no evidence to support the idea that the witnesses did not understand the meaning of “descriptive.” Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 12 of 34 7 Moreover, Beehive’s principals do not need to be knowledgeable in trademark law to properly comprehend and articulate the meaning and significance of the term “swap” as applied to watch bands and dials that can be swapped in a number of different combinations. Indeed, the proper inquiry for descriptiveness requires the consideration of the mark in connection with the particular goods or services being offered, the context in which it is being used, and the possible significance that the term would have to the average purchaser (not a trademark practitioner) of the goods because of the manner of its use or intended use. U.S. Search, LLC v. U.S. Search.com Inc., 300 F.3d 517, 524 (4th Cir. 2002) (citing 2 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition (hereinafter, McCarthy) § 11:64 (4th ed. 2001)); see also Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2012). Thus, even if Beehive’s principals are unsophisticated in trademark law, this actually serves as further evidence that the SWAP mark describes a primary function of the goods. In this regard, Beehive’s COPPERTONE® hypothetical pales. There is no word “coppertone” and no dictionary definition. No Coppertone executive could admit that the product “coppertones” the skin. Beehive’s own testimony that swapping bands and watch faces is a significant function of its products sold under the SWAP mark, and that the SWAP mark was selected because it conveyed this function is clear, unambiguous and unrebutted evidence of descriptiveness. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 13 of 34 8 In addition to Beehive’s testimonial admissions, and their advertisements, the evidence shows that third parties commonly use the term “swap” because of its descriptive nature. (E.g. PUMA SWAP WATCH et al., see J.A. 450-463, 472, 481, 484-504). The district court failed to weigh testimony and the evidence which clearly conflicted with the TTAB’s determination and which highlighted a clear gap in Beehive’s evidentiary presentation. Such failure amounts to reversible error. U.S. v. Wooden, 693 F.3d 440, 454 (4th Cir. 2012) (“[F]ailure to take into account and reconcile key parts of the record casts doubt on the process by which the finding was reached, and hence on the correctness of the finding.”); see also Doe v. Menefee, 391 F.3d 147, 164 (2d Cir. 2004) (“We have found a district court’s factual findings to be clearly erroneous where the court has failed to synthesize the evidence in a manner that accounts for conflicting evidence or the gaps in a party’s evidentiary presentation.”). The district court did not articulate any basis for disregarding Swatch’s evidence, which contradicted the TTAB’s determination on descriptiveness. This failure to reconcile key parts of the record casts doubt on the process by which the district court affirmed the TTAB’s decision and, consequently, on the correctness of the affirmance. Wooden, 693 F.3d at 454 (quoting Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992, 1007-08 (9th Cir. 2004)). Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 14 of 34 9 4. Beehive Seeks to Perpetuate the Clear Error of TTAB and the District Court A determination as to descriptiveness is not made in the abstract. U.S. Search, LLC, 300 F.3d 517 at 524 (citing 2 McCarthy § 11:64); see also Coach Services, Inc., 668 F.3d at 1378. The mark must be considered in connection with the particular goods or services being offered, the context in which it is being used, and the possible significance that the term would have to the average purchaser of the goods because of the manner of its use or intended use. Id. As Beehive concedes, the TTAB looked only to Beehive’s identification of goods in Application Serial No. 78459527 for “watch faces, ribbon watch bands, slide pendants, and beaded watch bands” in International Class 14, in considering the descriptiveness issue. (Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 33). However, the TTAB did not properly acknowledge that interchangeable and swappable watch faces and bands are merely a subset of “watch faces, ribbon watch bands, slide pendants, and beaded watch bands.” If the mark describes those features, then the entire list of goods fails (unless Beehive sought some amendment; which it never Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 15 of 34 10 did).1 The district court similarly examined the SWAP mark without reference to the actual nature of the goods on which the mark is used See Swatch S.A., 888 F. Supp. 2d at 758 (“There is nothing in the dictionary definition of SWAP to indicate that the term merely describes watch bands, watch faces, or slide pendants.”) (quoting the TTAB decision). Seeing that Beehive sells interchangeable watch faces and bands, a consumer clearly understands that a feature or characteristic of these goods is the ability to swap different bands and dials. This is the very definition of descriptiveness. The district court and the TTAB both failed to apprehend that this analysis requires a look at the goods encountered by consumers in the marketplace. This is the relevant point of inquiry. Interchangeable watch straps are watch straps and hence fall under the goods identified in the trademark application. The TTAB and the district court both improperly disregarded the nature of Beehive’s goods, relying solely on the phrasing used in the SWAP Application, without accepting that the particular goods on which the mark is used and the context in which the SWAP mark is being used. 1 The USPTO Examining Attorney reviewing Beehive’s Trademark Application was similarly presented only with Applicant’s recitation of goods which identifies “Watch faces, ribbon watch bands, slide pendants, and beaded watch bands” in Class 14. J.A. 161-162. Accordingly, Beehive’s assertion that its SWAP mark was deemed suggestive by the Examining Attorney at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 28) is not necessarily borne out by the record and suggests that Beehive claim of the prima facie presumption of suggestiveness is improper. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 16 of 34 11 While, Beehive argues that only an examination of the general nature of the goods is required when analyzing descriptiveness, (Beehive’s Opposition Brief, pp. 33-34), it provides no case law to support this assertion. Indeed, applying Beehive’s logic would result in very few findings of descriptiveness. For example, the mark YELLOW PAGES (Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Nationwide Independent Directory Service, Inc., 371 F. Supp. 900, 909 (W.D. Ark. 1974)) if only examined in conjunction with the general goods to which it is applied, a business directory, would result in the conclusion that the mark is arbitrary. It is only after one learns of the specific nature of the goods, business directories and advertisements printed on yellow pages, that the mark YELLOW PAGES could be considered descriptive. While the holdings of the TTAB and district court are afforded deference, this Court owes “no deference to ...findings if they are derived as a result of the court’s misapplication of the law.” Sara Lee Corp., 81 F.3d at 460 (4th Cir. 1996) citing Pizzeria Uno, 747 F.2d at 1526. Additionally, a term may be considered merely descriptive if the identified goods or services fall within a subset of goods or services indicated by the term. See Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure § 1209.01(b) (October 2012 Edition); see also In re Amer. Soc’y of Clinical Pathologists, Inc., 442 F.2d 1404, 1406-07, 169 U.S.P.Q. 800, 801 (C.C.P.A. 1971) (holding that REGISTRY OF MEDICAL PATHOLOGISTS was descriptive of certain claimed services that Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 17 of 34 12 were implicitly subsumed within service of providing a registry of medical pathologists and of additional claimed services that were “supporting, ancillary or auxiliary to the primary function” of applicant’s registry services). See also In re Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 1301-02, 102 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1217, 1220 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (NATIONAL CHAMBER held descriptive because “substantial evidence supports the TTAB’s determination that the designated business and regulatory data analysis services are within the scope of traditional chambers of commerce activities” of “promoting the interests of businessmen and businesswomen”). Given that watches in International Class 14 subsume and include swappable or interchangeable watch faces and bands, the SWAP mark is merely descriptive. The district court did not properly articulate its consideration of the evidence and issues raised on appeal. Beehive does nothing more than muddy the waters by suggesting that a heightened standard of review applies to this issue and by claiming that the TTAB’s determination on the matter is conclusive. Beehive cannot establish that the district court properly addressed the testimony and evidence of record with regard to descriptiveness. Rather it advocates an examination of the evidence without regard for the actual goods to which the SWAP mark is applied and without regard to the fact that even reliance upon the literal identification of goods in Beehive’s trademark application, when properly Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 18 of 34 13 construed, covers all types of straps and watch parts, including those that maybe swapped in different combinations. In light of the evidence, the district court’s holding as to descriptiveness should be overturned. As a result, Beehive should be denied a trademark registration. B. A Likelihood of Confusion Exists Between the SWAP and SWATCH Marks The district court further erred when it found no likelihood of confusion. The only factor accurately determined by both the TTAB and district court was the similarity of the goods. The district court rectified the TTAB’s clear error on the strength of the SWATCH marks, but then failed to properly analyze several crucial likelihood of confusion factors, including similarity of the facilities, similarity of advertising and Beehive’s bad intent. The district court accorded improper weight to the actual confusion factor and refused to consider the sophistication of the consumers. The determination of the similarity of the marks was the most significant error made by the TTAB, which the district court repeated and affirmed. These oversights resulted in clearly erroneous determinations of likelihood of confusion. The district court based both its affirmance of the TTAB’s dismissal of Swatch’s Opposition to Beehive’s mark (Count I) and its judgment in favor of Beehive on the federal and common law trademark infringement counts and the dilution claim (Counts II-VI) (Swatch S.A., 888 F. Supp. 2d at 760) on its Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 19 of 34 14 erroneous likelihood of confusion findings. The district court’s likelihood of confusion findings should thus be reversed and Beehive should be denied registration of the SWAP mark as it is likely to be confused with the SWATCH marks in Class 14. The district court’s ruling in favor of Beehive as to the dilution claim and the federal and common law trademark infringement counts should similarly be overturned and a ruling on these counts should be entered in Swatch’s favor. 1. Beehive Conceded that the SWATCH Marks are Strong and Distinctive Beehive does not challenge the district court’s findings that the SWATCH marks are “inherently distinctive,” that Swatch’s SWATCH marks are incontestable, that Beehive presented “no evidence that other parties use and therefore weaken Swatch’s mark,” and that the SWATCH Marks are commercially strong. See Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 2, and Swatch, S.A., 888 F. Supp. 2d at 748, 749.2 This issue is therefore conceded. Smith v. Guilford Bd. of Educ., 226 Fed. Appx. 58, 65 (2d Cir. 2007) (where an argument was not submitted in motion papers it was deemed waived); Landrau-Romero v. Banco Popular de P.R., 212 F.3d 607, 612 (1st Cir. 2000) (where appellant failed to raise an argument in 2 Beehive may not challenge the admission of Swatch’s evidence relating to the strength and fame of the SWATCH marks. See Beehive’s Opposition Brief, pp. 2- 3. By raising this issue for the first time in its Opposition Brief to Swatch’s Appeal which does not assert any evidentiary challenges, Beehive has waived such an evidentiary challenge. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 20 of 34 15 opposition to the appellee’s motion for summary judgment, the issue has been waived); Murray v. Geithner, 763 F. Supp. 2d 860, 871-872 (E.D. Mich. 2011) (finding that plaintiff conceded issues, where it failed to analyze a prong of a test and declined to respond to arguments advanced in defendant’s motion papers) (citing Humphrey v. U.S. Attorney General’s Office, 279 Fed. Appx. 328, 331 (6th Cir. 2008)). 2. Beehive Concedes that the Parties’ Goods are Identical Both the district court and the TTAB found that this factor weighs in favor of Swatch. Swatch S.A., 888 F. Supp. 2d at 752. Beehive’s Brief omits any mention of the similarity of the goods factor of the likelihood of confusion analysis. Accordingly, Beehive concedes that the parties’ goods under the SWATCH and SWAP marks are similar, if not, identical. Smith, 226 Fed. Appx. at 65 (where an argument was not submitted in motion papers it was deemed waived); Landrau-Romero, 212 F.3d at 612 (where appellant failed to raise an argument in opposition to the appellee’s motion for summary judgment, the issue has been waived); Murray, 763 F. Supp. 2d at 871-872 (finding that Plaintiff conceded issues, where it failed to analyze a prong of a test and declined to respond to arguments advanced in defendant’s motion papers) (citing Humphrey, 279 Fed. Appx. at 331 (6th Cir. 2008)). Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 21 of 34 16 3. Similarity of the Facilities Beehive misapprehends Swatch’s argument as to the similarity of the parties’ facilities. As Swatch previously noted, the parties offer identical and related goods under their respective marks. Such goods are distributed in identical channels of trade—department stores, gift stores and on the Internet. See J.A. 270 ¶ 25, 273-274 ¶¶ 62-66; J.A. 623-624 (8:19-9:9), 625-626 (10:8-11:8), 627 (17:9- 25), 645-646 (125:10-126:18), 649-650 (131:18-132:3); J.A. 349-370; J.A. 255 (10:10-14); J.A. 318, at Interrogatory No. 6; J.A. 258-259 (8:12-9:20), 266 (69:7- 14). The evidence before the district court established that Swatch and Beehive compete in a similar manner, in overlapping markets. As a result, consumers encounter the parties’ respective marks in these facilities in a similar manner. The district court’s holding as to this factor was clear error and this factor weighs in favor of Swatch. 4. Similarity of Advertising The district court committed clear error in ruling that this factor favors Beehive and Beehive’s Brief only seeks to reinforce the error. As previously noted, there is at least some overlap in the parties’ advertising, such as advertising through the Internet. Furthermore, as established in Swatch’s Opening Brief (pp. 35-36) and above, the parties compete in a similar manner in overlapping markets, Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 22 of 34 17 supporting a finding that this factor weighs in Swatch’s favor. George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm’t Ltd., 575 F.3d 383, 397 (4th Cir. 2009) (affirming that the similarity of the facilities and similarity of advertising weighed in plaintiff’s favor because the parties competed in a similar manner in overlapping markets). This factor would be neutral as to both parties at best and the district court’s finding to the contrary is reversible error. 5. Defendant’s Intent Beehive’s bad intent is evidenced by its imitation of Swatch watch designs. (See Swatch Opening Brief, pp. 31-34). Beehive’s argument to the contrary is misleading. Even if the images of the Swatch watches were taken from a 2009 printout of Swatch’s website, Swatch presented evidence that some of the relevant watch designs have been in existence for years, with some designs even dating back to 1986, as part of Swatch’s core collection. J.A. 636-637 (82:13-83:19). (“we do keep a core collection, it’s carried, continually being carried year to year.”). As such, Beehive’s objection to the date of the printout itself raises no true issue. Beehive’s claim that it is not imitating Swatch designs because it copied some elements but did not identically and uniformly copy every aspect of Swatch’s watch designs (see Beehive’s Opposition Brief, p. 17) is equally unavailing, and unsupported by any authority. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 23 of 34 18 The district court’s finding is also clearly erroneous given that “[l]ack of guile is immaterial.” Communications Satellite Corp. v. Comcet, Inc., 429 F.2d 1245, 1249 (4th Cir. 1970). Even if Beehive were deemed to have no deliberate intent to piggyback on Swatch’s goodwill, this factor would be neutral in the analysis and would not weigh for or against a likelihood of confusion. The district court, in finding no bad intent on the part of Beehive, erred in light of the evidence. 6. Actual Confusion The absence of actual confusion is not conclusive, despite Beehive’s claims. Indeed, “this Court has emphasized that a trademark owner need not demonstrate actual confusion.” Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon v. Alpha of Va., Inc., 43 F.3d 922, 933 (4th Cir. 1995). The district court weighed this too heavily. Moreover, the district court failed to account for or even address [ ] J.A. 657 (stipulated sales for SWAP products). See Clark, Inc., 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at 16-17 (actual confusion not significant in likelihood of confusion analysis in the case of two similar marks competing in the same market with the same product, where defendant had not been a vigorous competitor). Accordingly, it was an error for the district court to emphasize this factor in its analysis. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 24 of 34 19 7. Sophistication of the Consuming Public The district court made a conclusory determination as to the sophistication of the consuming public in its analysis of the similarity of the goods factor. The district court failed, in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(1), to provide its analysis of this factor and how it arrived at the conclusion that the products’ prices lessen the likelihood of confusion. The evidence contradicts the district court’s conclusion. Contrary to Beehive’s assertions, a feature of SWATCH brand watches is the ability to easily swap out dials and bracelets. See J.A. 596-597 (12:18-13:24). Additionally, Swatch bands are available for purchase separately allowing customers to customize their watches to their fashion, taste and mood. J.A. 629-630 (19:5-20:8) and J.A. 651-655. At these low price points consumers generally exercise less care and are therefore not deemed sophisticated, resulting in a heightened likelihood of confusion. See Recot, Inc. v. Becton, 214 F.3d 1322, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2000). 8. Similarity of the Marks a. Beehive, the TTAB and the district court placed too much emphasis on the disparate meanings of the SWATCH and SWAP trademarks. The overarching test for the “similarity of the marks” factor is whether there exists a “similarity in appearance and sound which would result in confusion.” Pizzeria Uno Corp., 747 F.2d at 1534. This is further corroborated by subsequent Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 25 of 34 20 Fourth Circuit precedent noting that marks must merely be “sufficiently similar in appearance, with greater weight given to the dominant or salient portions of the marks.” Renaissance Greeting Cards, Inc. v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., 227 Fed. Appx. 239, 244 (4th Cir. 2007) (quoting Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon, 43 F.3d at 936. While marks may be evaluated for similarity based upon sight, sound and meaning, (George & Co., LLC, 575 F.3d at 396) the case law does not support the contention that the meaning of the marks is paramount, to the detriment of the sight and sound, in the similarity analysis. Rather, in the face of evidence of the similarity of the dominant portions of the mark, the similarity of the marks as used in commerce and the identical nature of the goods to which the marks are applied, the dissimilarity of meaning is of little bearing in this analysis. b. The TTAB and district court did not consider the similarity of the marks in the commercial context. By weighing the connotation more heavily than the sight and sound of the marks, the TTAB and the district court both committed clear error. Analyzing the similarity of the marks requires an examination of “the allegedly infringing use in the context in which it is seen by the ordinary consumer.” Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. L & L Wings, Inc., 962 F.2d 316, 319 (4th Cir. 1992). Consumers encounter the parties’ SWAP and SWATCH goods in a store or while browsing the parties’ Internet websites. See J.A. 270 ¶25, 273-274 ¶¶ 62-66; J.A. 623-624 (8:19-9:9), Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 26 of 34 21 625-626 (10:8-11:8), 627 (17:9-25), 645-646 (125:10-126:18), 649-650 (131:18- 132:3); J.A. 349-370; J.A. 255 (10:10-14); J.A. 318 at Interrogatory No. 6; J.A. 258-259 (8:12-9:20), 266 (69:7-14). Accordingly, sight would be significantly more important in the analysis of the similarity of the marks than sound or meaning. See One Indus., LLC v. Jim O’Neal Distrib., 578 F.3d 1154, 1162-1163 (9th Cir. 2009) (noting where consumer confusion would occur as motocross enthusiasts select helmets inside a store or during online browsing, sight is significantly more important than sound or meaning when considering the similarity of the marks). In the market place, Beehive’s uses of its SWAP mark include: and See J.A. 317 at Interrogatory No. 2; J.A. 329, 337, 338, 341-343; J.A. 238 (33:18- 23), 342 and 343; J.A. 262-263 (14:23-15:2), 108-128; J.A. 264 (16:13-14), 126 and 127; J.A. 265 (18:4-7), 117; J.A. 482-483 (Requests for Admission Nos. 19 and 20). These uses create the impression of the word “SWATCH” owing to the dominant “S” and the letters “watch.” Further still, Beehive often depicts the term “watch” in a font and style that is similar to the stylized SWATCH Mark. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 27 of 34 22 Furthermore, despite Beehive’s assertions, incorporation of a generic term into a mark does not remove the term from the mark, but merely indicates that no trademark rights are claimed as to the generic term. It is appropriate to give consideration to Beehive’s incorporation of the term “watch” into its SWAP mark given the commercial context of the use. Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc., 710 F.2d 1565, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“disclaimed material still forms a part of the mark and cannot be ignored in determining likelihood of confusion.”); Sally Beauty Co. v. Beautyco, Inc., 304 F.3d 964, 972 n.1 (10th Cir. 2002). The SWAP mark is used on the face of the watch, directly under the number 12 on the dial. J.A. 239 (41:13-22). The SWATCH mark appears in the corresponding position on the dial. See J.A. 647-648 (128:11-129:5); J.A. 344-346. Both marks are single syllable terms with hard consonant endings and dominant SWA-prefixes and when used on the dial, (regardless of the position) the SWATCH and SWAP marks are depicted in very small characters. See id. and J.A. 320-342. Distinguishing elements are not easily identified under such circumstances. Furthermore, the SWAP and SWATCH marks are sometimes used alone, without additional symbols or terms, especially considering such use occurs on watch dials or “on identical goods.” Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 28 of 34 23 Additionally, the SWATCH and SWAP marks are similarly articulated. The SWA-prefix, given the dipthong, has a similar sound whether followed by “P” or “TCH” resulting in a similar sound. Both the TTAB and the district court should have ascribed greater weight to these similarities than the differences between the two marks. Nautilus Group, Inc. v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 372 F.3d 1330, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“In conducting this comparison, similarities weigh more heavily than differences.”) (internal quotations omitted). Given the commercial context in which consumers encounter the SWATCH and SWAP products, and Beehive’s use of the SWAP mark in such a commercial context, the visual similarity of the marks is a dominant issue in the ‘similarity of the marks’ analysis. If the similarity of the marks analysis was properly applied, the TTAB and district court could not have reached the conclusion that the difference in connotation was the pre-eminent inquiry. The TTAB and district court’s failures to consider the context in which confusion was likely to arise (in stores and on the Internet) and their failure to weigh the similarities more heavily than the differences is clearly erroneous and merits reversal. c. The identical nature of the goods warranted a lessened threshold for finding similarity. There is no question that the parties’ goods are identical. Given the identical nature of the Swatch’s and Beehive’s goods, the degree of similarity of the marks Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 29 of 34 24 required for a finding of likely confusion can be lessened. See Century 21 Real Estate, 970 F.2d 874, 877, 23 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1698 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (“When marks would appear on virtually identical goods or services, the degree of similarity necessary to support a conclusion of likely confusion decline.”); see also Exxon Corp. v. Texas Motor Exchange, Inc., 628 F.2d 500, 505 (5th Cir. 1980) (“The greater the similarity between the products and services, the greater the likelihood of confusion.”); see also Sabinsa Corp. v. Creative Compounds, LLC, 609 F.3d 175, 183-184 (3d Cir. 2010) (quoting 3 McCarthy § 23:20.1 (4th ed. 2003) (“The degree of similarity . . . needed to prove likely confusion will vary with the difference in the goods . . .. Where the goods . . . are directly competitive, the degree of similarity required to prove a likelihood of confusion is less than in the case of dissimilar products.”)). The district court and TTAB accorded far too much weight to their findings of divergent meanings of the SWATCH and SWAP marks. The similarity of the marks in their commercial contexts makes the district court’s determination as to the similarity of the marks clearly erroneous. The district court’s determination of several critical likelihood of confusion factors was flawed. Consequently, the district court arrived at a conclusion unsupported by the facts. The district court’s analysis of likelihood of confusion was clearly erroneous given the record. Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 30 of 34 25 The district court’s erroneous findings and conclusions as to trademark infringement and affirmance of the TTAB decision should be reversed, because the findings emanated from the district court’s erroneous determination on the issue of likelihood of confusion. CONCLUSION The district court’s determinations on Swatch’s claims are unsupported by the evidence and the law of this Circuit. As established, the district court erred in its evaluation of several key factors, precisely, the similarity of the marks, similarity of facilities, similarity of advertisements and Beehive’s intent. All of these favor Swatch. The district court failed to articulate a basis for its findings as to the sophistication of the consuming public. With regard to descriptiveness, the error is manifest. Swatch presented significant evidence, including numerous admissions made by Beehive in depositions, discovery responses and its own advertising, and in third parties’ descriptive uses of the word “swap” for identical goods. The district court held that the TTAB’s conclusion was correct without reconciling the evidence presented. The district court repeated the mistake of the TTAB by relying upon the general identification of Beehive’s goods as recited in the SWAP Application, rather than looking to the actual goods to which the SWAP mark is applied and was fatally flawed by not recognizing that if the subset of goods is descriptive— Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 31 of 34 26 that is, if any trait or feature is descriptive—then application for registration is to be refused. Swatch respectfully requests that this Court reverse: (1) the district court’s affirmance of the TTAB Order dismissing Swatch’s opposition and granting registration to Beehive’s SWAP mark, and (2) the district court’s holding as to the Federal, common law and Virginia trademark infringement claims, the dilution claim and descriptiveness claim. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Thomas P. Gulick Thomas P. Gulick Collen IP The Holyoke-Manhattan Building 80 South Highland Avenue Ossining, New York 10562 (914) 941-5668 Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 32 of 34 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 1. This brief complies with the type-volume limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 28.1(e)(2) or 32(a)(7)(B) because: [ X ] this brief contains [5,706] words, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii), or [ ] this brief uses a monospaced typeface and contains [state the number of] lines of text, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii). 2. This brief complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because: [ X ] this brief has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using [Microsoft Word 2007] in [14pt Times New Roman]; or [ ] this brief has been prepared in a monospaced typeface using [state name and version of word processing program] with [state number of characters per inch and name of type style]. Dated: April 30, 2013 /s/ Thomas P. Gulick Counsel for Appellant Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 33 of 34 CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 30th day of April, 2013, I caused this Public Final Reply Brief of Appellant to be filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System, which will send notice of such filing to the following registered CM/ECF users: James A. Oliff William J. Utermohlen OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC 277 South Washington Street Alexandria, Virginia 22320 (703) 836-6400 Counsel for Appellee I further certify that on this 30th day of April, 2013, I caused the required copies of the Public Final Reply Brief of Appellant to be hand filed with the Clerk. /s/ Thomas P. Gulick Counsel for Appellant Appeal: 12-2126 Doc: 37 Filed: 04/30/2013 Pg: 34 of 34
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/stats.bls.gov/news.release/history/cpi_121495.txt.json	TEXT Table 1. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service Table 2. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): Seasonally adjusted U.S. city average, by expenditure category and Table 4. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and Table 5. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and Table 3. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Selected areas, all items index Table 6. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: Selected areas, all items index FOR TECHNICAL INFORMATION: Patrick C. Jackman (202) 606-7000 USDL-95-505 CPI QUICKLINE: (202) 606-6994 TRANSMISSION OF MATERIAL IN FOR CURRENT AND HISTORICAL THIS RELEASE IS EMBARGOED INFORMATION: (202) 606-7828 UNTIL 8:30 A.M. (EST) MEDIA CONTACT: (202) 606-5902 Thursday, December 14, 1995 CONSUMER PRICE INDEX: NOVEMBER 1995 The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) declined 0.1 percent before seasonal adjustment in November to a level of 153.6 (1982-84=100), the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. For the 12-month period ended in November, the CPI-U increased 2.6 percent. The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) also declined 0.1 percent in November, prior to seasonal adjustment. The November 1995 CPI-W level of 150.9 was 2.4 percent higher than the index in November 1994. CPI for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) On a seasonally adjusted basis, the CPI-U, which rose 0.3 percent in October, was unchanged in November. The energy index, which rose 0.4 percent in October after declining in each of the 3 preceding months, turned down in November, decreasing 0.9 percent. The index for motor fuels fell 2.2 percent, more than offsetting a slight increase in the index for household fuels. The food index also turned down in November- -declining 0.1 percent--after increasing 0.5 and 0.3 percent in the 2 preceding months. A 2.5 percent drop in the index for fruits and vegetables was largely responsible for the November decline. Excluding food and energy, the CPI-U increased 0.1 percent after advancing 0.3 percent in October. The deceleration in November reflects a smaller increase in shelter costs coupled with declines in the indexes for apparel and for selected transportation components, including airline fares, used cars, and automobile finance charges, each of which had risen sharply early in the year. Table A. Percent changes in CPI for Urban Consumers (CPI-U) Seasonally adjusted Un- Compound adjusted Expenditure Changes from preceding month annual rate 12-mos. Category 1995 3-mos. ended ended May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Nov. '95 Nov. '95 All Items .3 .1 .2 .1 .1 .3 .0 1.8 2.6 Food and beverages .1 .1 .2 .2 .4 .3 -.1 2.7 2.7 Housing .1 .2 .3 .3 .1 .4 .1 2.4 2.7 Apparel and upkeep -.3 -.3 .2 .3 -.2 .3 -.1 .0 -.4 Transportation .4 .4 -.4 -.6 -.1 .1 -.6 -2.3 1.7 Medical care .3 .3 .4 .4 .3 .3 .4 4.0 4.1 Entertainment .5 -.2 .3 .4 .3 .1 .5 3.9 2.9 Other goods and services .4 .4 .4 .5 .3 .3 .5 4.7 4.4 Special Indexes: Energy .5 .5 -.8 -.8 -1.4 .4 -.9 -7.4 -2.7 Food .1 .1 .2 .2 .5 .3 -.1 2.7 2.8 All items less food and energy .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .1 2.5 3.0 During the first 11 months of 1995, the CPI-U rose at a 2.6 percent seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR). This compares with a 2.7 percent increase for all of 1994. The food index has risen at a 2.2 percent annual rate, while energy costs have decreased at a 2.7 percent rate. Excluding food and energy, the CPI-U advanced at a 3.1 percent annual rate in the first 11 months of 1995. This follows a 2.6 percent increase in all of 1994. The food and beverage index fell 0.1 percent in November. Grocery store food prices, which rose 0.6 and 0.4 percent in the 2 preceding months, declined 0.2 percent in November. Moderately large increases in most major grocery store food groups were more than offset by a 2.5 percent decline in the index for fruits and vegetables. Despite the sharp drop in November, the latter group has advanced 5.7 percent in the last 12 months, the largest increase during this period among the major grocery store food groups. In November, the index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs rose 0.6 percent, following increases of 0.6 and 1.0 percent in the 2 preceding months. Egg prices increased 3.5 percent in November and have risen 16.4 percent since June. Beef prices rose 0.5 percent, and the index for pork increased 1.1 percent. The indexes for cereal and bakery products and dairy products each increased 0.5 percent. The index for other food at home was unchanged. The other two components of the food and beverage index--restaurant meals and alcoholic beverages--increased 0.1 and 0.3 percent, respectively. The housing component increased 0.1 percent in November, following a 0.4 percent rise in October. Each of the three major housing groups contributed to the deceleration. Shelter costs, which rose 0.4 percent in October, increased 0.2 percent in November. Within shelter, an increase of 0.3 percent in homeowners' costs more than offset declines of 0.1 percent in both renters' costs and maintenance and repair costs. The index for fuel and utilities rose 0.2 percent in November, following a 0.6 percent increase in October. The index for household fuels rose 0.1 percent as declines in the indexes for fuel oil and natural gas-- down 0.5 and 0.3 percent, respectively--were more than offset by a 0.3 percent increase in the index for electricity. (Prior to seasonal adjustment, charges for electricity fell 1.9 percent.) The index for other utilities and public services rose 0.1 percent, as increases in the indexes for water and sewer services, refuse collection, and cable television were partially offset by a decline in telephone long distance toll calls. The index for household furnishings and operation, reflecting price declines for most housefurnishings, fell 0.2 percent in November after increasing 0.1 percent in October. The transportation index--down 0.6 percent in November--registered its fourth decline in the past 5 months. The indexes for motor fuel, airline fares, used cars, and automobile finance charges, each of which rose sharply during the first half of the year, have declined substantially in the second half of 1995. The index for gasoline--down 2.2 percent in November--has declined 9.0 percent since June and as of November was 6.5 percent lower than at the end of 1994 and 19.6 percent lower than its peak level of December 1990. The index for airline fares, which had increased 20.4 percent in the first half of 1995 after falling 9.5 percent in 1994, fell 4.0 percent in November and has declined 7.6 percent since June. The used car index, which rose 5.6 percent in the first half of 1995, fell 0.1 percent in November, bringing its level to a point 2.5 percent lower than in June. Automobile finance charges, which declined 1.0 percent in November, have fallen 3.9 percent in the past 5 months after increasing 7.3 percent in the first half of 1995. The index for new cars rose 0.1 percent in November, continuing the moderate rate of increase evident in this component this year. (Prior to seasonal adjustment, prices for new cars rose 1.1 percent. As of November, almost two-fifths of the new car sample was represented by 1996 models.) The index for apparel and upkeep decreased 0.1 percent in November, following an increase of 0.3 percent in October. (Prior to seasonal adjustment, clothing prices fell 0.6 percent, reflecting pre-holiday discounting.) Medical care costs rose 0.4 percent in November and have risen 4.1 percent in the past 12 months. The index for medical care commodities-- prescription drugs, non-prescription drugs, and medical supplies--increased 0.3 percent in November. The index for medical care services rose 0.4 percent. Charges for professional services and hospital and related services increased 0.5 and 0.3 percent, respectively. Entertainment costs rose 0.5 percent in November. A 1.8 percent increase in the index for reading materials, reflecting sharp advances in prices for both newspapers and for magazines,periodicals, and books, accounted for about three-fifths of the overall increase in the entertainment index. The index for other goods and services increased 0.5 percent in November, about in line with recent months. CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) On a seasonally adjusted basis, the CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers was unchanged in November. Table B. Percent changes in CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) Seasonally adjusted Un- Compound adjusted Expenditure Changes from preceding month annual rate 12-mos. Category 1995 3-mos. ended ended May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Nov. '95 Nov. '95 All Items .2 .1 .1 .1 .2 .3 .0 1.9 2.4 Food and beverages .1 .0 .2 .3 .5 .3 -.1 3.0 2.8 Housing .2 .1 .3 .3 .1 .4 .1 2.5 2.6 Apparel and upkeep -.5 -.1 -.1 .3 -.2 .4 -.4 -.6 -.4 Transportation .4 .2 -.6 -.6 -.2 .1 -.4 -2.3 1.7 Medical care .3 .3 .3 .5 .3 .3 .4 3.7 4.1 Entertainment .4 -.1 .1 .4 .3 .1 .5 3.7 2.7 Other goods and services .4 .4 .3 .5 .6 .3 .4 5.6 4.3 Special Indexes: Energy .7 .4 -1.0 -.9 -1.4 .4 -.9 -7.5 -2.9 Food .0 .1 .2 .2 .5 .4 -.1 3.3 2.8 All items less food and energy .2 .1 .1 .3 .2 .3 .1 2.5 3.0 As the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced on November 21, the CPI for November, originally scheduled for release December 13, was rescheduled for release on December 14. Price collection in November was extended beyond the usual closeout date in order to obtain those price data that were lost during the period from the 14th through the 19th of November, when CPI data collection was suspended as a result of the federal government shutdown. Consumer Price Index data for December are scheduled for release on Friday, January 12, 1996, at 8:30 A.M. (EST). Releases for the remainder of 1996: Feb. 14 Aug. 13 Mar. 15 Sep. 13 Apr. 12 Oct. 16 May 14 Nov. 14 June 12 Dec. 12 July 16 Jan. 14, 1997 Table 1. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service group (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Relative Unadjusted indexes Unadjusted Seasonally adjusted importance, percent change to percent change from- December Oct. Nov. Nov. 1995 from- Aug. to Sept. to Oct. to 1994 1995 1995 Nov. 1994 Oct. 1995 Sept. Oct. Nov. Expenditure category All items .................................. 100.000 153.7 153.6 2.6 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0 All items (1967=100) ....................... - 460.3 460.1 - - - - - Food and beverages ....................... 17.412 149.8 149.8 2.7 .0 .4 .3 -.1 Food ................................... 15.838 149.4 149.4 2.8 .0 .5 .3 -.1 Food at home ......................... 9.934 149.7 149.5 3.0 -.1 .6 .4 -.2 Cereals and bakery products ........ 1.464 169.0 169.0 3.2 .0 .2 .5 .5 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ..... 2.892 140.8 141.7 3.5 .6 .6 1.0 .6 Dairy products ..................... 1.169 133.2 133.7 1.5 .4 -.2 .7 .5 Fruits and vegetables .............. 2.013 177.2 175.2 5.7 -1.1 2.4 -.2 -2.5 Other food at home ................. 2.396 141.2 140.5 1.1 -.5 -.1 -.1 .0 Sugar and sweets ................. .326 139.2 138.4 2.9 -.6 -.1 .4 -.1 Fats and oils .................... .249 138.3 137.8 2.6 -.4 .1 .5 .5 Nonalcoholic beverages ........... .796 130.9 130.5 -1.4 -.3 .1 -1.1 .2 Other prepared food .............. 1.026 152.1 151.1 2.0 -.7 -.2 .3 -.1 Food away from home .................. 5.904 150.0 150.2 2.3 .1 .1 .3 .1 Alcoholic beverages .................... 1.574 154.9 155.2 2.2 .2 -.1 .2 .3 Housing .................................. 41.187 149.7 149.4 2.7 -.2 .1 .4 .1 Shelter ................................ 28.042 167.3 167.3 3.2 .0 .4 .4 .2 Renters' costs 1/ .................... 7.955 175.3 173.8 2.9 -.9 .5 .3 -.1 Rent, residential .................. 5.765 158.9 159.3 2.4 .3 .1 .2 .3 Other renters' costs ............... 2.190 205.0 197.5 4.4 -3.7 1.4 .5 -.8 Homeowners' costs 1/ ................. 19.889 173.0 173.5 3.3 .3 .3 .3 .3 Owners' equivalent rent 1/ ......... 19.501 173.4 173.9 3.4 .3 .3 .4 .3 Household insurance 1/ ............. .389 157.1 157.6 1.7 .3 -1.0 .1 .4 Maintenance and repairs 2/ ........... .198 136.3 136.2 3.8 -.1 .0 .7 -.1 Maintenance and repair services 2/ . .120 141.8 141.8 4.0 .0 .0 1.1 .0 Maintenance and repair commodities 2/ ................. .078 128.9 128.7 3.5 -.2 .1 .0 -.2 Fuel and other utilities ............... 7.093 123.9 123.1 1.1 -.6 -.6 .6 .2 Fuels ................................ 3.859 111.5 110.1 .2 -1.3 -1.3 1.1 .1 Fuel oil and other household fuel commodities .................... .360 86.9 87.7 .0 .9 -.3 -1.0 -.1 Gas (piped) and electricity (energy services)....................... 3.499 119.3 117.6 .3 -1.4 -1.4 1.2 .2 Other utilities and public services 2/ ...................... 3.234 153.5 153.6 2.1 .1 .1 .2 .1 Household furnishings and operation .... 6.052 123.9 123.6 2.1 -.2 .3 .1 -.2 Housefurnishings ..................... 3.508 111.7 111.0 .2 -.6 .4 -.1 -.7 Housekeeping supplies ................ 1.088 139.2 139.8 5.4 .4 .1 .6 .2 Housekeeping services ................ 1.455 144.7 144.9 4.2 .1 .3 .2 .3 Apparel and upkeep ....................... 5.656 134.5 133.7 -.4 -.6 -.2 .3 -.1 Apparel commodities .................... 5.097 131.4 130.6 -.4 -.6 -.2 .3 -.1 Men's and boys' apparel .............. 1.329 128.4 128.4 -.6 .0 -.1 .1 -.2 Women's and girls' apparel............ 2.269 130.6 129.5 -.8 -.8 -1.1 1.3 .3 Infants' and toddlers' apparel ....... .204 131.0 129.7 -1.1 -1.0 2.1 .2 -2.4 Footwear ............................. .747 127.5 126.7 .8 -.6 1.3 -.1 -.6 Other apparel commodities ............ .548 153.1 151.3 .3 -1.2 -.5 -1.9 -.1 Apparel services 2/ .................... .559 157.0 157.2 .6 .1 .1 -.3 .1 Transportation ........................... 17.139 139.4 139.4 1.7 .0 -.1 .1 -.6 Private transportation ................. 15.623 136.3 136.5 1.3 .1 -.1 .0 -.4 New vehicles ......................... 5.059 140.9 142.2 2.0 .9 .5 -.1 .1 New cars ........................... 4.052 138.6 140.1 1.7 1.1 .2 .0 .1 Used cars ............................ 1.318 157.2 157.8 5.1 .4 -.6 .0 -.1 Motor fuel ........................... 3.106 98.3 96.4 -6.1 -1.9 -1.5 -.3 -2.2 Gasoline ........................... - 98.0 96.0 -6.4 -2.0 -1.6 -.5 -2.2 Maintenance and repairs .............. 1.536 155.4 155.7 2.6 .2 .3 .2 .3 Other private transportation ......... 4.604 172.0 172.7 3.9 .4 .3 .2 .0 Other private transportation commodities .................... .618 105.0 105.1 1.1 .1 -.2 .2 -.3 Other private transportation services ....................... 3.986 187.7 188.6 4.4 .5 .4 .2 .0 Public transportation .................. 1.516 178.7 177.5 6.2 -.7 -.5 1.6 -2.3 Medical care ............................. 7.266 222.9 223.5 4.1 .3 .3 .3 .4 Medical care commodities ............... 1.291 205.7 206.3 1.8 .3 .2 .5 .3 Medical care services .................. 5.974 226.9 227.4 4.6 .2 .3 .3 .4 Professional medical services ........ 3.416 202.9 203.4 4.0 .2 .4 .1 .5 Entertainment ............................ 4.335 155.2 156.0 2.9 .5 .3 .1 .5 Entertainment commodities .............. 1.968 139.6 140.6 2.4 .7 .2 .1 .6 Entertainment services ................. 2.366 173.6 174.3 3.4 .4 .4 .1 .5 Other goods and services ................. 7.005 210.7 211.2 4.4 .2 .3 .3 .5 Tobacco and smoking products ........... 1.607 228.0 228.9 3.4 .4 .9 .3 .5 Personal care 2/ ....................... 1.175 148.5 148.9 2.2 .3 .1 .7 .3 Toilet goods and personal care appliances 2/ .................... .622 144.4 144.8 1.8 .3 -.1 1.0 .3 Personal care services 2/ ............ .553 153.0 153.5 2.9 .3 .5 .4 .3 Personal and educational expenses ...... 4.223 241.3 241.6 5.4 .1 .2 .3 .5 School books and supplies ............ .251 217.7 218.6 5.2 .4 .7 .7 .8 Personal and educational services .... 3.972 243.2 243.5 5.4 .1 .2 .3 .5 Commodity and service group All items .................................. 100.000 153.7 153.6 2.6 -.1 .1 .3 .0 Commodities .............................. 43.386 137.2 137.2 1.5 .0 .1 .2 -.1 Food and beverages ..................... 17.412 149.8 149.8 2.7 .0 .4 .3 -.1 Commodities less food and beverages .... 25.974 129.5 129.4 .6 -.1 .0 .1 -.2 Nondurables less food and beverages .. 15.375 130.5 130.0 -.1 -.4 -.3 .1 -.2 Apparel commodities ................ 5.097 131.4 130.6 -.4 -.6 -.2 .3 -.1 Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel 2/ ................. 10.278 133.1 132.6 .1 -.4 -.2 -.2 -.4 Durables ............................. 10.599 128.2 128.7 1.7 .4 .2 .0 -.2 Services ................................. 56.614 170.4 170.3 3.4 -.1 .2 .4 .2 Rent of shelter 1/ ..................... 27.422 174.1 174.1 3.3 .0 .3 .3 .3 Household services less rent of shelter 1/ ......................... 8.731 138.8 138.1 1.7 -.5 -.4 .5 .1 Transportation services ................ 7.038 177.7 178.0 4.4 .2 .1 .5 -.4 Medical care services .................. 5.974 226.9 227.4 4.6 .2 .3 .3 .4 Other services ......................... 7.450 196.5 197.0 4.2 .3 .3 .2 .5 Special indexes All items less food ........................ 84.162 154.4 154.4 2.5 .0 .1 .3 .0 All items less shelter ..................... 71.958 149.8 149.7 2.3 -.1 .1 .3 .0 All items less homeowners' costs 1/ ........ 80.111 154.7 154.5 2.4 -.1 .1 .3 -.1 All items less medical care ................ 92.734 149.8 149.7 2.5 -.1 .1 .3 .0 Commodities less food ...................... 27.548 130.5 130.4 .7 -.1 -.1 .2 -.2 Nondurables less food ...................... 16.950 131.9 131.4 .2 -.4 -.3 .2 -.2 Nondurables less food and apparel 2/ ....... 11.852 134.3 134.0 .4 -.2 -.2 -.1 -.2 Nondurables ................................ 32.788 140.4 140.1 1.4 -.2 .0 .2 -.1 Services less rent of shelter 1/ ........... 29.192 178.6 178.6 3.6 .0 .1 .3 .1 Services less medical care services ........ 50.640 165.1 165.0 3.3 -.1 .2 .4 .1 Energy ..................................... 6.965 104.5 102.8 -2.7 -1.6 -1.4 .4 -.9 All items less energy ...................... 93.035 160.2 160.3 3.0 .1 .3 .3 .1 All items less food and energy ........... 77.197 162.8 163.0 3.0 .1 .2 .3 .1 Commodities less food and energy commodities ................. 24.082 140.5 140.7 1.7 .1 .1 .2 .0 Energy commodities ................... 3.466 97.2 95.6 -5.5 -1.6 -1.3 -.5 -1.9 Services less energy services .......... 53.115 175.6 175.7 3.6 .1 .3 .3 .2 Purchasing power of the consumer dollar: 1982-84=$1.00 2/ ......................... - $.651 $.651 -2.5 .0 -.2 -.3 .0 1967=$1.00 2/ ............................ - .217 .217 - - - - - 1/ Indexes on a December 1982=100 base. 2/ Not seasonally adjusted. - Data not available. NOTE: Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date. Table 2. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): Seasonally adjusted U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service group (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Seasonally adjusted indexes Seasonally adjusted annual rate percent change for 3 months ended- 6 months ended- Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Feb. May Aug. Nov. May Nov. 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 Expenditure category All items .................................... - - - - 3.2 3.5 1.9 1.8 3.4 1.8 Food and beverages ......................... 149.3 149.9 150.4 150.3 2.8 3.3 1.9 2.7 3.0 2.3 Food ..................................... 149.0 149.7 150.2 150.0 3.0 3.3 1.9 2.7 3.2 2.3 Food at home ........................... 149.1 150.0 150.6 150.3 3.3 3.9 1.6 3.3 3.6 2.4 Cereals and bakery products .......... 168.1 168.4 169.2 170.0 1.7 2.9 3.7 4.6 2.3 4.1 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ....... 138.7 139.5 140.9 141.7 2.1 -.3 3.5 8.9 .9 6.2 Dairy products ....................... 132.6 132.3 133.2 133.8 -.6 5.3 -2.4 3.7 2.3 .6 Fruits and vegetables ................ 178.6 182.8 182.5 178.0 13.7 12.3 -.9 -1.3 13.0 -1.1 Other food at home ................... 141.3 141.2 141.1 141.1 .6 2.0 2.3 -.6 1.3 .9 Sugar and sweets ................... 138.6 138.4 139.0 138.9 1.2 4.8 4.8 .9 3.0 2.8 Fats and oils ...................... 137.5 137.6 138.3 139.0 1.8 1.8 2.4 4.4 1.8 3.4 Nonalcoholic beverages ............. 132.0 132.1 130.7 130.9 -1.2 -2.7 1.5 -3.3 -1.9 -.9 Other prepared food ................ 151.9 151.6 152.1 151.9 1.4 4.9 2.1 .0 3.1 1.1 Food away from home .................... 149.4 149.6 150.0 150.2 2.2 2.7 2.2 2.2 2.5 2.2 Alcoholic beverages ...................... 154.8 154.7 155.0 155.5 .3 3.5 3.2 1.8 1.8 2.5 Housing .................................... 148.9 149.1 149.7 149.8 2.8 2.5 3.0 2.4 2.6 2.7 Shelter .................................. 165.9 166.6 167.2 167.5 2.7 4.2 2.2 3.9 3.5 3.1 Renters' costs 1/ ...................... 173.9 174.7 175.3 175.2 1.9 5.7 1.2 3.0 3.8 2.1 Rent, residential .................... 158.2 158.4 158.7 159.1 2.3 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.2 Other renters' costs ................. 204.7 207.6 208.7 207.0 .8 13.5 -.8 4.6 7.0 1.9 Homeowners' costs 1/ ................... 171.6 172.2 172.8 173.4 2.9 3.6 2.8 4.3 3.2 3.6 Owners' equivalent rent 1/ ........... 171.9 172.5 173.2 173.7 2.6 3.8 2.8 4.3 3.2 3.5 Household insurance 1/ ............... 158.2 156.6 156.7 157.3 3.9 4.4 .5 -2.3 4.2 -.9 Maintenance and repairs 2/ ............. 135.4 135.4 136.3 136.2 8.2 2.4 2.4 2.4 5.3 2.4 Maintenance and repair services 2/ ... 140.3 140.3 141.8 141.8 4.5 4.4 2.6 4.3 4.4 3.5 Maintenance and repair commodities 2/ 128.8 128.9 128.9 128.7 13.2 -.3 2.2 -.3 6.2 .9 Fuel and other utilities ................. 124.2 123.4 124.1 124.3 1.3 -1.3 4.3 .3 .0 2.3 Fuels .................................. 111.5 110.0 111.2 111.3 -.7 -3.6 6.3 -.7 -2.2 2.8 Fuel oil and other household fuel commodities ...................... 89.0 88.7 87.8 87.7 -1.8 3.2 4.6 -5.7 .7 -.7 Gas (piped) and electricity (energy services)......................... 119.3 117.6 119.0 119.2 -.3 -4.3 6.6 -.3 -2.3 3.1 Other utilities and public services 2/ . 153.1 153.2 153.5 153.6 3.5 1.3 2.1 1.3 2.4 1.7 Household furnishings and operation ...... 123.3 123.7 123.8 123.5 4.7 .3 2.6 .7 2.5 1.6 Housefurnishings ....................... 111.5 111.9 111.8 111.0 1.8 -1.8 2.6 -1.8 .0 .4 Housekeeping supplies .................. 138.3 138.4 139.2 139.5 6.5 5.2 6.3 3.5 5.8 4.9 Housekeeping services .................. 143.7 144.1 144.4 144.9 11.1 2.3 .3 3.4 6.6 1.8 Apparel and upkeep ......................... 132.0 131.7 132.1 132.0 -.6 -1.5 .9 .0 -1.1 .5 Apparel commodities ...................... 128.6 128.3 128.7 128.6 -1.2 -1.5 .9 .0 -1.4 .5 Men's and boys' apparel ................ 126.0 125.9 126.0 125.7 2.2 -1.3 -2.5 -.9 .5 -1.7 Women's and girls' apparel ............. 126.6 125.2 126.8 127.2 -3.4 -.3 -1.3 1.9 -1.9 .3 Infants' and toddlers' apparel ......... 128.3 131.0 131.3 128.2 -4.5 -14.7 17.2 -.3 -9.8 8.1 Footwear ............................... 125.0 126.6 126.5 125.8 2.9 -2.8 .6 2.6 .0 1.6 Other apparel commodities .............. 155.0 154.2 151.2 151.1 -2.1 -1.1 15.5 -9.7 -1.6 2.2 Apparel services 2/....................... 157.3 157.4 157.0 157.2 2.6 1.0 -1.0 -.3 1.8 -.6 Transportation ............................. 139.4 139.2 139.4 138.6 4.8 7.1 -2.5 -2.3 6.0 -2.4 Private transportation ................... 136.3 136.2 136.2 135.7 5.8 5.1 -3.7 -1.7 5.4 -2.7 New vehicles ........................... 141.2 141.9 141.8 141.9 1.4 3.5 1.1 2.0 2.5 1.6 New cars ............................. 139.3 139.6 139.6 139.8 2.1 2.6 .9 1.4 2.3 1.2 Used cars .............................. 155.0 154.0 154.0 153.8 33.6 5.7 -11.0 -3.1 18.8 -7.1 Motor fuel ............................. 98.8 97.3 97.0 94.9 .8 9.0 -17.0 -14.9 4.8 -15.9 Gasoline ............................. 98.7 97.1 96.6 94.5 .4 9.8 -17.3 -16.0 5.0 -16.6 Maintenance and repairs ................ 154.6 155.0 155.3 155.7 1.6 3.5 2.1 2.9 2.5 2.5 Other private transportation ........... 171.0 171.5 171.8 171.8 7.5 5.6 .9 1.9 6.5 1.4 Other private transportation commodities ...................... 105.3 105.1 105.3 105.0 1.5 1.9 1.9 -1.1 1.7 .4 Other private transportation services ......................... 186.6 187.3 187.7 187.7 8.5 6.2 .6 2.4 7.4 1.5 Public transportation .................... 179.9 179.0 181.8 177.7 -1.2 25.1 8.2 -4.8 11.2 1.5 Medical care ............................... 221.8 222.5 223.2 224.0 4.5 3.5 4.3 4.0 4.0 4.1 Medical care commodities ................. 204.5 205.0 206.1 206.8 .2 -.2 2.6 4.6 .0 3.6 Medical care services .................... 225.6 226.3 226.9 227.7 5.4 4.4 4.7 3.8 4.9 4.3 Professional medical services .......... 201.8 202.6 202.9 203.9 5.0 3.5 3.6 4.2 4.2 3.9 Entertainment .............................. 154.4 154.9 155.1 155.9 2.7 3.2 2.1 3.9 2.9 3.0 Entertainment commodities ................ 139.1 139.4 139.6 140.4 1.2 1.2 3.2 3.8 1.2 3.5 Entertainment services ................... 172.5 173.2 173.4 174.2 4.1 4.5 1.2 4.0 4.3 2.6 Other goods and services ................... 209.0 209.7 210.4 211.4 4.2 3.2 5.5 4.7 3.7 5.1 Tobacco and smoking products ............. 227.2 229.3 229.9 231.0 -3.4 3.8 6.4 6.9 .2 6.6 Personal care 2/ ......................... 147.3 147.5 148.5 148.9 1.4 1.1 1.9 4.4 1.2 3.2 Toilet goods and personal care appliances 2/ ...................... 143.2 143.0 144.4 144.8 .8 .8 .8 4.5 .8 2.7 Personal care services 2/ .............. 151.7 152.4 153.0 153.5 2.4 1.3 3.0 4.8 1.9 3.9 Personal and educational expenses ........ 237.8 238.2 238.8 240.1 8.0 3.5 6.3 3.9 5.7 5.1 School books and supplies .............. 214.2 215.6 217.1 218.8 6.7 3.1 2.7 8.9 4.9 5.7 Personal and educational services ...... 239.4 239.8 240.4 241.6 7.9 3.5 6.6 3.7 5.7 5.2 Commodity and service group All items .................................... - - - - 3.2 3.5 1.9 1.8 3.4 1.8 Commodities ................................ 136.6 136.8 137.1 136.9 2.4 2.7 .0 .9 2.5 .4 Food and beverages ....................... 149.3 149.9 150.4 150.3 2.8 3.3 1.9 2.7 3.0 2.3 Commodities less food and beverages ...... 128.9 128.9 129.0 128.7 2.2 2.2 -.9 -.6 2.2 -.8 Nondurables less food and beverages .... 129.4 129.0 129.1 128.8 1.2 2.8 -2.4 -1.8 2.0 -2.1 Apparel commodities .................. 128.6 128.3 128.7 128.6 -1.2 -1.5 .9 .0 -1.4 .5 Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel 2/ ................... 133.6 133.3 133.1 132.6 -3.6 9.1 -1.8 -3.0 2.6 -2.4 Durables ............................... 128.1 128.3 128.3 128.1 4.8 1.6 .0 .0 3.2 .0 Services ................................... 169.5 169.8 170.4 170.7 3.4 4.1 3.1 2.9 3.8 3.0 Rent of shelter 1/ ....................... 173.1 173.6 174.1 174.6 2.4 4.1 3.1 3.5 3.2 3.3 Household services less rent of shelter 1/ ........................ 138.8 138.2 138.9 139.0 2.7 .0 3.2 .6 1.3 1.9 Transportation services .................. 177.2 177.4 178.3 177.5 4.8 9.4 2.8 .7 7.1 1.7 Medical care services .................... 225.6 226.3 226.9 227.7 5.4 4.4 4.7 3.8 4.9 4.3 Other services ........................... 194.9 195.4 195.8 196.7 5.8 3.4 4.0 3.7 4.6 3.9 Special indexes All items less food .......................... 153.6 153.7 154.2 154.2 3.2 3.5 1.8 1.6 3.4 1.7 All items less shelter ....................... 149.1 149.2 149.6 149.6 3.3 3.0 1.6 1.3 3.2 1.5 All items less homeowners' costs 1/ .......... 154.0 154.2 154.7 154.6 3.2 3.2 1.6 1.6 3.2 1.6 All items less medical care .................. 148.9 149.1 149.5 149.5 3.1 3.3 1.9 1.6 3.2 1.8 Commodities less food ........................ 130.1 130.0 130.2 129.9 2.2 2.2 -.6 -.6 2.2 -.6 Nondurables less food ........................ 130.9 130.5 130.7 130.4 .9 2.8 -1.5 -1.5 1.9 -1.5 Nondurables less food and apparel 2/ ......... 134.8 134.5 134.3 134.0 -3.0 8.4 -1.2 -2.4 2.6 -1.8 Nondurables .................................. 139.5 139.5 139.8 139.6 1.8 2.9 .0 .3 2.3 .1 Services less rent of shelter 1/ ............. 177.7 177.8 178.4 178.6 5.2 3.7 3.2 2.0 4.5 2.6 Services less medical care services .......... 164.1 164.4 165.1 165.2 3.5 4.3 2.5 2.7 3.9 2.6 Energy ....................................... 104.8 103.3 103.7 102.8 .4 1.5 -4.5 -7.4 1.0 -5.9 All items less energy ........................ 159.4 159.9 160.3 160.5 3.4 3.6 2.3 2.8 3.5 2.5 All items less food and energy ............. 162.0 162.4 162.9 163.0 3.3 3.6 2.5 2.5 3.4 2.5 Commodities less food and energy commodities .......................... 139.6 139.8 140.1 140.1 2.3 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.9 1.4 Energy commodities ..................... 97.8 96.5 96.0 94.2 .4 8.3 -14.8 -13.9 4.3 -14.4 Services less energy services ............ 174.5 175.1 175.6 175.9 4.1 4.5 2.8 3.2 4.3 3.0 1/ Indexes on a December 1982=100 base. 2/ Not seasonally adjusted. - Data not available. NOTE: Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date. Table 4. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service group (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Relative Unadjusted indexes Unadjusted Seasonally adjusted importance, percent change to percent change from- December Oct. Nov. Nov. 1995 from- Aug. to Sept. to Oct. to 1994 1995 1995 Nov. 1994 Oct. 1995 Sept. Oct. Nov. Expenditure category All items .................................. 100.000 151.0 150.9 2.4 -0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 All items (1967=100) ....................... - 449.6 449.5 - - - - - Food and beverages ....................... 19.320 149.3 149.3 2.8 .0 .5 .3 -.1 Food ................................... 17.629 148.9 148.9 2.8 .0 .5 .4 -.1 Food at home ......................... 11.243 148.9 148.7 3.0 -.1 .6 .4 -.1 Cereals and bakery products ........ 1.670 168.8 168.8 3.2 .0 .2 .4 .5 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ..... 3.398 140.5 141.3 3.4 .6 .7 1.1 .4 Dairy products ..................... 1.299 132.8 133.5 1.6 .5 -.2 .5 .6 Fruits and vegetables .............. 2.124 176.4 174.4 6.0 -1.1 2.3 -.1 -2.4 Other food at home ................. 2.751 140.8 140.1 1.2 -.5 .1 -.2 .1 Sugar and sweets ................. .367 139.0 138.4 2.9 -.4 -.1 .4 .0 Fats and oils .................... .286 138.0 137.7 2.7 -.2 .1 .4 .7 Nonalcoholic beverages ........... .920 130.2 129.8 -1.0 -.3 .4 -1.3 .4 Other prepared food .............. 1.179 151.8 150.8 2.0 -.7 -.1 .3 -.1 Food away from home .................. 6.387 149.9 150.1 2.3 .1 .2 .3 .1 Alcoholic beverages .................... 1.690 154.2 154.6 2.2 .3 -.1 .3 .3 Housing .................................. 38.759 146.6 146.4 2.6 -.1 .1 .4 .1 Shelter ................................ 25.753 162.8 162.8 3.1 .0 .3 .4 .2 Renters' costs 1/ .................... 8.073 153.5 152.7 2.6 -.5 .4 .3 .1 Rent, residential .................. 6.615 158.6 158.9 2.3 .2 .1 .3 .3 Other renters' costs ............... 1.458 205.3 197.5 4.2 -3.8 1.7 .3 -.9 Homeowners' costs 1/ ................. 17.491 157.8 158.3 3.4 .3 .3 .4 .3 Owners' equivalent rent 1/ ......... 17.161 158.1 158.6 3.5 .3 .3 .4 .3 Household insurance 1/ ............. .331 144.3 144.9 1.8 .4 -1.5 .6 .4 Maintenance and repairs 2/ ........... .189 135.7 135.6 3.2 -.1 .1 .5 -.1 Maintenance and repair services 2/ . .104 144.4 144.5 3.2 .1 .0 1.0 .1 Maintenance and repair commodities 2/ ................. .085 124.3 123.9 3.1 -.3 .2 .0 -.3 Fuel and other utilities ............... 7.329 123.5 122.7 1.0 -.6 -.7 .7 .1 Fuels ................................ 3.958 110.8 109.5 .2 -1.2 -1.4 1.3 .1 Fuel oil and other household fuel commodities .................... .331 86.8 87.6 .0 .9 -.2 -1.1 .0 Gas (piped) and electricity (energy services)....................... 3.627 118.5 116.9 .2 -1.4 -1.5 1.5 .1 Other utilities and public services 2/ ...................... 3.372 153.9 154.0 2.1 .1 .1 .2 .1 Household furnishings and operation .... 5.676 122.7 122.3 2.1 -.3 .3 .0 -.2 Housefurnishings ..................... 3.432 110.4 109.7 .2 -.6 .4 -.2 -.6 Housekeeping supplies ................ 1.122 139.4 139.9 5.2 .4 .1 .4 .4 Housekeeping services ................ 1.122 148.0 148.2 4.8 .1 .3 .2 .3 Apparel and upkeep ....................... 5.661 133.4 132.5 -.4 -.7 -.2 .4 -.4 Apparel commodities .................... 5.136 130.5 129.5 -.5 -.8 -.2 .4 -.4 Men's and boys' apparel .............. 1.329 127.9 127.9 -.4 .0 -.2 .1 -.5 Women's and girls' apparel............ 2.214 129.2 127.7 -1.1 -1.2 -.9 1.4 -.2 Infants' and toddlers' apparel ....... .263 132.8 130.9 -1.7 -1.4 2.2 .3 -2.7 Footwear ............................. .827 128.4 127.6 1.2 -.6 1.1 .1 -.5 Other apparel commodities ............ .503 150.8 149.1 .0 -1.1 -.5 -1.8 -.3 Apparel services 2/ .................... .524 156.3 156.6 .5 .2 -.1 -.3 .2 Transportation ........................... 19.183 139.0 139.0 1.7 .0 -.2 .1 -.4 Private transportation ................. 18.027 136.9 136.9 1.3 .0 -.2 .0 -.4 New vehicles ......................... 4.982 141.9 143.0 2.1 .8 .3 .1 .1 New cars ........................... 3.622 138.3 139.6 1.7 .9 .1 .1 .0 Used cars ............................ 2.382 158.1 158.8 5.3 .4 -.6 -.1 -.1 Motor fuel ........................... 3.819 98.2 96.3 -6.1 -1.9 -1.4 -.5 -2.1 Gasoline ........................... - 97.9 95.9 -6.4 -2.0 -1.6 -.4 -2.3 Maintenance and repairs .............. 1.617 156.2 156.5 2.6 .2 .3 .1 .3 Other private transportation ......... 5.227 167.7 168.5 4.0 .5 .3 .2 -.1 Other private transportation commodities .................... .780 104.2 104.3 1.1 .1 -.2 .2 -.3 Other private transportation services ....................... 4.447 183.7 184.6 4.5 .5 .4 .2 .0 Public transportation .................. 1.156 174.8 174.1 6.3 -.4 -.1 1.7 -1.3 Medical care ............................. 6.173 222.3 222.8 4.1 .2 .3 .3 .4 Medical care commodities ............... 1.063 203.2 203.9 1.6 .3 .1 .5 .4 Medical care services .................. 5.110 226.6 227.1 4.6 .2 .3 .3 .3 Professional medical services ........ 2.920 204.0 204.5 4.1 .2 .3 .1 .4 Entertainment ............................ 4.005 152.9 153.6 2.7 .5 .3 .1 .5 Entertainment commodities .............. 2.054 138.7 139.4 2.0 .5 .2 .1 .5 Entertainment services ................. 1.951 173.5 174.1 3.3 .3 .3 .2 .4 Other goods and services ................. 6.900 207.8 208.3 4.3 .2 .6 .3 .4 Tobacco and smoking products ........... 2.128 228.2 229.1 3.3 .4 .9 .3 .6 Personal care 2/ ....................... 1.139 148.7 149.0 2.1 .2 .1 .7 .2 Toilet goods and personal care appliances 2/ .................... .646 145.1 145.4 1.6 .2 -.1 1.0 .2 Personal care services 2/ ............ .493 153.2 153.5 3.0 .2 .5 .5 .2 Personal and educational expenses ...... 3.633 236.8 237.1 5.4 .1 .6 .3 .4 School books and supplies ............ .220 219.1 219.9 5.3 .4 .7 .6 1.0 Personal and educational services .... 3.413 238.4 238.7 5.4 .1 .5 .3 .4 Commodity and service group All items .................................. 100.000 151.0 150.9 2.4 -.1 .2 .3 .0 Commodities .............................. 47.499 137.1 137.0 1.5 -.1 .1 .1 -.1 Food and beverages ..................... 19.320 149.3 149.3 2.8 .0 .5 .3 -.1 Commodities less food and beverages .... 28.180 129.7 129.5 .7 -.2 -.1 .1 -.3 Nondurables less food and beverages .. 16.400 130.0 129.2 -.4 -.6 -.2 .0 -.4 Apparel commodities ................ 5.136 130.5 129.5 -.5 -.8 -.2 .4 -.4 Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel 2/ ................. 11.263 132.7 132.1 -.2 -.5 -.2 -.3 -.5 Durables ............................. 11.780 128.2 128.6 2.1 .3 .1 .0 .0 Services ................................. 52.501 167.7 167.7 3.3 .0 .2 .4 .2 Rent of shelter 1/ ..................... 25.206 156.6 156.7 3.2 .1 .3 .3 .3 Household services less rent of shelter 1/ ......................... 8.584 127.4 126.8 1.7 -.5 -.5 .6 .2 Transportation services ................ 7.220 175.3 175.8 4.4 .3 .3 .4 -.2 Medical care services .................. 5.110 226.6 227.1 4.6 .2 .3 .3 .3 Other services ......................... 6.381 193.3 193.7 4.2 .2 .4 .2 .4 Special indexes All items less food ........................ 82.371 151.3 151.2 2.4 -.1 .1 .3 .0 All items less shelter ..................... 74.247 147.9 147.8 2.2 -.1 .1 .3 -.1 All items less homeowners' costs 1/ ........ 82.509 141.8 141.6 2.3 -.1 .1 .3 -.1 All items less medical care ................ 93.827 147.6 147.5 2.4 -.1 .1 .3 -.1 Commodities less food ...................... 29.870 130.6 130.4 .8 -.2 -.1 .1 -.2 Nondurables less food ...................... 18.090 131.4 130.7 -.1 -.5 -.4 .2 -.4 Nondurables less food and apparel 2/ ....... 12.954 133.9 133.4 .1 -.4 -.2 -.2 -.4 Nondurables ................................ 35.719 139.9 139.6 1.3 -.2 .0 .2 -.1 Services less rent of shelter 1/ ........... 27.295 159.1 159.1 3.5 .0 .1 .4 .1 Services less medical care services ........ 47.390 162.6 162.6 3.2 .0 .2 .4 .1 Energy ..................................... 7.777 103.8 102.2 -2.9 -1.5 -1.4 .4 -.9 All items less energy ...................... 92.223 157.5 157.7 2.9 .1 .3 .3 .1 All items less food and energy ........... 74.594 159.7 159.9 3.0 .1 .2 .3 .1 Commodities less food and energy commodities ................. 25.720 140.1 140.2 1.8 .1 .1 .2 .0 Energy commodities ................... 4.150 97.5 95.8 -5.6 -1.7 -1.4 -.5 -1.9 Services less energy services .......... 48.874 173.1 173.3 3.5 .1 .3 .3 .2 Purchasing power of the consumer dollar: 1982-84=$1.00 2/ ......................... - $.662 $.663 -2.4 .2 -.3 -.3 .2 1967=$1.00 2/ ............................ - .222 .222 - - - - - 1/ Indexes on a December 1984=100 base. 2/ Not seasonally adjusted. - Data not available. NOTE: Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date. Table 5. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W): U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service group (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Seasonally adjusted indexes Seasonally adjusted annual rate percent change for 3 months ended- 6 months ended- Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Feb. May Aug. Nov. May Nov. 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 Expenditure category All items .................................... - - - - 3.3 3.3 1.3 1.9 3.3 1.6 Food and beverages ......................... 148.8 149.5 150.0 149.9 2.8 3.0 1.9 3.0 2.9 2.4 Food ..................................... 148.3 149.0 149.6 149.5 3.1 3.0 1.9 3.3 3.0 2.6 Food at home ........................... 148.3 149.2 149.8 149.6 3.6 3.0 2.2 3.6 3.3 2.9 Cereals and bakery products .......... 167.8 168.2 168.9 169.8 2.5 2.2 3.7 4.9 2.3 4.3 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ....... 138.3 139.2 140.7 141.3 2.4 -1.2 3.8 9.0 .6 6.4 Dairy products ....................... 132.3 132.1 132.8 133.6 -.3 4.6 -2.1 4.0 2.1 .9 Fruits and vegetables ................ 178.0 182.1 182.0 177.7 13.5 11.8 .0 -.7 12.7 -.3 Other food at home ................... 140.8 140.9 140.6 140.8 .9 2.0 2.3 .0 1.4 1.1 Sugar and sweets ................... 138.5 138.3 138.9 138.9 .9 4.8 4.5 1.2 2.8 2.8 Fats and oils ...................... 137.4 137.5 138.0 138.9 2.1 1.5 2.7 4.4 1.8 3.5 Nonalcoholic beverages ............. 131.2 131.7 130.0 130.5 -.9 -2.1 1.5 -2.1 -1.5 -.3 Other prepared food ................ 151.6 151.4 151.8 151.6 1.9 4.6 1.9 .0 3.3 .9 Food away from home .................... 149.2 149.5 149.9 150.1 2.2 2.7 1.9 2.4 2.5 2.2 Alcoholic beverages ...................... 154.1 153.9 154.4 154.9 .8 2.9 2.6 2.1 1.9 2.4 Housing .................................... 145.8 145.9 146.5 146.7 2.5 2.5 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.6 Shelter .................................. 161.5 162.0 162.7 163.0 2.0 4.3 2.3 3.8 3.2 3.0 Renters' costs 1/ ...................... 152.5 153.1 153.5 153.6 1.9 4.6 1.3 2.9 3.2 2.1 Rent, residential .................... 157.8 158.0 158.4 158.8 2.3 2.6 1.8 2.6 2.5 2.2 Other renters' costs ................. 204.7 208.1 208.8 207.0 .6 13.7 -1.7 4.6 7.0 1.4 Homeowners' costs 1/ ................... 156.5 156.9 157.6 158.1 2.1 4.2 2.9 4.2 3.2 3.5 Owners' equivalent rent 1/ ........... 156.8 157.2 157.9 158.4 2.1 4.2 3.1 4.1 3.2 3.6 Household insurance 1/ ............... 145.3 143.1 144.0 144.6 4.6 4.2 .3 -1.9 4.4 -.8 Maintenance and repairs 2/ ............. 134.9 135.0 135.7 135.6 5.6 2.7 2.4 2.1 4.2 2.2 Maintenance and repair services 2/ ... 143.0 143.0 144.4 144.5 2.3 4.3 2.0 4.3 3.3 3.1 Maintenance and repair commodities 2/ 124.1 124.3 124.3 123.9 9.6 .7 3.0 -.6 5.1 1.1 Fuel and other utilities ................. 123.7 122.8 123.7 123.8 1.3 -1.6 4.3 .3 -.2 2.3 Fuels .................................. 110.7 109.1 110.5 110.6 -.4 -4.3 6.4 -.4 -2.3 3.0 Fuel oil and other household fuel commodities ...................... 88.8 88.6 87.6 87.6 -1.4 2.8 4.2 -5.3 .7 -.7 Gas (piped) and electricity (energy services)......................... 118.4 116.6 118.3 118.4 -.3 -5.0 6.3 .0 -2.7 3.1 Other utilities and public services 2/ . 153.5 153.6 153.9 154.0 3.5 1.6 1.8 1.3 2.5 1.6 Household furnishings and operation ...... 122.1 122.5 122.5 122.2 5.1 .3 2.7 .3 2.7 1.5 Housefurnishings ....................... 110.2 110.6 110.4 109.7 1.8 -1.4 2.2 -1.8 .2 .2 Housekeeping supplies .................. 138.5 138.7 139.2 139.8 6.2 4.8 6.3 3.8 5.5 5.0 Housekeeping services .................. 146.9 147.4 147.7 148.1 14.0 1.4 1.1 3.3 7.5 2.2 Apparel and upkeep ......................... 130.7 130.5 131.0 130.5 .3 -1.8 .6 -.6 -.8 .0 Apparel commodities ...................... 127.7 127.5 128.0 127.5 .6 -2.5 .9 -.6 -.9 .2 Men's and boys' apparel ................ 125.6 125.4 125.5 124.9 5.2 -.6 -3.7 -2.2 2.2 -3.0 Women's and girls' apparel ............. 125.1 124.0 125.7 125.5 -2.8 .3 -2.8 1.3 -1.3 -.8 Infants' and toddlers' apparel ......... 129.5 132.4 132.8 129.2 -9.4 -13.6 20.1 -.9 -11.5 9.1 Footwear ............................... 125.8 127.2 127.3 126.7 3.6 -2.5 1.0 2.9 .5 1.9 Other apparel commodities .............. 153.0 152.3 149.6 149.2 2.2 -10.5 20.9 -9.6 -4.4 4.6 Apparel services 2/....................... 156.9 156.8 156.3 156.6 2.6 .8 -.5 -.8 1.7 -.6 Transportation ............................. 138.7 138.4 138.5 137.9 6.3 6.8 -3.9 -2.3 6.6 -3.1 Private transportation ................... 136.7 136.4 136.4 135.9 7.0 5.7 -4.5 -2.3 6.4 -3.4 New vehicles ........................... 142.2 142.6 142.7 142.8 1.4 3.8 1.7 1.7 2.6 1.7 New cars ............................. 139.0 139.2 139.3 139.3 2.1 2.6 .9 .9 2.3 .9 Used cars .............................. 155.9 155.0 154.9 154.7 33.1 6.5 -10.8 -3.0 19.1 -7.0 Motor fuel ............................. 98.7 97.3 96.8 94.8 .4 9.0 -17.0 -14.9 4.6 -15.9 Gasoline ............................. 98.6 97.0 96.6 94.4 .8 9.8 -17.6 -16.0 5.2 -16.8 Maintenance and repairs ................ 155.5 155.9 156.1 156.5 1.3 3.4 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.7 Other private transportation ........... 167.0 167.5 167.8 167.7 8.4 5.7 .5 1.7 7.1 1.1 Other private transportation commodities ...................... 104.5 104.3 104.5 104.2 2.0 1.6 1.9 -1.1 1.8 .4 Other private transportation services ......................... 182.6 183.3 183.7 183.7 9.7 6.4 .0 2.4 8.0 1.2 Public transportation .................... 174.2 174.0 176.9 174.6 -1.0 24.1 2.8 .9 10.9 1.9 Medical care ............................... 221.2 221.8 222.4 223.2 4.4 3.6 4.7 3.7 4.0 4.2 Medical care commodities ................. 202.3 202.5 203.6 204.5 -.2 -.6 3.0 4.4 -.4 3.7 Medical care services .................... 225.3 226.0 226.6 227.3 5.4 4.4 4.9 3.6 4.9 4.3 Professional medical services .......... 203.0 203.7 204.0 204.9 4.8 3.7 4.0 3.8 4.2 3.9 Entertainment .............................. 152.2 152.7 152.8 153.6 2.4 3.0 1.9 3.7 2.7 2.8 Entertainment commodities ................ 138.2 138.5 138.7 139.4 .9 1.2 2.6 3.5 1.0 3.1 Entertainment services ................... 172.5 173.0 173.3 174.0 4.1 5.0 1.2 3.5 4.6 2.3 Other goods and services ................... 205.7 206.9 207.6 208.5 3.2 3.0 5.2 5.6 3.1 5.4 Tobacco and smoking products ............. 227.2 229.2 229.8 231.1 -2.8 3.3 6.2 7.0 .2 6.6 Personal care 2/ ......................... 147.4 147.6 148.7 149.0 1.4 1.1 1.6 4.4 1.2 3.0 Toilet goods and personal care appliances 2/ ...................... 143.8 143.7 145.1 145.4 .8 .8 .3 4.5 .8 2.4 Personal care services 2/ .............. 151.7 152.5 153.2 153.5 2.7 1.3 3.0 4.8 2.0 3.9 Personal and educational expenses ........ 232.7 234.0 234.6 235.6 7.4 3.6 5.7 5.1 5.4 5.4 School books and supplies .............. 215.0 216.6 218.0 220.1 6.3 3.6 1.9 9.8 4.9 5.8 Personal and educational services ...... 234.3 235.5 236.1 237.0 7.5 3.4 6.2 4.7 5.4 5.4 Commodity and service group All items .................................... - - - - 3.3 3.3 1.3 1.9 3.3 1.6 Commodities ................................ 136.5 136.7 136.9 136.7 3.3 2.7 -.3 .6 3.0 .1 Food and beverages ....................... 148.8 149.5 150.0 149.9 2.8 3.0 1.9 3.0 2.9 2.4 Commodities less food and beverages ...... 128.9 128.8 128.9 128.5 3.2 2.5 -1.5 -1.2 2.8 -1.4 Nondurables less food and beverages .... 128.9 128.6 128.6 128.1 .9 3.5 -3.0 -2.5 2.2 -2.8 Apparel commodities .................. 127.7 127.5 128.0 127.5 .6 -2.5 .9 -.6 -.9 .2 Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel 2/ ................... 133.4 133.1 132.7 132.1 -4.7 10.8 -2.4 -3.8 2.7 -3.1 Durables ............................... 127.9 128.0 128.0 128.0 6.9 2.5 -1.2 .3 4.7 -.5 Services ................................... 166.7 167.0 167.7 168.0 3.7 3.7 2.9 3.2 3.7 3.0 Rent of shelter 1/ ....................... 155.7 156.1 156.6 157.0 2.4 3.7 3.1 3.4 3.0 3.3 Household services less rent of shelter 1/ ........................ 127.5 126.8 127.5 127.8 2.9 -.6 3.5 .9 1.1 2.2 Transportation services .................. 174.4 174.9 175.6 175.3 5.8 8.5 1.2 2.1 7.1 1.6 Medical care services .................... 225.3 226.0 226.6 227.3 5.4 4.4 4.9 3.6 4.9 4.3 Other services ........................... 191.5 192.3 192.7 193.4 5.7 3.4 3.8 4.0 4.6 3.9 Special indexes All items less food .......................... 150.2 150.3 150.8 150.8 3.3 3.3 1.3 1.6 3.3 1.5 All items less shelter ....................... 147.2 147.3 147.7 147.6 3.7 3.1 1.1 1.1 3.4 1.1 All items less homeowners' costs 1/ .......... 141.1 141.2 141.6 141.5 3.5 3.2 1.1 1.1 3.4 1.1 All items less medical care .................. 146.7 146.9 147.4 147.3 3.4 3.3 1.1 1.6 3.4 1.4 Commodities less food ........................ 130.1 130.0 130.1 129.8 3.1 2.2 -1.2 -.9 2.7 -1.1 Nondurables less food ........................ 130.4 129.9 130.2 129.7 .9 3.1 -2.1 -2.1 2.0 -2.1 Nondurables less food and apparel 2/ ......... 134.5 134.2 133.9 133.4 -3.8 9.7 -1.8 -3.2 2.7 -2.5 Nondurables .................................. 139.1 139.1 139.4 139.3 2.3 2.6 -.3 .6 2.5 .1 Services less rent of shelter 1/ ............. 158.2 158.4 159.1 159.3 5.3 3.4 2.8 2.8 4.3 2.8 Services less medical care services .......... 161.6 162.0 162.6 162.8 3.9 3.6 2.3 3.0 3.7 2.6 Energy ....................................... 104.2 102.7 103.1 102.2 .0 2.3 -5.9 -7.5 1.1 -6.7 All items less energy ........................ 156.6 157.1 157.5 157.7 3.4 3.4 2.1 2.8 3.4 2.5 All items less food and energy ............. 158.9 159.2 159.7 159.9 3.7 3.6 2.0 2.5 3.6 2.3 Commodities less food and energy commodities .......................... 139.2 139.3 139.6 139.6 3.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 2.5 1.2 Energy commodities ..................... 98.1 96.7 96.2 94.4 .0 9.1 -15.4 -14.3 4.4 -14.8 Services less energy services ............ 172.2 172.7 173.3 173.6 3.9 4.6 2.6 3.3 4.2 2.9 1/ Indexes on a December 1984=100 base. 2/ Not seasonally adjusted. - Data not available. NOTE: Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date. Table 3. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Selected areas, all items index (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Indexes Percent change to Percent change to Area Pricing Nov. 1995 from- Oct. 1995 from- schedule Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Nov. Sept. Oct. Oct. Aug. Sept. 1/ 1995 1995 1995 1995 1994 1995 1995 1994 1995 1995 U.S. city average ...................... M 152.9 153.2 153.7 153.6 2.6 0.3 -0.1 2.8 0.5 0.3 Region and area size 2/ Northeast urban......................... M 159.7 160.0 160.3 160.5 2.4 .3 .1 2.5 .4 .2 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 160.3 160.7 161.1 161.3 2.6 .4 .1 2.5 .5 .2 Size B - 500,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 157.9 158.0 158.5 158.3 2.3 .2 -.1 2.5 .4 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 500,000 .......... M 158.5 158.5 158.3 158.5 2.0 .0 .1 2.6 -.1 -.1 North Central urban .................... M 148.9 149.4 149.6 149.5 2.5 .1 -.1 3.0 .5 .1 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 149.8 150.3 150.3 150.2 2.3 -.1 -.1 2.8 .3 .0 Size B - 360,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 147.8 147.9 148.4 148.1 2.5 .1 -.2 2.8 .4 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 360,000 .......... M 149.9 150.6 151.5 151.5 2.8 .6 .0 3.1 1.1 .6 Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000) ......... M 145.7 146.3 146.0 146.0 3.3 -.2 .0 3.6 .2 -.2 South urban ............................ M 149.7 149.8 150.5 150.4 3.0 .4 -.1 3.2 .5 .5 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 149.4 149.2 149.9 149.7 2.6 .3 -.1 2.7 .3 .5 Size B - 450,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 152.0 152.3 152.6 152.6 2.8 .2 .0 3.0 .4 .2 Size C - 50,000 to 450,000 .......... M 149.4 149.5 150.4 150.4 3.7 .6 .0 3.7 .7 .6 Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000) ......... M 147.8 148.4 149.0 148.9 3.2 .3 -.1 3.4 .8 .4 West urban ............................. M 153.7 154.1 154.6 154.4 2.2 .2 -.1 2.4 .6 .3 Size A - More than 1,250,000 ........ M 154.1 154.5 154.9 154.4 1.6 -.1 -.3 1.8 .5 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 330,000 .......... M 157.0 157.6 157.9 158.4 3.0 .5 .3 3.4 .6 .2 Size classes A 3/ ................................. M 138.2 138.5 138.8 138.7 2.3 .1 -.1 2.4 .4 .2 B .................................... M 152.8 153.1 153.5 153.5 2.7 .3 .0 2.9 .5 .3 C .................................... M 152.4 152.7 153.3 153.5 3.1 .5 .1 3.3 .6 .4 D .................................... M 148.8 149.6 150.0 150.0 3.2 .3 .0 3.4 .8 .3 Selected local areas Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN-WI...... M 153.8 154.0 154.3 154.0 2.4 .0 -.2 3.3 .3 .2 Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside, CA ...... M 154.4 154.6 155.2 154.4 1.0 -.1 -.5 1.2 .5 .4 N.Y.-Northern N.J.-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT M 162.8 163.2 163.6 163.8 2.8 .4 .1 2.6 .5 .2 Phil.-Wilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-DE-MD .. M 159.6 160.3 160.4 159.6 1.9 -.4 -.5 2.4 .5 .1 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA ..... M 151.5 152.3 152.6 152.4 1.7 .1 -.1 2.1 .7 .2 Baltimore, MD .......................... 1 - 151.8 - 151.1 1.7 -.5 - - - - Boston-Lawrence-Salem, MA-NH ........... 1 - 158.6 - 160.3 2.3 1.1 - - - - Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH ............. 1 - 149.0 - 148.2 1.5 -.5 - - - - Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL .............. 1 - 148.9 - 150.2 3.9 .9 - - - - St. Louis-East St. Louis, MO-IL ........ 1 - 147.1 - 145.7 1.7 -1.0 - - - - Washington, DC-MD-VA ................... 1 - 156.2 - 155.2 1.4 -.6 - - - - Dallas-Fort Worth, TX .................. 2 145.1 - 146.8 - - - - 2.8 1.2 - Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI .................. 2 148.8 - 149.8 - - - - 2.8 .7 - Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX ......... 2 140.1 - 141.6 - - - - 1.7 1.1 - Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA ........... 2 150.1 - 150.5 - - - - 2.8 .3 - 1/ Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas; most other goods and services priced as indicated: M - Every month. 1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November. 2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December. 2/ Regions defined as the four Census regions. See map in technical notes. 3/ Indexes on a December 1986=100 base. - Data not available. NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local index has a smaller sample size than the national index and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling and other measurement error. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI for use in their escalator clauses. Table 6. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: Selected areas, all items index (1982-84=100, unless otherwise noted) Indexes Percent change to Percent change to Area Pricing Nov. 1995 from- Oct. 1995 from- schedule Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Nov. Sept. Oct. Oct. Aug. Sept. 1/ 1995 1995 1995 1995 1994 1995 1995 1994 1995 1995 U.S. city average ...................... M 150.2 150.6 151.0 150.9 2.4 0.2 -0.1 2.7 0.5 0.3 Region and area size 2/ Northeast urban......................... M 157.1 157.6 157.8 158.0 2.4 .3 .1 2.4 .4 .1 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 156.7 157.2 157.5 157.7 2.5 .3 .1 2.4 .5 .2 Size B - 500,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 155.7 155.9 156.4 156.2 2.4 .2 -.1 2.5 .4 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 500,000 .......... M 159.8 160.1 160.0 160.1 1.9 .0 .1 2.6 .1 -.1 North Central urban .................... M 145.6 146.1 146.3 146.2 2.4 .1 -.1 2.9 .5 .1 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 145.8 146.3 146.3 146.2 2.2 -.1 -.1 2.7 .3 .0 Size B - 360,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 144.0 144.2 144.6 144.4 2.4 .1 -.1 2.6 .4 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 360,000 .......... M 147.3 147.9 148.8 148.9 2.8 .7 .1 3.0 1.0 .6 Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000) ......... M 144.0 144.5 144.2 144.1 3.0 -.3 -.1 3.4 .1 -.2 South urban ............................ M 148.3 148.4 149.0 148.9 2.8 .3 -.1 3.0 .5 .4 Size A - More than 1,200,000 ........ M 147.6 147.3 148.0 147.8 2.4 .3 -.1 2.6 .3 .5 Size B - 450,000 to 1,200,000 ....... M 148.3 148.7 149.0 149.0 2.6 .2 .0 2.8 .5 .2 Size C - 50,000 to 450,000 .......... M 149.4 149.5 150.4 150.4 3.7 .6 .0 3.7 .7 .6 Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000) ......... M 148.3 148.9 149.3 149.2 3.1 .2 -.1 3.4 .7 .3 West urban ............................. M 150.7 151.0 151.6 151.4 2.2 .3 -.1 2.4 .6 .4 Size A - More than 1,250,000 ........ M 149.6 149.9 150.4 150.0 1.6 .1 -.3 1.9 .5 .3 Size C - 50,000 to 330,000 .......... M 153.9 154.5 154.8 155.4 2.8 .6 .4 3.2 .6 .2 Size classes A 3/ ................................. M 137.2 137.5 137.8 137.7 2.2 .1 -.1 2.4 .4 .2 B .................................... M 150.0 150.3 150.7 150.7 2.7 .3 .0 2.8 .5 .3 C .................................... M 151.5 151.9 152.5 152.6 3.0 .5 .1 3.2 .7 .4 D .................................... M 148.2 148.9 149.2 149.3 3.1 .3 .1 3.4 .7 .2 Selected local areas Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN-WI...... M 148.8 149.0 149.2 149.0 2.3 .0 -.1 3.2 .3 .1 Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside, CA ...... M 149.2 149.3 149.9 149.2 1.0 -.1 -.5 1.3 .5 .4 N.Y.-Northern N.J.-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT M 158.9 159.5 159.7 159.9 2.6 .3 .1 2.4 .5 .1 Phil.-Wilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-DE-MD .. M 159.2 159.8 159.7 159.2 2.0 -.4 -.3 2.3 .3 -.1 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA ..... M 149.3 150.0 150.2 149.9 1.6 -.1 -.2 2.2 .6 .1 Baltimore, MD .......................... 1 - 150.8 - 149.9 1.6 -.6 - - - - Boston-Lawrence-Salem, MA-NH ........... 1 - 157.4 - 159.3 2.2 1.2 - - - - Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH ............. 1 - 141.3 - 140.6 1.3 -.5 - - - - Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL .............. 1 - 146.9 - 148.2 3.9 .9 - - - - St. Louis-East St. Louis, MO-IL ........ 1 - 146.5 - 145.0 1.5 -1.0 - - - - Washington, DC-MD-VA ................... 1 - 153.5 - 152.5 1.3 -.7 - - - - Dallas-Fort Worth, TX .................. 2 144.8 - 146.5 - - - - 2.9 1.2 - Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI .................. 2 144.0 - 145.0 - - - - 2.8 .7 - Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX ......... 2 139.8 - 140.9 - - - - 1.4 .8 - Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA ........... 2 143.7 - 144.2 - - - - 2.9 .3 - 1/ Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas; most other goods and services priced as indicated: M - Every month. 1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November. 2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December. 2/ Regions defined as the four Census regions. See map in technical notes. 3/ Indexes on a December 1986=100 base. - Data not available. NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local index has a smaller sample size than the national index and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling and other measurement error. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI for use in their escalator clauses.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions_tr2016/tables/table_run227.pdf.json	Cost Rate Income Rate Annual Balance Cost Rate Income Rate Annual Balance 14.05 12.94 -1.10 303 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.72 12.92 -0.80 293 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.93 12.96 -0.97 275 0.08 0.00 -0.07 14.06 12.97 -1.09 260 0.08 0.00 -0.07 14.21 12.98 -1.23 244 0.08 0.00 -0.07 14.35 13.01 -1.34 229 0.08 0.00 -0.07 14.57 13.04 -1.53 213 0.08 0.00 -0.08 14.84 13.06 -1.78 196 0.08 0.00 -0.08 15.11 13.10 -2.01 179 0.08 0.00 -0.08 15.37 13.11 -2.26 161 0.09 0.00 -0.08 15.56 13.13 -2.43 144 0.09 0.00 -0.08 15.74 13.15 -2.59 127 0.09 0.00 -0.09 15.91 13.16 -2.75 110 0.10 0.01 -0.09 16.07 13.17 -2.89 92 0.10 0.01 -0.10 16.21 13.19 -3.02 75 0.10 0.01 -0.10 16.33 13.20 -3.13 57 0.11 0.01 -0.10 16.44 13.21 -3.24 38 0.11 0.01 -0.11 16.53 13.21 -3.31 19 0.12 0.01 -0.11 16.59 13.22 -3.37 ---- 0.12 0.01 -0.12 16.62 13.22 -3.40 ---- 0.13 0.01 -0.12 16.69 13.23 -3.46 ---- 0.13 0.01 -0.12 16.73 13.23 -3.50 ---- 0.13 0.01 -0.13 16.75 13.24 -3.52 ---- 0.14 0.01 -0.13 16.75 13.24 -3.51 ---- 0.14 0.01 -0.14 16.74 13.24 -3.50 ---- 0.15 0.01 -0.14 16.71 13.24 -3.47 ---- 0.15 0.01 -0.14 16.69 13.24 -3.45 ---- 0.15 0.01 -0.15 16.66 13.24 -3.42 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.63 13.24 -3.39 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.61 13.24 -3.37 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.59 13.24 -3.35 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.57 13.24 -3.33 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.16 16.55 13.24 -3.31 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 16.53 13.24 -3.29 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.16 16.52 13.24 -3.28 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.16 16.52 13.24 -3.28 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.54 13.24 -3.29 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.56 13.25 -3.31 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.59 13.25 -3.34 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.62 13.25 -3.37 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.67 13.26 -3.41 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.72 13.26 -3.46 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.76 13.26 -3.50 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.81 13.27 -3.55 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.86 13.27 -3.59 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.91 13.27 -3.64 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 16.97 13.28 -3.69 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 17.02 13.28 -3.73 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 17.07 13.29 -3.78 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 17.12 13.29 -3.83 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 17.17 13.29 -3.88 ---- 0.16 0.01 -0.15 17.23 13.30 -3.93 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 17.28 13.30 -3.98 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 17.33 13.30 -4.03 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 17.39 13.31 -4.08 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 17.44 13.31 -4.13 ---- 0.17 0.01 -0.16 17.48 13.31 -4.17 ---- 0.18 0.01 -0.17 17.52 13.32 -4.20 ---- 0.18 0.01 -0.17 17.55 13.32 -4.23 ---- 0.18 0.01 -0.17 17.57 13.32 -4.25 ---- 0.18 0.01 -0.17 17.59 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.18 0.01 -0.17 17.60 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.60 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.59 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.59 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.59 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.60 13.32 -4.27 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.61 13.32 -4.29 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.63 13.32 -4.31 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.66 13.33 -4.33 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.70 13.33 -4.37 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.74 13.33 -4.40 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.78 13.33 -4.45 ---- 0.19 0.01 -0.18 17.83 13.34 -4.49 ---- 0.20 0.01 -0.18 17.87 13.34 -4.53 ---- 0.20 0.01 -0.19 17.92 13.34 -4.58 ---- 0.20 0.01 -0.19 Cost Rate Income Rate Actuarial Balance Cost Rate Income Rate Actuarial Balance 16.64% 13.85% -2.79% 2033 0.14% 0.01% -0.13% 1 Office of the Chief Actuary Social Security Administration Expressed as a percentage of present-law taxable payroll Trust Fund Ratio 1-1-year Expressed as a percentage of present-law taxable payroll Year Detailed Single Year Tables Category of Change: Level of Monthly Benefits Proposal Change from Present Law Proposed Provision: B6.3. Provide an increase in the benefit level of any beneficiary who is 85 or older at the beginning of 2018 or who reaches their 85th birthday after the beginning of 2018. Increase the beneficiary's PIA based on an amount equal to the average retired-worker PIA at the end of 2017, or at the end of the year age 80 if later. Increase the beneficiary's PIA by 5 percent of this amount for those older than 85 at the beginning of 2018 and by 5 percent of this amount at age 85 for others, phased in at 1 percent per year for ages 81-85. 2027 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2039 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2051 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2063 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2075 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2087 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2088 2089 2090 2091 August 30, 2016 Year of reserve depletion1 Summarized Estimates: Change from Present Law 2016 -2090 Under present law, the year of Trust Fund reserve depletion is 2034. Estimates based on Intermediate Assumptions of the 2016 Trustees Report Summarized Estimates: Proposal
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions_tr2021/charts/chart_run237.html.json	## Summary Measures and Graphs - Individual Provisions - Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable) ### Description of Proposed Provision: E1.8: Increase the payroll tax rate (currently 12.4 percent) by 0.1 percentage point each year from 2024-2029, until the rate reaches 13.0 percent for 2029 and later. \| \| \| \|--\|--\|
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.cob.425421.2.0.pdf.json	© 1993-2013 EZ-Filing, Inc. [1-800-998-2424] - Forms Software Only B8 (Official Form 8) (12/08) IN RE: Case No. Debtor(s) Chapter PART A – Debts secured by property of the estate. (Part A must be fully completed for EACH debt which is secured by property of the estate. Attach additional pages if necessary.) Property No. 1 Creditor’s Name: Describe Property Securing Debt: Property will be (check one): Surrendered Retained If retaining the property, I intend to (check at least one): Redeem the property Reaffirm the debt Other. Explain (for example, avoid lien using 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)). Property is (check one): Claimed as exempt Not claimed as exempt Property No. 2 (if necessary) Creditor’s Name: Describe Property Securing Debt: Property will be (check one): Surrendered Retained If retaining the property, I intend to (check at least one): Redeem the property Reaffirm the debt Other. Explain (for example, avoid lien using 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)). Property is (check one): Claimed as exempt Not claimed as exempt PART B – Personal property subject to unexpired leases. (All three columns of Part B must be completed for each unexpired lease. Attach additional pages if necessary.) Property No. 1 Lessor’s Name: Describe Leased Property: Lease will be assumed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(p)(2): Yes No Property No. 2 (if necessary) Lessor’s Name: Describe Leased Property: Lease will be assumed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(p)(2): Yes No continuation sheets attached (if any) I declare under penalty of perjury that the above indicates my intention as to any property of my estate securing a debt and/or personal property subject to an unexpired lease. Date: Signature of Debtor Signature of Joint Debtor United States Bankruptcy Court District of Colorado CHAPTER 7 INDIVIDUAL DEBTOR'S STATEMENT OF INTENTION Degarmo, Thomas Kent 7 Bank Of America 100 Hurliman Ct. 9 9 9 Capitol One Kawasaki 2013 MC Kawaski 9 9 9 November 7, 2014 /s/ Thomas Kent Degarmo Case:14-25085-EEB Doc#:2 Filed:11/07/14 Entered:11/07/14 08:23:02 Page1 of 1
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nigc.gov/images/uploads/bulletins/2007 Final Fee Rate.pdf.json	## ________________ # BULLETIN ________________ No. 2007-4 December 18, 2007 ### Subject: 2007 Fee Rate; Final The National Indian Gaming Commission (Commission) has adopted final annual fee rates of 0.00% for tier 1 and 0.059% (.00059) for t ier 2 for calendar year 2007. These rates shall apply to all assessable gross revenues from each gaming operation under the jurisdiction of the Commission. If a tribe has a certificate of self-regulation und er 25 CFR part 518, the final fee rate on class II revenues for calendar year 2007 shall be o ne-half of the annual fee rate, which is 0.0295% (.000295). The fees are due in four quarterly payments. Enclo sed is a copy of the Federal Register Notice announcing the adoption of these rates. Please be sure to use calendar year 2006 as the bas e period for determining 2007 fees payments. Also, please provide the following ident ifying information: name, address and telephone number of the gaming operation; name of l icensing tribe; name, telephone number, and email address of contact person. Should you have any questions, please contact Kwame Mainoo, National Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW, Suite 9100, Washingt on, DC 20005; telephone (202) 632-7003; fax (202) 632-7066 (these are not toll-fr ee numbers).(Billing Code 7565-01) NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION FEE RATE AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Commission ACTION: Notice SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 25 CFR 514.1(a ) (3), that the National Indian Gaming Commission has adopted final annual fee rates of 0.00% for tier 1 and 0.059% (.00059) for tier 2 for calendar year 2007. These rates shall apply to all assessable gross revenues from each gaming operation under the jurisdiction of the Commission. If a tri be has a certificate of selfregulation under 25 CFR part 518, the final fee rat e on class II revenues for calendar year 2007 shall be one-half of the ann ual fee rate, which is 0.0295% (.000295). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kwame Mainoo, Nati onal Indian Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, NW, Suite 9100, W ashington, DC 20005; telephone (202) 632-7003; fax (202) 632-7066 (these are not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Indian Gaming Regul atory Act (IGRA) established the National Indian Gaming Commission w hich is charged with, among other things, regulating gaming on Indian lan ds. The regulations of the Commission (25 CFR part 514) , as amended, provide for a system of fee assessment and payment that is self-administered by gaming operations. Pursuant to those regulations, the Commission is required to adopt and communicate assessment rates; the gaming operations are required to apply those rates to their revenues, compute the fees to be paid, report the revenues, and remit the fees to the Commission on a quarterly basis. The regulations of the Commission and the final ra te being adopted today are effective for calendar year 2007. Theref ore, all gaming operations within the jurisdiction of the Commission are requi red to self administer the provisions of these regulations, and report and pay any fees that are due to the Commission by December 31, 2007.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/NPFC/Claims/2017/J13014-0012 PE Paid_Redacted.pdf.json	3 CLAIM SUMMARY / RECONSIDERATION DETERMINATION Claim Number: J13014-0012 Claimant: Trident Seafood s Corporation Type of Claimant: Commercial Business Type of Claim: Loss of Profits and Earnings Claim Manager: Amount Requested: $709,777.67 I. INTRODUCTION : 1. Incident: On June 30, 2013, at 0700L (local time), 1 the F/V LONE STAR sank and discharged oil into the Igushik River, Alaska, posing a substantial threat of a discharge of oil into Bristol Bay, a navigable water of the United States. There were appr oximately 14,500 gallons of diesel, hydraulic and lube oil, and gasoline on board the vessel. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) closed the fishing grounds at 9:00 a.m. June 30 th and reopened it at noon on July 1, 2015. After discovering contaminated fish, it closed the river again on July 5 th and remained closed until after July 17 th , the date in which Claimant ceased operations on the Igushik River. own ed the vessel and Burrece Fisheries, Inc. operated the vessel. 2. Claimant: The Claimant is Trident Seafoods Corporation (Claimant) of Seattle, Washington as represented by Keesal, Young & Logan (KYL). Since 2010, Trident has been purchasing salmon from the same group of Igushik River commercial set gillnet fishermen who deploy their nets upstream of the mouth of the Igushik River. 2 During the 2013 fishing season, Claimant provided three different tender boats that purchased Igushik River salmon; the F/V LONE STAR, F/V CAPE ST JOHN and F/V TRADITION. Claimant time chartered the F/V LONE STAR 3 and F/V TRADITION 4 from Burrece Fisheries; the F/V CAPE ST JOHN was owned by Claimant. 5 Claimant also operated a shore -based fish processing plant on the eastern shore of Bristol Bay, and a fish- processing vessel, the ALEUTIAN FALCON, which was, at all relevant times, anchored in the Nushagak River and was receiving fish from tender vessels operating in the Nushagak, Wood and Igushik Rivers. 3. Responsible Party: The responsible parties (RP) for the incident are Burrece Fisheries, Inc., as owners and operators of the F/V LONE STAR and their subrogated insurance carriers, The Great American Insurance Company of New York and Ship Owners Mutual Protection & Indemnity Association (Luxembourg). 1 POLREP One 2 See spreadsheets and associated 2010 - 2014 Igushik River fish tickets submitted by claimant dated 25 Nov 2015. 3 See Trident’s Salmon Tender Charter Agreement with Burrece Fisheries, Inc. dated February 14, 2013. 4 See Trident’s Salmon Tender Charter Agreement with dated January 28, 2013. 5 See Claimant’s request for reconsideration pages 12 - 13 dated November 25, 2015.4 Claimant had a long standing business relationship with and Burrece Fisheries, Inc. Claimant time chartered the F/V LONE STAR from June 14, 2013 to July 20, 2013 to purchase, store a nd deliver salmon caught by set gill net fishermen along the banks of the Igushik River. 6 On October 31, 2013, Claimant submitted a notice of claim to The Meredith Management Group, Inc., (Meredith) representing the RP and its insurers the Great American Insurance Group and The Ship Owners Club Mutual Insurance 7 alleging lost profits of $390,497.01. A claim representative from The Ship Owner’s Club informed Claimant that all the insurance money had been assigned to the removal and salvage costs and that th ere were no funds available to compensate Claimant or its independent set- net fishermen. 8 II. THE CLAIM AND PROCEDURAL POSTURE: In July 2015, Claimant presented its claim to the Fund, seeking lost profits, reimbursement for tender day rates for two vessels that it was unable to use due to the river closure, and reimbursement for the purchase of contaminated fish. The NPFC initiall y denied the claim and Claimant sought reconsideration of that denial. The NPFC issued a determination on reconsideration, reversing the denial in part. Claimant then opined that the NPFC erred when considering their lost profits for June 30 – 1 July 2013 as well as the costs associated with the purchase of oiled salmon from the F/V CAPE ST JOHN. After several months of correspondence and communications, and after extensively reviewing Claimant’s calculations, the corrections to those calculations, and additional arguments, the NPFC revoked its determination on reconsideration based on a factual error. Today, the NPFC issues an amended offer in its corrected determination on reconsideration. For background purposes, a brief summation of the procedural history follows . Due to the long, complicated history of this claim, the specific details of the NPFC’s initial denial, and its first determination on reconsideration, which has now been revoked, will not be rearticulated herein. 1. Initial Claim On Ju ly 14, 2015, Claimant sought compensation in the amount of $381,553.26, representing the value of its losses incurred as a result of the oil spill and river closure. Claimant included the following description as the cause of its damages: When the Lone Star sank in the Igushik River it leaked several thousand gallons of diesel and petroleum products into the river. The Alaska Fish & Game authorities closed the river to commercial fishing due to contamination of the fish stocks and visible oil sheens. Due to the nature of the Igushik fishery, 52 set net fishermen were unable to complete their commercial fishery. Trident Seafood’s was not able to purchase or process the Igushik river salmon run that it has historically done since 2010. These fish were lost and clearly would have been available to harvest, purchase and process. 9 6 See Trident’s Salmon Tender Charter Agreement with Burrece Fisheries, Inc. dated February 14, 2013. 7 See claim submission page 4 paragraph 9 Great American Insurance Group, Ocean Marine Policy OMH 314481901 8 See claim submission page 4, under Explanation 9 Claim submission letter dated July 14, 2015at ¶10.5 Claimant separated the $381,553.26 into the following components: Lost profit margin on 396,313 10 lbs of salmon at $.851 11 per lb:$255,443.76 Tender Day Rates for CAPE ST JOHN & TRADITION: $ 85,500.00 Oil contaminated fish lost on CAPE ST JOHN: $ 40,609.50 Claimant’s lost profit margin calculation included 338,794 pounds of salmon it could not purchase due to the closure, 30,446 pounds that sank with the LONE STAR, and 27 ,073 pounds that were onboard the CAPE ST JOHN but had to be destroyed due to oil contamination. Claimant’s tender day rate calculation was comprised of $3,400 per day for the TRADITION, and $3,500 per day for the CAPE ST JOHN, the total of which was $ 6,900 per day or $287.50 per hour (24 hour basis). Claimant submitted a spreadsheet showing partial fishery closures on June 30, July 1 and July 5, 2013 totaling 40.5 hours. An additional 12 days of full closure or 288 hours, from July 6 through July 17, 2013 for a total of 328.5 hours of fishery closures (40.5hrs + 288hrs =328.5hrs). Claimant multiplied 328.5 total hours by the vessels hourly rate of $287.50 to arrive at $94,444. However, Claimant only asserted $85,500 for this portion of its lost profit s claim Finally, Claimant’s calculation of oiled salmon was a simple calculation of 27,073 pounds multiplied by $1.50, the average per pound price paid in 2013 to the Igushik River fishermen . 2. NPFC denial On October 22, 2015, the NPFC denied the cl aim . In short, the NPFC determined Claimant had waived its subrogable rights under the terms of the charter agreement with Burrece ; 12 that the Claimant’s claimed losses were based on gross operating losses and not net operating losses ; 13 and that the claime d loss of salmon was based on projected versus actual fish losses. Claimant’s fish loss also included 30,446 pounds of salmon onboard the LONE STAR when it sank, which the NPFC determined was caused by the vessel sinking , not by the oil spill. The NPFC ul timately concluded that Claimant failed to provide adequate documentation such as comparable financials. Claimant also failed to explain how the cost of hiring the F/V TRADITION and F/V CAPE ST JOHN related to a loss of profit due to the oil spill. Last ly, the Claimant failed to show how losses were offset by a decrease in expenses (i.e. saved expenses) due to the oil spill. The NPFC found that Claimant’s evidence raised many questions. The only claimed costs that appeared to be compensable were the $40 ,609.50 for contaminated salmon onboard the CAPE ST. JOHN but those costs were denied pending the subrogation issues identified between the Claimant and Burrece Fisheries. 3. Request for Reconsideration On November 25, 2015, Claimant requested reconsideration of the claim. In its request, Claimant raised its loss of foregone salmon from $255,443.76 to $658,056.00 , asserting that 10 Total includes 338,794 pounds of salmon not purchased by Claimant based upon the 2013 projected Igushik River inshore run + 30,446 pounds of salmon lost when the F/V LONE STAR sank + 27,073 pounds of oiled salmon disposed of on the F/V CAPE ST JOHN. 11 Trident’s claimed profit per pound after purchasing and processing cost. 12 See Charter Agreement, number 9, first paragraph. 13 See Claimant’s original submission, Attachment 2, page 4.6 actual fish counts, rather than the pre - season estimation, was the better method. In addition, it no longer sought th e tender day rate for the F/V CAPE ST JOH N because Claimant owned that vessel. Claimant also reduced the day rate for the F/V TRADITION from twelve to seven days. The claimed amount is itemized by the following components: Lost profit margin on 561,474 raw pounds of fish lost: 14 15 $ 658,056.00 Tender day rate for the F/V TRADITION: 16 $ 23,800.00 Oil contaminated fish lost on CAPE ST JOHN: 17 $ 40,609.00 Total Claimed $ 722,465.00 In its request for reconsideration, Claimant provided the follow ing additional information: Evidence of Trident Salmon Purchases in Bristol Bay for years 2010 - 2014 Spreadsheet calculating the Pounds of Salmon Lost due to 2013 Igushik River Closure Attachment 10b - Workbook for Lost Profits Calculation Alaska Bu siness Fisheries Annual Tax Return for the F/V ALEUTIAN FALCON 2011 - 2014 Maps of Geographic Areas for Alaska Fisheries F/V ALEUTIAN FALCON Deck Log for June 2013 and July 2013 F/V TRADITION Fish Tickets & Tender Log for June 30, 2013 – July 5, 2013 F/ V TRADITION Fish Tickets & Tender Log for July 12, 2013 – July 15, 2013 F/V CAPE ST JOHN Fish Tickets & Tender Log for July 2, 2013 – July 5, 2013 F/V CAPE ST JOHN Fish Tickets & Tender Log for July 12, 2013 – July 13, 2013 F/V ALEUTIAN FALCON Sales dat a (2010 - 2015), Financial Data and Production Data 2013 Bristol Bay Fish Ticket spreadsheet F/V TRADITION and CAPE ST JOHN fuel costs 4. NPFC Determination on Reconsideration (November 10, 2016) The NPFC conducted a de novo review of all information incorporated with the Claimant’s initial determination as well as information provided in the request for reconsideration. The NPFC agreed with Claimant that it had not waived its subrogable rights. It also issued a determination offering Cla imant $199,303.55 in settlement of their claim. In this determination, the NPFC offered settlement for losses resulting from the Igushik River fishery closure from July 5 – July 12, 2013, which included the profit per raw pound for salmon that were found to be oiled . The NPFC denied the tender day rate claim and the claim for purchased oiled salmon. The NPFC provided the Claimant 60 days from the date of their offer to accept the settlement or the offer would become void. 18 5. Claimant’s response to the NPFC’s determination. On January 5, 2017, the Claimant responded stating that the NPFC's settlement offer overlooked and failed to compensate Trident for its losses for the June 30 — July 1, 2013 date . 14 Total includes 534,401 pounds of salmon not purchased by Claimant based upon 2013 actual Igushik River inshore run + 27,073 pounds of oiled salmon destroyed on the F/V CAPE ST JOHN. 15 Lost mar gin determined by subtracting 2013 Claimant’s revenue from fish cost, packaging cost, processing costs and saved fuel costs. 16 F/V TRADITION daily charter rate of $ 3,400.00 per day x 7 days (July 5, 2013 – July 12, 2013). 17 27,073 pounds of oil contamina ted fish onboard the F/V CAPE ST JOHN x $1.50 average price paid to Igushik River fishermen for salmon in 2013. 18 See NPFC Determination on Reconsideration to Trident Seafoods, Inc dated 10 Nov 2016.7 Claimant did not contest the NPFC’s methodology for calculating the lost fish profits, however, and at least implicitly agreed with the NPFC’s calculation of lost fish profits from July 5 -12 th . In addition, the Claimant asserted that the purchase price of the oil contaminated salmon should also have been reimbursed. Claimant also requested an extension of time to submit additional evidence. On January 6, 2017, the NPFC acknowledged and granted the Claimant’s request for an extension of time based upon their assertion that the NPFC had erred in analysis and/or in fact relating to their claim. Claimant was informed that the NPFC would keep their offer open until February 6, 2017, during which time the NPFC would review the points and arguments made in the Claimant’s letter which could result in follow -up questions and/or a request for additional information. 19 6. The revocation and Claimant’s additional information On February 6, 2017, by way of letter to Claimant, the NPFC revoked their offer of November 10, 2016, citing a factual error when it denied compensation for the oil contaminated salmon that had to be destroyed. 20 That decision was based upon the information in the administrative record and clarification of information provided by Claimant on January 5, 2017. 21 However, regarding the claimed losses resulting from the Igushik River fishery closure on June 30-July 1, 2013, the NPFC informed Claimant that it failed to provide additional evidence with their letter to establish either estimated or actual loss of pro fits. As the NPFC had revoked their offer of November 10, 2016 and in an effort to properly evaluate all information cited by Claimant, the NPFC requested additional information to support the claimed losses incurred as a result of the Igushik River fishery closure on June 30-July 1, 2013. 22 In support of the NPFC’s request for additional information, the Claimant provided the following information: Third declaration of , Director of Risk Management Trident Seafoods Declaration of , Captain and owner of the F/V LONE STAR Declaration of , Vessel Manager Trident Seafoods Second declaration of , Fleet Manager Trident Seafoods Exhibit 1 to declaration – Wheel house logs for the F/V TRADITION Exhibit A – F/V CAPE ST JOHN delivery logs Exhibit B – Fuel and grocery sales receipts for the F/V CAPE ST JOHN Exhibit C – Fuel and grocery sales receipts for the F/V TRADITION Exhibit D – Charters for the F/V ALEUTIAN BEAUTY, KAREN EVICH and TRADITION Exhibit E – Fish tickets documenting salmon sales to the F/V TRADITION Exhibit F – Fish tickets documenting salmon sales to the F/V LONE STAR Exhibit G – Fish tickets documenting 2012 Igushik River salmon sales to the F/V ALASKAN BEAUTY Exhibit H – Fi sh tickets documenting 2010 Igushik River salmon sales to the F/V KAREN EVICH Exhibit I – Wheel house logs for the F/V PACIFIC VIKING 19 See letter from Mr. , NPFC to Mr. KYL, dated 6 Jan 2017. 20 See letter from Mr. , NPFC to Mr. , KYL, dated 6 Feb 2017. 21 See letter from Mr. , NPFC to Mr. KYL, dated 6 Feb 2017. 22 See email from M r. , NPFC to Mr. KYL, dated 7 Feb 20178 Exhibit J – Wheel house logs for the F/V COLUMBIA Exhibit K – Fuel and grocery sales receipts from tenders workin g on the Nushagak Bay_ Exhibit L – Fish tickets documenting salmon sales to tenders working on the Nushagak Bay Exhibit M – Vessel’s crew list for Trident owned tenders working on Nushagak Bay in 2013 Exhibit N – Vessel statistics for Trident owned tend ers working on Nushagak Bay in 2013 Exhibit O – Wheel house logs for the F/V VIKING EXPLORER 23 The NPFC now adjudicates Claimant’s request for reconsideration as follows. III. FACTS 1. Overview of the Igushik River fishery. The Bristol Bay management area involves several major river systems , including the Igushik River, and is divided into management districts that correspond to these river systems. Collectively, these rivers are home to the largest commercial sockeye salmon fishery in the world. Sockeye salmon are by far the most abundant salmon species that return to Bristol Bay each year. 24 As of 2013, the ADF&G had been managing and tracking the salmon in the Bristol Bay for 52 years. The 2013 Brist ol Bay Area Management Report, relied extensively up on by Claimant, was the 52 nd annual publication reporting on the management activities of the ADF&G in the Bristol Bay area. 25 The rep ort describe s information, decisions, and rationale used to manage the annual Bristol Bay commercial salmon and herring run , and outline ADF&G’s basic management objectives and procedures. The basic management objective for each river is to “achieve salmon escapements 26 within established ranges while harvesting fish in excess of those ranges through orderly fisheries.” 27 Becau se the Bristol Bay report is peer -reviewed and utilizes objective data, the NPFC determines that the report is credible evidence and has incorporated much of that data in the current decision. Management of the commercial fishery in Bristol Bay is focus ed on discrete stocks with harvests directed at terminal areas around the mouths of major river systems. Each stock is managed to achieve a spawning escapement goal based on sustained yield. Escapement goals are achieved by regulating fishing time and ar ea by emergency order (EO) and/or adjusting weekly fishing schedules. Legal gear for the commercial salmon fishery includes both drift and set gillnets. 28 In order to manage its fish stocks from year to year, the ADF&G monitor salmon escapement by cou nting the fish that pass through a “tower”. The Igushik River tower is located on the Igushik River; approximately 50 miles upstream from the river’s mouth, where the commercial harvest area is located and the set gillnet fishermen fish. Once the salmon swim past the commercial harvest area, they can no longer be fished. There are no commercial fisheries upstream of the commercial harvest area. 29 The salmon take approximately five days to swim from the mouth of the river to the tower. 23 See letter with attachments from Mr. , KYL, to Mr. , NPFC dated 9 Mar 2017 24 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014. 25 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014, p. 1 26 “Salmon escapement” refers to the salmon population that is not recreationally or commercially harvested and that return to their freshwater spawning habitats. http s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmon_escapement 27 ADF&G Report No. 14 - 23 at p. 1 28 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Fishery Management, Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014. 29 Decl. .9 The Bristol B ay report indicates that the total salmon count for the 2013 Igushik run totaled 708,000 , but that 66% of the salmon had already run on June 30 th , when the ADF&G first closed the river, and 85 % had run by July 5 th , when the ADF&G closed the river for the second time. This left only a small portion of the salmon for the balance of the 2013 run. 30 Notwithstanding, t he Igushik River escapement resulted in an overall increase due to the river closure. The final escapement of 387,744 exceeded the upper end of the escapement goal range of 150,000 to 300,000 fish — i.e. an excess of 29% . 31 32 33 The late opening for the season, the limited fishing hours early on and the early salmon run all contributed to the season’s escapement figures. 2. The ex - vessel value and average salmon sale. The Bristol Bay 2013 harvest of all salmon species was 16.4 million fish with a preliminary ex - vessel value 34 of $141 million which is 26% above the 20 - year average and ranks 7 th over that same period. The weights, harvests, and prices listed in Table 1 35 were used to estimate ex vessel value. This estimate does not include future price adjustments, loyalty bonuses, and differential prices for refrigerated versus non - refrigerated fish. Although the harvest was below the historica l average, the increased price per pound caused the value to be above average. 36 Overall 15,376,432 salmon were harvested in the Bristol Bay 2013 season at an average weight of six pounds per fish. These fish were sold at an average of $1.50/lb to 34 di fferent companies. The Igushik fishing area accounted for 321K of the fish harvested. The State reported that this harvest for the Igushik was 29 percent higher than forecasted while the overall Bristol Bay Sockeye harvest was reported to be about 30% be low the 20 - year average. 37 3. Claimant’s operations and the Igushik River closure . Since 2010, Claimant has purchased salmon from 52 - 53 commercial set gillnet fishermen who fish via set gillnets along the river banks upstream from the mouth of the Igushik River. 38 Although there are other companies that purchase salmon caught on the Igushik River , Claimant 30 See Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014, Table 16 – Commercial fishing emergency orders, by district and statistical area, Bristol Bay Westside, 2013, p. 45. 31 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014, Appendix A1 – Escapement goal ranges and actual counts of sockeye salmon by river system, in thousands of fish, Bristol Bay 1993 – 2013, p. 66 - 67. 32 The river closure reduced harvest in that area of the district and allowed increased escapement into the Igushik River. 33 Alaska Department o f Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries, News Release, 2013 Bristol Bay Salmon Season Summary, p.1. Table 5, Bristol Bay sockeye salmon goals and escapement, 2013, p. 3. 34 Ex - Vessel value: The post - season adjusted price per pound for the first pur chase of commercial harvest. The ex vessel value is usually established by determining the average price for an individual species, harvested by a specific gear, in a specific area. The delivery condition of the product is usually taken into consideration when the average price is established. 35 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries, News Release, 2013 Bristol Bay Salmon Season Summary, Table 1 – Average price, weight, and value of salmon harvest in Bristol Bay, 2013, p. 2. 36 A laska Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries, News Release, 2013 Bristol Bay Salmon Season Summary, pgs. 1 – 2. 37 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries. 38 Claimant’s req. for recon. Dated November 25, 201 5.10 has consistently purchased all salmon from its commercial set gillnet fishermen during the years 2010-2014. 39 The ADF&G closed the Igushik River fishing grounds at approximately 9:00 a.m. on June 30 th until noon on July 1, 2013. During this time, Claimant directed its tender boats to stop buying salmon. Once the fishery was reopened, Claimant commenced buying salmon until July 5 th , after a two mi le long sheen was spotted emanating from the LONE STAR wreck, and after contaminated fish were discovered in the hold of the CAPE ST JOHN. 40 On July 13 th the ADF&G announced that the fishery would remain closed until the LONE STAR was completely removed from the river. 41 Claimant has asserted that but for the closure; it would have continued purchasing salmon until July 17, 2013. 42 IV. NPFC’S DETERMINATION ON RECONSIDERATION 1. Adjudication of Claims Against the OSLTF When adjudicating claims against the OSLTF, the NPFC utilizes an informal process controlled by 5 U.S.C. § 555. 43 As a result, 5 U.S.C. § 555 (e) requires the NPFC to provide a brief statement explaining the basis for a denial. This determination is issued to satisfy that requirement. The claims adjudication process is also subject to the regulations at 33 C.F.R. Part 136. As the last decision was an offer on reconsideration, the Claimant has 60 days to accept this offer. If the Claimant fails to accept this offer within 60 days, the claim is denied as final agency action. The NPFC reserves the right to revoke this settlement offer at any time. 44 During the adjudication of claims against the OSLTF, the NPFC acts as the finder of fact. In this role, the NPFC considers all relevant evidence and weighs its probative value when determining the facts of the claim. The NPFC’s review of the evidence is de novo , and the NPFC is not bound by the findings of fact and conclusions reached by other entities . 45 If there is conflicting evidence in the record, the NPFC will make a determination as to what evidence is more credible or deserves greater weight, and finds facts based on the preponderance of the credible evidence . 2. Applicable law The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF), which is administered by the NPFC, is available, pursuant to 33 USC §§ 2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the OSLTF claims adjudication 39 Claimant’s req. for recon. Dated November 25, 2015. 40 Decl. ; ADF&G emergency orders. 41 Claimant Letter to NPFC dated November 25, 2015. 42 Id. 43 The court in Bean Dredging, LLC v. United States , 773 F. Supp. 2d 63, 75 (D.D.C. 2011), characterized the informal adjucation process for OSLTF claims with the following: “ [W] hile the OPA allows responsible parties to present a claim for reimbursement to the NPFC, they do not confer upon such parties a right to a formal hearing, a right to pr esent rebuttal evidence or argument, or really any procedural rights at all, see 33 U.S.C. §§ 2704, 2708, 2713, an entirely unremarkable fact given that Congress’ overarching intent in enacting the OPA was to ‘streamline’ the claims adjudication process . . . .” 44 See , Smith Property Holdings v. United States, 311 F.Supp.2d 69, 83 (D.D.C. 2004). 45 See , Bean Dredging, LLC v. United States , 699 F. Supp. 2d 118, 128 - 29 (D.D.C. 2010) ( noting that the NPFC may consider a marine casualty investigation report bu t is not bound by it).11 regulations at 33 CFR Part 136, to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan and uncompensated damages. Damages include injury to real or personal property and loss of profits or impairment of earning capacity due to the injury, destruction of real property, personal property or nat ural resources. 33 U.S.C. § 2702(b)(2)(B) and (E). See also 33 CFR 136.213 - .217. Under 33 CFR 136.105(a) and 136.105(e)(6), the claimant bears the burden of providing all evidence, information, and documentation deemed necessary by the Director, NPFC, to support the claim. With respect to income, the claimant must provide evidence that its income was reduced as a consequence of the injury to, destruction of, or loss of the property or natural resources and the amount of that reduction. 33 CFR 136.233(b). In addition, the claimant must establish the amount of the claimant's profit s or earnings in comparable periods and during the period when the claimed loss or impairment was suffered by income tax returns, financial statements, and similar documents, and must establish comparative figures for profits or earnings for the same or si milar activities outside of the area affected by the incident. 33 CFR 136.233(c). Finally, 33 CFR 136.233(d) requires claimant to provide whether alternative employment or business was available and undertaken and, if so, the amount of income received. All income that a claimant received as a result of the incident must be clearly indicated and any saved overhead and other normal expenses not incurred as a result of the incident must be established. The amount of compensation allowable is limited to the actual net reduction or loss of earnings or profits suffered. Calculations for net reductions or losses must clearly reflect adjustments for — (a) All income resulting from the incident; (b) All income from alternative employment or business undertaken; (c) Potential income from alternative employment or business not undertaken, but reasonably available; (d) Any saved overhead or normal expenses not incurred as a result of the incident; and (e) State, local, and Federal taxes. 33 CFR 136.235. The NPFC revi ews the claim on reconsideration de novo and incorporates the initial determination into the record. Thus, the analysis on reconsideration includes a review and consideration of the information submitted by the Claimant in its initial claim, in addition t o the information submitted on reconsideration. Claimant presented its loss of profits claim in multiple components. The NPFC addresses and analyzes each component of Claimant’s submission separately below. 3. Claimant’s damages representing lost fish pr ofits are $ 271,567.35 . Based on Claimant’s evidence, the NPFC agrees that Claimant has suffered damages as a result of the F/V LONE STAR oil spill because Claimant was unable to purchase salmon from its Igushik set gillnet fishermen in two discrete time frames: from June 30 th – July 1 st , and then from July 5 th until the July 17 , 2013. 46 Claimant does not dispute these dates are the relevant dates fo r purposes of calculating lost profits. In addition, although Claimant initially used a different methodology in calculating lost profits, upon its request for reconsideration dated January 5, 2017, Claimant took no issue with the NPFC’s methodology. The only issue raised by Claimant was that the NPFC failed to account for its lost profits for the June 30 th - July 1 st closure. The NPFC agrees that Claimant 46 Technically the season ended July 17 th , but because Claimant was unable to provide data for its losses July 13 - 17 th , Claimant subsequently withdrew its claim for those days.12 suffered losses due to the closure on June 30 th – July 1 st . Accordingly, the NPFC determines Claimant’ s lost profits as set forth below. a. Determining the lost pounds of salmon . Claimant’s methodology in using the total Igushik fish count (708,000) is an improper starting point because 66% of the salmon had already run on June 30 th and 85 % had run by July 5 th , leaving only a small portion of the salmon for the balance of the 2013 run . Claimant’s simplistic method of calculating its losses based on its percentage share of the total 708,000 fish results in an overstatement of loss. In order to prec isely determine the actual amount of fish Claimant lost out on purchasing, it is important to use the actual tower count numbers (the count of the individual salmon that passed through the tower) for the specific dates in question. It is the actual tower count numbers on these dates that give a better indicator of the amount of salmon that could have been purchased, but for the river closure. Based on this, the NPFC a dded the ADF&G tower counts for dates correlating to July 30 - July 1 (43,212) and towe r counts for dates correlating to July 5 - July 12 (66,738) for a total of 109,950. 47 This figure represents the actual amount of salmon escapement — i.e. individual salmon that made it to the spawning grounds — for the dates in question. Claimant has not taken issue with the 66,738 calculation, but has maintained that its June 30 - July 1 count should be 69,167 pounds. 48 However, the 69,167 was an average of pounds caught on the river for the days the river was open to commercial fishing on a 24 hour basis (June 24 - 29, and July 2 - 4). 49 The NPFC finds that it is a better practice to use the actual data when it is available. Next, the NPFC converted the salmon escapement into pounds 50 : 109,950 individuals x 6 pounds (average weight of 2013 salmon ) = 659,700 pounds. 51 Third, the NPFC determined Claimant’s historical average share of Igushik River salmon purchases for the years of 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2014. That share was calculated to be 36 percent. 52 Finally, The NPFC calculated what portion of the esc aped pounds belongs to Claimant : 659,700 (pounds escaped salmon) x .36075 (historic percentage share of run) = 237,986.78. Thus, Claimant’s share of the salmon escapement is 237,986.78 pounds . 53 54 47 See Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014, Table 16 – Commercial fishing emergency orders, by district and statistical area, Bristol Bay Westside, 2013, p. 45. See also NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “X”. 48 See Claimant letter dated January 5, 2017 and March 9, 2017. 49 See Claimant letter dated January 5, 2017. 50 The NPFC agrees with Claimant that the average weight of 2013 Igushik salmon was six pounds. 51 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “Y” 52 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “V”. Claimant performed a similar calculation, which resulted in a more conservative 32%. 53 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “Z”. 54 In the Claimant’s request for reconsideration (November 25, 2015), Claimant calculated the salmon they were prevented from purchasing in 2013 by applying historic purchase rates to actual 2013 purchases. That reasoning is flawed as it doesn’t consider the early salmon run of 2013 and the fact that their loss didn’t begin until the Igushik River was temporarily closed to fishing on 30 Jun 2013 and then permanently closed to fishing on 5 Jul 2013. In the13 The analysis does not end there, however. When th e Igushik River fishing season opened on June 15 th , fishing was limited to 8 hours per day; as the salmon escapement increased, management allowed a corresponding increase in fishing hours. By June 23 rd commercial fishing was allowed on a 24 hour basis du e to the strong escapement. 55 Although the tower counts cannot establish the exact time in which each fish escaped the fishing grounds, it is clear that the counts for June 30 th and July 1 st encompass fish escapement on a 24 hour basis. In other words, they include those fish that escaped when the grounds were closed, as well as , when the grounds were open. The fishing grounds closed at 9:00 a.m. on June 30 th and reopened on July 1 st around noon. The administrative record shows that Claimant was able to purchase 40,431 pounds on June 30 th and July 1 st . Specifically, prior to the river closing at 9:00 a.m. on June 30 th , the F/V LONE STAR purchased 7,884 pounds of salmon 56 and the F/V TRADI TION purchased 4,445 pounds of salmon. The F/V TRADITION purchased another 28,102 pounds of salmon after the fishing grounds were re -opened on July 1, 2013. 57 Because Claimant was able to make these purchases on June 30 th and July 1, the purchases must be removed from the 237,986.78 pounds. Without removing the amount, Claimant is awarded the fish that escaped prior to the grounds closing, and after they had opened. Accordingly, those salmon purchases are removed from the amount of salmon the Claimant was prevented from purchasing making the revised and correct amount to be 197,555.78 pounds. In addition, Claimant had to dispose of 27,073 pounds of oiled fish that it had already purchased. Adding both together, Claimant lost a total of 224,628.78 pounds of fish as a result of the 2013 Igushik River set gillnet fishery closure. 58 b. Determining actual lost profit. Next, the amount of pounds must be converted to actual lost profit. To do so, the NPFC then calculated the Claimant’s 2013 Igushik River set gillnet fishery profit per raw pound to determine their actual loss. The NPFC calculated the Claimant’s revenue per raw lb 59 and then subtracted the Claimant’s fish 60 , packaging 61 , supply 62 and labor costs per raw pound 63 . See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 17 Jun 2016 for details. Claimant has not taken issue with the NPFC’s methodology in calculating lost profit. The NPFC finds Claimant’s profit per raw pound after expenses is as shown below: $2.973 – Claimant’s revenue per raw pound ($1.62) – Claimant’s fish cost per raw pound Claimant’s letter to the NPFC (Jan. 5, 2017), Claimant calculated the salmon they were prevented from purchasing from 30 Jun – 1 Jul 2013 by averaging their salmon purchases on the days the Igushik River was open for fishing in 2013. And w hile this could be an appropriate means to calculate a loss, the NPFC remained consistent to all claimed losses by applying a historic .36075 purchase rate to the total salmon run for days Jun 30 – Jul 1 and Jul 5 – Jul 12, 2013, as a result of the Igushik River fishing grounds closure. 55 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 14 - 23, May 2014, at p. 14. 56 See Exhibit F to Claimants letter to Mr. , NPFC dated 9 Mar 2017. 57 See Exhibit E to Claimants letter to Mr. , NPFC dated 9 Mar 2017 58 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “DD”. 59 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cells “H” and “I”. 60 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell s “N” and “O”. 61 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cells “P” and “Q”. 62 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cells “R” and “S”. 63 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cells “T” and “U”.14 ($0.017) – Claimant’s packaging per raw pound ($0.006) – Claimant’s supplies per raw pound ($0.124) –Claimant’s labor per raw pound $1.209 Profit per raw pound 64 Multiplying the 224,628.78 pounds of fish lost to Claimant by their $1.209 profit per raw pounds equals a total loss of profits of $271,567.35 . 65 4. Claimant’s reimbursable expense for contaminated fish is $40,609. In its decision on reconsideration dated November 10, 2016, the NPFC determined that Claimant was not entitled to reimbursement of the 27,073 pounds of contaminated fish on the basis that this was double recovery. Subsequent to the decision, Claimant further explained that this amount is not double recovery because they had already inclu ded this fish loss in their total raw pounds lost calculation, and more importantly from NPFC’s view, this payment was not an expense that could have been avoided. On March 18, 2016, Claimant submitted evidence demonstrating its disposal efforts for the contaminated fish, and the US EPA directive that Claimant could dispose the fish offshore so long as they didn’t create a sheen. Claimant also provided ADEC Seafood Processing Spot Check Forms as well as ADEC Sitrep 4 dated 8 Jul 2013 in which it sta tes “ADEC Seafood representative determined 27,109 pounds of salmon was oil contaminated and that an EPA permit for ocean dumping would be required. 66 On July 7, 2013, the F/V CAPE ST JOHN disposed of the oil contaminated fish approximately 12 miles from shore. An ADEC Seafood Program representative on -board the vessel observed no sheen as the fish were dumped”. 67 On January 5, 2017, by way of letter, Claimant explained that in calculating lost profits for the salmon that it was prevented from purchasing, it deducted the price that it would have paid for the salmon that it was not able to purchase. As such, that deduction was appropriate because the purchase price was expense . However, because it did purchase contaminated salmon , it was not appropriate to deduct because that cost was not avoidable. 68 Claimant multiplies the 27,073 pounds of fish lost x $1.50 average price paid to Igushik River fishermen per pound for salmon in 2013 which totals $40,609. 69 On reconsideration, t he NPFC agrees that the 2 7,073 pounds of oiled salmon purchased by the Claimant is appropriate for reimbursement as that was an incurred expense . As such, the NPFC approves the claimed $40,609.00 for the purchase of oil contaminated fish. 5. Saved Expenses - Fuel 64 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cells “H” through “M”. 65 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017 cell “FF”. 66 It’s unclear to the NPFC why the Claimant only claimed 27,073 pounds of oil contaminated salmon when ADEC confirmed that there were 27,109 pounds of oil contaminated salmon. 67 See ADEC Situation Report #4 dated 8 Jul 2013. 68 See letter from Mr. KYL, to Mr. , NPFC dated 5 Jan 2017. 69 See Claimants request for reconsideration page 9 dated 25 Nov 2015. Also, 27,073 pounds of salmon x $1.50 equals $40,609.50 but the Claimant only claimed $40,609.00 in lost costs.15 Any saved overhead or normal expenses not incurred as a result of the incident must be reduced from the award. 33 CFR 136.235. The Claimant calculated fuel savings by the amount of fuel that its tender boats would have consumed had they been purchasing fish from Igushik River fishermen and delivering the fish to their processing vessel/facilities from June 30 – July 1, 2013 and July 5 – July 17, 2013 (316.5 hours or 13.2 days). Specifically, the average daily fuel consumption of the F/V TRADITION was $910.88 a day. The average daily fuel consumption of the F/V CAPE ST JOHN was $570.30 a day. 70 Combining these averages, the Claimant calculated the average daily fuel cost of a tender servicing the Igushik River in 2013 was $740.59 a day. Claimant had one tender boat purchasing salmon from the Igushik River for 11 days and two tender boats purchasing salmon from the Igushik River for 10 days. Claimant calculated their fuel saving by assuming 1.5 vessels would have purchased salmon from the Igushik River multiplied by the average daily fuel costs of a tender of $740.59 multiplied by 13.2 days equaled a fuel savings of $14,664.00. 71 On December 22, 2015, the Claimant provided additional fuel receipts to support their fuel ledger for fuel purchased on the F/ V CAPE ST JOHN, LONE STAR and TRADITION. They also explained a change to their saved fuel expenses for the F/V TRADITION and CAPE ST JOHN. Specific to the request for reconsideration, they had included gasoline purchases in their calculation of a daily a verage. However, when solely analyzing saved diesel fuel expenses, the average daily fuel consumption of the F/V TRADITION was $451.34 a day. The average daily fuel consumption of the F/V CAPE ST JOHN was $860.11 a day. Combining these averages, the Cla imant calculated the average daily fuel cost of a tender servicing the Igushik River in 2013 was $655.72 a day. Claimant had one tender boat purchasing salmon from the Igushik River for 11 days and two tender boats purchasing salmon from the Igushik River for 10 days. Claimant calculated their fuel saving by assuming 1.5 vessels would have purchased salmon from the Igushik River multiplied by the average daily fuel costs of a tender of $655.72 multiplied by 13.2 days equaled a fuel savings of $12,983.33. 72 Once the Claimant no longer claimed lost profits past July 12, 2013, it adjusted its calculation for fuel used by their tenders after July 12, 2013. Multiplying the amount of days being removed from their claim (5 days, Jul 13 – July 17, 2013) by th e average daily fuel costs of a tender of $655.72 equaled $4,917.00. That amount was deducted by their previous fuel savings of $12,983.33 which resulted in a new saved cost of $8,066.33. 73 The NPFC will incorporate this saved expense when calculating the final offer below. 6. Tender day rate for the F/V TRADITION is denied. In its request for reconsideration, Claimant removed the tender day rates previously claimed for the F/V CAPE ST JOHN from their claim submission. Claimant acknowledges that t hey owned the F/V CAPE ST JOHN and that claiming charter expenses that were never incurred overstated their loss. Claimant also reduced the tender day rate previously claimed for the F/V TRADITION from twelve days to seven days (specifically July 6, 2013, through July 12, 2013), which represents the days the F/V TRADITION was anchored in the Igushik River waiting for 70 See Tab Fuel Ledger attachment 19a dated 25 Nov 2015. 71 See Claimants request for reconsideration pages 18 - 20 dated 25 Nov 2015. 72 See email from , KYL to Mr. , CG NPFC dated 22 Dec 2015. 73 See email from , KYL to Ms. , CG NPFC dated 29 Jan 2016.16 ADF&G to decide whether or not to reopen the commercial set gillnet fishery. Multiplying the F/V TRADITION’s tender day rate of $3,400 by seven days totals $23,800.00. 74 The NPFC finds Claimant was bound by a signed charter agreement with the owner of the F/V TRADITION to purchase, store and deliver salmon caught by the Igushik set- net fishermen in 2013. 75 This was a fixed, set cost that the Claimant would have incurred regardless of the 2013 Igushik River set gillnet fishery closure. Therefore, the vessel charter costs in the amount of $23,800.00 are denied. V. CONCLUSION The NPFC reviewed and consi dered all of the claimant’s arguments and evidence that was provided on Reconsideration as well as the administrative record that was created during the initial claim adjudication. The NPFC’s offer and Methodology correlates directly to the reported 2013 Bristol Bay Sockeye Salmon run that was based on State documented records as well as the evidence that Claimant provided. The Claimant was successful in purchasing salmon in 2013 from Igushik River set gillnet fishermen and was only prevented from purchas ing additional salmon after the majority of salmon had already passed the fishing ground. To properly document that loss, the NPFC created a spreadsheet documenting the actual net lost profits of the Claimant totaling $271,567.35 76 , which will be an enclosure to this determination. In addition, the NPFC agrees that the 27,073 pounds of oiled salmon purchased by the Claimant is appropriate for reimbursement as an incurred cost and cost that couldn’t have been avoided. As such, the NPFC approves the claimed $40,609.00 for the purchase of oil contaminated fish. The NPFC has determined that the Claimant’s net lost profits resulting from the 2013 Igushik River oil spill incident and subsequent set gillnet fishery closure total $312,176.35. Reducing this amount by the Claimant’s saved fuel costs of $8,066.33 results in a total offer of $304,110.02. Offered Amount on Reconsideration : $304,110.02 Claim Supervisor: Date of Supervisor’s review: April 2 4, 2017 Supervisor Action: Approved Supervisor’s Comments: 74 See Claimants request for reconsideration page 7 dated 25 Nov 2015. 75 See Trident’s Salmon Tender Charter Agreement with dated January 28, 2013. 76 See NPFC Trident Lost Profits Spreadsheet dated 13 Mar 2017.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca10.88322/gov.uscourts.ca10.88322.010011106231.0.pdf.json	i No. 24 - 8024 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT __________________________________________________________________ C USTODIA B ANK , I NC ., Plaintiff - Appellant , v. F EDERAL R ESERVE B OARD O F G OVERNORS , ET AL ., Defendants - Appellees , On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming No. 1:22 - CV - 00125, Hon. Scott W. Skavdahl BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS - APPELLEE AND AFFIRMANCE Jonathan K. Youngwood Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 455 - 2000 jyoungwood@stblaw.com Attorney for Amici Curiae Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1ii DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1, counsel for amici certifies that none of the amici have any parent corporations or subsidiaries . Each Federal Reserve Bank is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the United States pursuant to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 , 12 U.S.C § 221 et seq . Although stock of Federal Reserve Bank s is held by member commercial banks within their respective Federal Reserve District s , none of the stockholders controls the Reserve Bank s . Stock of Federal R eserve Banks, unlike stock in a private corporation, is not acquired for investment purposes or purposes of control. Rather, such stock is acquired because its o wnership is a condition of membership in the Federal Reserve System. Unlike owners of a privat e corporation, Federal Reserve Bank stockholders do not possess a residual equity interest in Federal Reserve Bank assets. That interest remains always with the United States. Date : September 4 , 2024 Jonathan K. Youngwood /s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood Jonathan K. Youngwood Attorney for Amici Curiae Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2iii TABLE OF CONTENTS AMICI STATEMENT ................................ ................................ ............................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................ ................................ ................. 3 ARGUMENT ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4 I. Federal Reserve Banks’ Discretion Over Access To Federal Reserve Bank Master Accounts and Services Is Essential to Their Abil ity to Manage Risks to Themselves and the Financial System ................................ . 4 A. The FRA Entrusts Federal Reserve Banks with Protecting the Stability of the U.S. Financial System ................................ .................. 4 B. The Risks Associated with Master Account and Financial Services Access Make the Discr etion to Deny Such Access Essential ................................ ................................ ................................ . 7 1. Federal Reserve Banks Manage Credit Risk by Denying Master Account Access ................................ ............................... 9 2. Federal Reserve Banks Exercise Discretion Over Reserve Bank Master Accounts and Financial Services to Protect the U.S. Financial System from Illicit Activity ........................ 11 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 15 Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 3iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Am. Bankers Ass’n v. United States , 932 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2019) ................................ ................................ ............ 6 Banco San Juan Internacional, Inc. v. FRB of N.Y ., 700 F. Supp. 3d 86 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) ................................ ................. 4, 15, 16, 17 Berini v. FRB , 420 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (E.D. Mo. 2005) ................................ ................................ 6 Custodia Bank, Inc. v. Fed. Rsrv. Bd. of Governors , 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76822 (D. Wyo. Mar. 29, 2024) ................................ ..... 4 FBME Bank Ltd. v. Mnuchin , 249 F. Supp. 3d 215 (D.D.C. 2017) ................................ ............................. 14, 15 Fed. Res. Bank v. Metrocentre Improv. Dist. #1 , 657 F.2d 183 (8th Cir. 1981) ................................ ................................ ................ 5 Fed. Reserve Bank of St. Louis v. Metrocentre Improvement Dist. , 492 F. Supp. 353 (E.D. Ark. 1980) ................................ ................................ ....... 1 Fourth Corner Credit Union v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of Kansas City , 861 F. 3d 1052 (10th Cir. 2017) ................................ ................................ .......... 18 PayServices Bank v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of San Francisco , 2024 WL 1347094 (D. Idaho Mar. 30, 20 24) ................................ ..................... 17 Starr Int’l Co. v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of N.Y ., 906 F.Supp.2d 202 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), aff’d , 742 F.3d 37 (2d Cir. 2014) ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 5 Starr Int’l Co. v. United States , 856 F.3d 953 (Fed. Cir. 2017) ................................ ................................ .............. 7 United States v. Martin , 320 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2003) ................................ ................................ .......... 14 Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 4v Statutes 12 U.S.C. § 221 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 1 12 U.S.C. § 222 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 2 12 U.S.C. § 248a(b) ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 8 12 U.S.C. § 290 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 13 12 U.S.C. § 342 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 2 Regulations 49 Fed. Reg. 13186 (1984) ................................ ................................ ........................ 7 87 Fed. Reg. 51,099 (Aug. 19, 2022) ................................ ............................ 9, 10, 14 Policy on Payments System Risk, 73 Fed. Reg. 12417 (Mar. 7, 2008) ............ 11, 12 Regulatory Materials Off. of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes, U.S . Dep't of the Treasury, 2022 National Money Laundering Risk Assessment (3d ed. Feb. 2022) ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 16 Off. of the Comptroller of Currency , U.S. Dep't of the Treasury, Comp troller’s Handbook (Sept. 2019) ................................ ............................... 11 Banking Act of 1933, Pub. L. No. 66 - 73, 48 Stat. 162 (1933 ) ................................ .. 6 Bd. of Governors , Discount Window Lending (Jun. 28, 2024) .............................. 11 Bd. of Governors, Federal Reserve Policy on Payment System Risk (as amended July 20, 2023) ................................ ................................ ................ 10 Bd. of Governors , Reserve Maintenance Manual: Account Structure (Nov. 19, 2018) ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12 Bd. of Governors, The Twelve Federal Reserve Districts (Apr. 24, 2017) ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 2 Department of Treasury, Illicit Finance Risk Assessment of Non Fungible Tokens at 1 (May 2024) ................................ ................................ ...... 13 Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 5vi Dodd - Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act , Pub. L. No. 111 - 203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) ................................ ................................ . 7 Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Pub. L. No. 63 - 43, ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251 ....................... 6 T HE F EDERAL R ESERVE S YSTEM , The Fed Explained: What the Central Bank Does (11 th ed. Aug. 2021) ................................ .............................. 8 Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 6AMICI STATEMENT Amici Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, and Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis submit this brief pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a)(2). 1 The Federal Reserve Banks were established pursu ant to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 , 12 U.S.C. § 221 et seq . (“FRA”). The Federal Reserve Banks serve as the operating arm of the nation’s central bank and are uniquely authorized by statute to act as “bankers’ banks.” Fed. Reserve Bank of St. Louis v. Metrocent re Improvement Dist. , 492 F. Supp. 353, 355 (E.D. Ark. 1980) (quoting H.R. Report No. 69, 63d Cong., 1st Sess. 16 ( 1913)). As set forth in the FRA, the re are twelve Federal Reserve Districts across the country , each spanning multiple states and each with its own responsible Federal Reserve Bank. See 12 U.S.C. § 222 ; Bd. of Governors, The Twelve Federal Reserve Districts (Apr. 24, 2017) , http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm . Collectively , the Federal Reserve 1 Pursuant to Local Rule 29 , amici state that this brief was authored by them, and was not authored or funded by any party to this action. All parties have consented to this filing. Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 72 Banks carry out the nationwide, operational responsibilities of the nation’s central bank . The Federal Reserve Banks have a strong interest in this case becau se it concerns a provision of the FRA that vests them with an essential risk management tool . That provision, 12 U.S.C. § 342 , confers F ederal Reserve Banks with discretion to deny a depository institution access to a Federal Reserve Bank deposit account ( currently referred to as a master account ) and Federal Reserve Bank financial services . This discretion is essential because such access can pose unacceptable levels of ris k to Reserve Banks and the U.S. financial system . Appellant Custodia Bank, Inc. (“Custodia”) asks this Court to reach the dangerous conclusion — contrary to the plain language of the FRA and decades of Federal Reserve Bank practice — that Reserve Banks are requ ired to provide account access to any entity that meets the definition of a “depository institution” under the FRA , regardless of the risks the institution pose s . Appellant’s extreme argument is that it — and every other depository institution — is automatically entitled to a master account on a no - questions - asked basis . If the Court were to become the first to adopt this misplaced position , it would strip Federal Reserve Banks of a critical authority necessary to both manage their own risks and to carry out the central bank ’s statutory mandate to promote the safety and stability of the U.S. financial system . Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 83 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Over 100 years ago, Congress vested Federal Reserve Banks with discretion over depository institutions’ access to Reserve Bank deposit accounts and financial services. This longstanding discretion is critical , as it provides Federal Reserve Banks with a necessary risk - management tool and allows them to carry out the central bank ’s mandate to safeguard the U.S. financial system. Removing this tool, as Custodia requests in this appeal, would expose Federal Reserve Banks , the U.S. payments system , and the broader economy to sign i ficant , disruptive risk s — including liquidity risk , credit risk , operational risk , settlement risk , cyber risk , and the risk s of facilitating money laundering and terrorism financing . Unmitigated by Reserve Bank discretion, these risks would destabilize the financial system and erode its integrity , and would interfere with the central bank ’s ability to implement monetary policy . Custodia’s position is that Federal Reserve Banks have no discretion at all to deny access to Reserve Bank master accounts and financial services , regardless of the risk a financial institution present s . Not only would accepting this proposition be contrary both to the FRA and common sense , i t would represent a sea change in how Federal Reserve Banks have been making access decisions since 1913. Accordingly, t he Court should reject Custodia’s position and affirm the District Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 94 Court’s well - reasoned decision holding that the FRA affords Federal Reserve Banks discretion to deny account access . ARGUMENT I. Federal Reserve Banks’ Discretion O ver Access To Federal Reserve Bank Master Accounts and Services Is Essential to Their Ability to Manage Risks to Themselves and the Financial System As the District Court correctly held, FRA Section 342 provides the Federal R eserve Banks with discretion to reject deposits and, accordingly, depository account access . Custodia Bank, Inc. v. Fe d. Rsrv. Bd. of Governors , 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76822, at 32 - 33 (D. Wyo. Mar. 29, 2024) . S ee also Banco San Juan Internacional, Inc. v. FRB of N.Y ., 700 F. Supp. 3d 86, 98 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) ( “ BSJI’ s statutory claim fails because 12 U.S.C. § 342 makes clear that Federal reserve banks are authorized to maintain Master Accounts, but are not required to do so. ” ) . Federal Reserve Banks have long relied on th is discretion to manage the significant risks that account access can present to themselves, the federal payments system and the U.S. financial system . This discretio n is not a matter of happenstance or convenience; it is essential to the Federal Reserve Banks’ ability to protect themselves and the broader financial system and economy . A. The FRA Entrusts Federal Reserve Banks with Protect ing the Stability of the U.S. Financial System Since the FRA was enac ted in 1913, the Federal Reserve Banks have been “charged with vitally important statutory responsibilities,” which include Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 105 “preserving the stability of the nation’s banking system” and implementing monetary policy. Starr Int’l Co. v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of N.Y ., 906 F.Supp.2d 202, 215, 232 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), aff’d , 742 F.3d 37 (2d Cir. 2014) ; Fed. Res. Bank v. Metrocentre Improv. Dist. #1 , 657 F.2d 183, 185 (8th Cir. 1981) (“[The Reserve Banks] conduct important governmental functions regarding the issuance of currency, general fiscal duties of the United States, and, in general, regulate the financial structure, either directly or indirectly, of both federal and state banks.”). Congress establi s hed the Federal Reserve System as the nation’s central bank “to oversee banking operations and promote [] greater economic stability.” Am. Bankers Ass’n v. United States , 932 F .3d 1375, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2019) . As the operating arms of th e central bank, the Federal Reserve Banks “were established directly by Congressional legislation for the public purpose of increased control of the nation’s currency and banking system.” Berini v. FRB , 420 F. Supp. 2d 1021, 1024 (E.D. Mo. 2005) . Congress has repeatedly reaffirmed the central bank ’s duty to safeguard the stability of the U.S. financial system. See, e.g. , Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Pub. L. No. 63 - 43, ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251 (establishing the Federal Reserve Banks to “furnish a more elastic means of currency” and “to establish a more effective means for supervision of banking in the United States”); Banking Act of 1933, Pub. L. No. 66 - 73, 48 Stat. 162 (1933) (amending the FR A “[t]o provide for the Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 116 safer and more effecti ve use of the assets of banks”); Dodd - Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111 - 203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (amending the FRA to, among other things, “promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system ” ). See also Starr Int’ l Co. v. United States , 856 F.3d 953, 984 (Fed. Cir. 2017) ( noting that “ the Federal Reserve Act was designed to prevent or mitigate significant financial crises.”) . The Federal Reserve Banks’ administration of a safe and effective global payment and settlement syst em is a critical component of the central bank’s Congressional mandate to safeguard the U.S. economy . Indeed, “the Federal Reserve’ s responsibility for the implementation of monetary policy, as well as its responsibility as a bank supervisor, requires the prese rvation of a safe and efficient payments mechanism .” 49 Fed. Reg. 13186 , 13187 (1984) . The Federal Reserve Banks , among other things, provide various financial services to certain master account holders , including payment, clearing, and settlement functions, such as clearing checks and operating the Fedwire Funds Service® (which effectuates funds transfers). See 12 U.S.C. § 248a(b) (listing services). These functions help keep cash, check, and electronic transactions moving reliably through the U.S. economy on behalf of consumers, businesses, and market participants. See The Federal Reserve System , The Fed Explained: What the Central Bank Does (11th Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 127 ed. Aug. 2021), https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/files/the - fed explained.pdf. For that reason, the Federal Reserve Banks monitor risks to the payment systems, “engage in payment system research,” and “act as cata lysts to improve the safety and efficiency of the payment system.” Id. at 86. B. The Risks Associated with Master Account and Financial Services Access Make the Discretion to Deny Such Access Essential Federal Reserve Banks manage and mitigate the significa nt risk s described above by exercising their statutory discretion to deny access to Federal Reserve Bank master accounts and financial services. The host of risks that Federal Reserve Banks encounter and consider in determining whether to provid e master accounts and financial services to depository institutions i s detailed in the Guidelines for Evaluating Account and Services Requests (the “Guid e lines) published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. See 87 Fed. Reg. 51,099, 51,101 (Aug. 19, 2022) . Specifically, the Guidelines enumerate six categories of ris k that Federal Reserve B anks should consider when exercising their discretion to grant or deny account access , stating that financial institutions: 1) must be legally eligible for an account and services, and have a clear, transparent and enforceable legal basis for its operations; 2) should not present or create undue credit, operational settle ment cyber, or other risks to the Federal Reserve Bank; Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 138 3) should not present or create undue credit, liquidity, operational, settlement, cyber , or other risk to the overall payment system; 4) should not create undue risk to the stability of the U.S. financial system; 5) should not create undue risk to the overall economy by facilitating activities such as money laundering, terrorism financing, fraud, cybercrimes, economic or trade sanctions violations, or other illicit activity; and 6) should not adversely affect the Federal Reserve’s ability to implement monetary policy. Id. at 51,099 - 100 . These risks are not tenuous or hypothe tica l; they present concrete concerns that could significantly burden Federal Reserve Banks and expose the financial system to harm or disruption. For example, a mong other things, there are risks of cybersecurity attacks, operational failures, price volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and vulnerability to geopolitical or other external events. Each of these can result in the actual or p erceived “reduction, deterioration, or breakdown of services” at the impacted institution, resulting in a classic bank run. See Bd. of Governors, Federal Reserve Policy on Payment System Risk, at 5 (as amended July 20, 2023) , https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/files/psr_policy.pdf . And because financial institutions are connected throu gh Federal Reserve payment and settlement systems, the contagion can quickly spread . 2 2 See , e.g. , 87 Fed. Reg. 51,099, 51,108 (“The Reserve Bank should consider the extent to which, especially in times of financial or economic stress, liquidity or other strains at the institution may be transmitted to other segments of the financial system.”). Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 149 A mici offer two concrete examples below — one related to credit risk , and one related to the risk s associated with facilitating money laundering and other illicit activity. 1. Federal Reserve Banks Manage Credit Risk b y Denying Master Account Access As the Guidelines acknowledge , Federal Reserve Banks take on credit risk when they permit depository institutions to access Federal Reserve Bank master accounts and financial services. Credit risk arises “any time bank funds are extended, committed, invested, or otherwise exposed through actual or implied contractual agreements, whether reflected on or off the balance sheet.” Off. of the Comptroller of Currency , U.S . Dep't of the Treasury, Comp troller’s Handbook (Sept. 2019) , https://www.occ.gov/publications - and - resources/publications/comptrollers handbo ok/files/bank - supervision - process/pub - ch - bank - supervision - process.pdf . As the operating arms of the nation’s central bank , Reserve Banks’ credit exposure at any given time may be significant. See, e. g. , Policy on Payments System Risk , 73 F ed. R eg. 12417, 12420 (Mar. 7, 2008) (“ data show that Reserve Banks ’ credit exposure has increased over time in real terms despite Reserve Banks c harging fees. On certain days, the peak overdraft of the banking s ystem can exceed $210 billion.”) ; id . at 1241 8 (“[T]he Board believes that significant further steps are appropriate to mitigate the growing credit ex posures of the Reserve Banks.”). Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1510 T emporary credit risk — like the exposure crea ted through an institution’s use of the Federal Reserve Banks ’ payment services — is a significant component of a Reserve Bank ’ s risk profile . To use the se payment servi ces, a depository institution make s deposits into a master account , which is held by its regional Federal Reserve Bank . See Bd. of Governors , Reserve Maintenance Manual: Account Structure (Nov. 19, 2018), https://www.federalreserve.gov/ monetarypolicy /reserve - maintenance - manual - account - structure.htm ( “[A] ll credits and debits resulting from the use of Federal Reserve services at any Federal Reserve office are booked to this single master account.” ). Because m aster account deposits are liabilities of the Federal Reserve , affording master account access and related services to uncreditworthy depository institutions could disrupt the nation’s payments system, weaken the Federal Reserve’s financial condition , and destabilize the broader U. S. economy. While all banks manage credit risk, Federal Reserve Banks have a unique, statutory mandate to “support[] the liquidity and stability of the banking system and the effective implementation of monetary policy.” Bd. of Governors , Discount Wind o w Lending (Jun. 28, 2024) , https://www.federalreserve.gov/regreform/discount - window.htm . Accordingly, Federal Reserve Banks rely on their discretion over master account access to proactively “ manage [] the credit risk posed by the institution’s use of Federal Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1611 Reserve services.” Reserve Maintenance Manual: Account Structure , supra at 10 . This benefits both the financial system and the U.S. taxpayer, since Federal Reserve Bank s are required under the Fe deral Reserve Act to remit their e xcess earnings annual ly to the United States Treasury . 12 U.S.C. § 290 . Under Custodia’s proposed approach, however, Reserve Banks would have no discretion to decide who to bank , no matter how uncreditworthy . Neither the plain language of the Federal Reserve Act nor common sense countenance that extreme result , which would burden Federal Reserve Banks with the immense risks associated with extendi ng credit to institut ions they have deemed unable or unlikely to be able to meet their obligations . 2. Federal Reserve Banks Exercise Discretion Over Reserve Bank Master Accounts and Financial Services to Protect the U.S. Financial System from Illicit Activity Among other things, t he Guidelines also require Federal Reserve Banks to ensure that the “[p] rovision of an account and services to an institution should not create undue risk to the overall economy by facilitating activities such as money laundering, terrorism financing, fr aud, cybercrimes, or other illicit activity. ” 87 F ed. R eg. 51 , 099 . As t he U.S. Department of the Treasury’s (“Treasury”) Financial Crimes E nforcement Network (“FinCEN”) recently warned , money laundering “has devastating social consequences” and “can erode the integrity of our nation’s Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1712 financial systems.” See, e.g., United States v. Martin , 320 F.3d 1223, 1227 (11th Cir. 2003) (“ The harm from . . . a [money - laundering] transaction does not generally fall upon an individual, but falls upon society in general.” ); FBME Bank Ltd. v. Mnuchin , 249 F. Supp. 3d 215, 230 (D.D.C. 2017) (noting the “ public's interest in protecting the U.S. financial system from illicit ac tivity such as money laundering” ). Treasury has also warned that novel busi ness models can be especially susceptible to fraud, terrorist financing, or other criminal transactions. See Department of Treasury, Illicit Finance Risk Assessment of Non - Fungible Tokens at 1 (May 2024) , https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Illicit Finance - Risk - Assessment - of - Non - Fungible - Tokens.pdf (“[S] ome NFT firms and platforms lack appropriate internal controls to mitigate risks to market integrity, mon ey laundering and terrorist financing, and sanctions evasion. ”). These risks are not merely theoretical , and they are not specific to the crypto industry . Federal Reserve Banks have already seen how providing certain financial institutions with master a ccounts could facilitate money laundering and other illicit activities . For example, i n Banco San Juan Internacional a high - risk financial institution that had been raided by the FBI in an investigation into its transactions and compliance with U.S. anti - money laundering laws , Banco San Juan Internacional, Inc. (“BSJI”), sought to block the Federal Reserve Bank of New Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1813 York (“FRBNY”) from closing its master account . 700 F. Supp. at 93 , 101. The Department of Treasury had recently publicly warned that, due to their offshore business model and resource constraints of their local regulator , financial institutions with BSJI’s charter type “are attractive money laundering vehicles” that “ potentially allow[] nefarious actors to misuse them to facilitate illicit financial activity” and “present money laundering vulnerabilities to the U.S. financial system.” See Off. of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes, U.S. Dep't of the Treasury, 20 22 National Money Laundering Risk Assessment at 68 - 69 (3d ed. Feb. 2022) , https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/2022 - National - Money Laundering - Risk - Assessment.pdf . FRBNY had conducted an exte nsive review that found that many of BSJI’s transactions bore the hallmarks of money laundering , and determined that “ BSJI pose [ d ] undue risk ” to FRBNY and the broader economy . Banco San Juan Internacional , 700 F. Supp. 3d at 94 . The review identified numerous concerning transactions totaling millions of dollars that had multiple red flags for money laundering, much of which involved transactions among BSJI’s owner’s family members. Id. at 104. In rejecting BSJI’s contention that it was entitled to a master account under the FRA , the court noted that the risks of facilitating money laundering exposed “ the FRBNY and the financ ial system to risk. This harm is not ju st to the FRBNY, but to the fiscal system, because ‘ federal reserve banks are not operated for the Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1914 profit of shareholders; rather, they were created and are operated in furtherance of the national fiscal policy.’” Id. at 104 . Keeping BSJI’s account open would thus “ place the public in harm's way .” Id. In a similar vein, t he Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRBSF”) recently denied a request for a master account after determining the financial institution , an Idaho - chartered online - only bank that sought to facilitate high - risk cross - border transactions , had an “ unproven risk management framework ” that was insufficien t to address heightened money laundering and terrorism financing risks associated with its business model. See PayServices Bank v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of San Francisco , 2024 WL 1347094 at 4 (D. Idaho Mar. 30, 2024) , appeal docketed , No. 24 - 2355 (9th Cir.) . “ Most notably, the significant risks and conc erns in the areas of [Bank Secrecy Act]/[Anti - Money Laundering] and [Office of Foreign Assets Control] risk management, credit and settlement process and controls, cyber and inform ation security risk management . . . and the limited banking and bank - specif ic risk management experience among management, ” presented undue risk . See PayServices Bank v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of San Francisco , Case No. 1:23 - cv - 305, Dkt . No. 22, Exhibit A (Aug. 14, 2023). As these examples illustrate , the Federal Reserve Banks ’ discretion to deny account access is not just consistent with the plain text of the FRA but is also essential to the Reserve Banks’ fulfillment of their duty to protect the U.S. Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2015 financial system from risk , including risks associated with processing illicit transacti ons. Y et Custodia ’s position would prevent Reserve Banks from even considering whether a depository institution is likely to process illicit transactions , is vulnerable to external threats, has adequately mitigated its operational risks , or has a business model that furthers violations of federal law ( a situation that Federal Reserve Banks have been presented with and may face again in the future ) . 3 Th at is not and should not be the law. Reserve Banks cannot turn a blind eye to risks that could harm them o r the U.S. financial system, in contravention of the central bank’s mission and mandate . CONCLUSION The ability to deny access to deposit accounts and financial services is a fundamental and universal risk - management tool inherent in banking. For the Federal Reserve Banks , th e discretion set forth in Section 342 of the FRA is c ritical because Congress entrusted the m with safeguard ing the U.S. financial system , Custodia asks the Court to upset this established framework by stripping the Federal Reserve Banks of their account access discretion , despite the fact that the 3 For example, a financial institu tion that planned to service the marijuana industry , in violation of federal law , sought access to a master account at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City ( “ FRBKC”) . The dispute was dismissed on ripeness grounds , Fourth Corner Credit Union v. Fed. Rsrv. Bank of Kansas City , 861 F.3d 1052, 1053 (10th Cir. 2017 ) . But in Custodia’s view, the FRA compelled FRBKC to provide account access even under those circumstances. Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2116 FRA’s text plainly affords it to them and that the significant risks at issue here, in the context of the central bank, are orders of magnitude higher than those faced by commercial banks . Custodia’s position finds no support in law or logic, and the Court should reject it. For the foregoing reasons, amici respectfully request that the Court affirm the lower court’s well - reasoned decision . /s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood Jonathan K. Youngwood Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: ( 212 ) 455 - 2000 jyoungwood@stblaw.com Attorney for Amici Curia e Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2217 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 1. This brief complies with the type - volume limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(5) because it contains 3,409 words , excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(f) and 10th Cir. R. 32(B) 2. This brief complies with the typeface requirements of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32(a)(5)(A) and the type style requirements of Rule 32(a)(6) because it has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using 14 - point font. Dated: September 4, 2024 /s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood Jonathan K. Youngwood Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: ( 212 ) 455 - 2000 jyoungwood@stblaw.com Attorney for Amici Curia e Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2318 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and c orrect copy of the foregoing was e - filed on September 4, 2024 through the 10th C ircuit electronic filing system /s/ Jonathan K. Youngwood Jonathan K. Youngwood Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: ( 212 ) 455 - 200 0 jyoungwood@stblaw.com Attorn ey for Amici Curia e Appellate Case: 24-8024 Document: 010111106231 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 24
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2017/34-80353.pdf.json	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 80353 / March 31, 2017 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3 - 17791 In the Matter of Orthofix International N.V. Respondent. : : : : : : EXTENSION ORDER The Division of Enforcement (“Division”) has requested an extension of time until September 15, 2017 to submit a Proposed Plan of Distribution under Rule 1101(a) of the Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans , 17 C . F . R . § 201.1101(a) . On January 18, 2017, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Cease - and - Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Remed ial Sanctions and a Cease - and - Desist Order (“Order”) 1 against Orthofix International N.V. (“Orthofix”). The Order required Orthofix to pay an $8,250,000.00 civil money penalty. The Order also created a Fair Fund, pursuant to Section 308(a) of the Sarbane s - Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, so the penalties could be distributed to harmed investors (the “Fair Fund”). The Order further provided that the Fair Fund could receive funds from and/or be combined with fair funds established for civil penalties paid by other respondents for conduct arising in relation to the violative conduct at issue in the Order. 1 Securities Act Rel. No. 10281 (Jan. 18, 2017).2 Orthofix has paid $8,250,000.00 as ordered into the F air Fund, and monies paid in three related cases 2 will be combined with the Fair Fund , for a total of $8,370,000.00, for distribution to harmed investors. In its request for an extension of time , the Division states that it is in the process of s electing a fund administrator to develop a proposed plan of distribution. T he Division requires additional time to complete the fund administrator appointment process . Accordingly, for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Division’s request for an extension of time until September 15, 2017 to submit a Proposed Plan of Distribution is granted. For the C ommission, by its Secretary, pursuant to delegated authority. Brent J. Fields Secretary 2 See In the Matter of Jeffrey Hammel, CPA , Order Instituting Public Administrative and Cease - and - Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 4C and 21C of the Securiti es Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, Making Findings and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease - and - Desist Order, Securities Act Rel. No. 10282 (Jan. 18, 2017) , Admin . Proc . File No. 3 - 17792; In the Matter of Bri an McCollum , Order Instituting Cease - and - Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Cease - and - Desist Orders and Remedies, Exchange Act Rel. No. 79819 (Jan. 18, 2017) , Admin . Proc . File N o. 3 - 17793; and In the Matter of Kenneth Mack and Bryan McMillan , Order Instituting Cease - and - Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Cease - and - Desist Orders and Penalties, Exchange A ct Rel. No. 79820 (Jan. 18, 2017), Admin . Proc . File No. 3 - 17794.
text/markdown	2.428771	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/eu_oj/publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/52013XC0504%2805%29.json	# C_2013128EN.01003001.xml \| 4.5.2013 \| EN \| Official Journal of the European Union \| C 128/30 \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| --- \| 4.5.2013 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 128/30 --- Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 2013/C 128/04 Aid No: SA.35677 (12/XA) Member State: Italy Region: PIEMONTE Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Iniziativa di monitoraggio e supporto del settore cunicolo per la prevenzione della mixomatosi in Piemonte. Importo Euro 80 000,00. Legge regionale 63/1978 — art.17 lett g). Legal basis: \| — \| Legge regionale n. 63 del 12 ottobre 1978 \| \| --- \| --- \| — Legge regionale n. 63 del 12 ottobre 1978 \| — \| D.G.R. n. 48-4872 del 31.10.2012 \| \| --- \| --- \| — D.G.R. n. 48-4872 del 31.10.2012 \| — \| Determinazione n. 162 del 11.3.2013 \| \| --- \| --- \| — Determinazione n. 162 del 11.3.2013 Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,08 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 100 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 18.4.2013—31.12.2013 Objective of aid: Animal diseases (Art. 10 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING Name and address of the granting authority: \| Regione Piemonte \| \| --- \| \| C.so Stati Uniti 21 10128 Torino \| Regione Piemonte C.so Stati Uniti 21 10128 Torino Website: http://www.regione.piemonte.it/governo/bollettino/abbonati/2012/50/siste/00000005 Other information: — Aid No: SA.36422 (13/XA) Member State: France Region: VENDEE Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: aides en faveur de la promotion de la qualité des produits agricoles vendéens Legal basis: Article L. 1511-5 et suivants du code général des collectivités territoriales Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,07 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 40 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 18.4.2013—31.12.2018 Objective of aid: Production of quality agricultural products (Art. 14 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING Name and address of the granting authority: \| Conseil Général de la Vendée \| \| --- \| \| Direction Générale Adjointe de l’Environnement et de l’Aménagement \| \| Service Agriculture et Pêche \| \| 40 rue Maréchal Foch \| \| 85923 LA ROCHE SUR YON Cedex 9 \| Conseil Général de la Vendée Direction Générale Adjointe de l’Environnement et de l’Aménagement Service Agriculture et Pêche 40 rue Maréchal Foch 85923 LA ROCHE SUR YON Cedex 9 Website: http://vendee.fr/Media/Files/Territoire-Environnement/Agriculture/Programme-departemental-d-aide-a-la-promotion-des-produits-agricoles-vendeens-2012 Other information: — Aid No: SA.36494 (13/XA) Member State: Italy Region: TRENTO Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Interventi per la difesa passiva Legal basis: L.P. 4 del 28 marzo 2003«Sostegno dell’economia agricola, disciplina dell’agricoltura biologica e della contrassegnazione di prodotti geneticamente non modificati» art. 54. Deliberazione della Giunta provinciale di Trento 519 del 22 marzo 2013, criteri attuativi dell’art. 54 della L.P.4/2003 Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 5,90 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 80 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 30.4.2013—31.12.2013 Objective of aid: Insurance premiums (Art. 12 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities Name and address of the granting authority: \| Provincia Autonoma di Trento \| \| --- \| \| Dipartimento Agricoltura, Turismo, Commercio e Promozione \| \| Servizio Agricoltura \| \| Via G.B. Trener, 3 \| \| 38100-TRENTO \| Provincia Autonoma di Trento Dipartimento Agricoltura, Turismo, Commercio e Promozione Servizio Agricoltura Via G.B. Trener, 3 38100-TRENTO Website: \| \| http://www.consiglio.provincia.tn.it/banche_dati/codice_provinciale/clex_ricerca_per_campi.it.asp \| \| --- \| --- \| http://www.consiglio.provincia.tn.it/banche_dati/codice_provinciale/clex_ricerca_per_campi.it.asp \| \| http://www.delibere.provincia.tn.it/ricerca_delibere.asp \| \| --- \| --- \| http://www.delibere.provincia.tn.it/ricerca_delibere.asp Other information: — Aid No: SA.36501 (13/XA) Member State: Italy Region: FRIULI-VENEZIA GIULIA Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Regolamento per la concessione di indennizzi a favore delle aziende agricole per le perdite causate dal cancro batterico dell'actinidia (Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae)_ stanziamenti 2013 Legal basis: Legge regionale 22/2002 «istituzione del fondo regionale per la gestione delle emergenze in agricoltura», articolo 1, comma 2. Delibera di Giunta regionale n. 2456 del 12 dicembre 2011«Regolamento per la concessione di indennizzi a favore delle aziende agricole operanti nella Regione per le perdite causate dal cancro batterico dell'actinidia (pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidae) nell'ambito del programma dell'Ersa di prevenzione, controllo ed eradicazione della malattia. Approvazione» Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,15 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 100 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 18.4.2013—31.12.2013 Objective of aid: Plant diseases — pest infestations (Art. 10 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Name and address of the granting authority: \| Regione autonoma Friuli venezia Giulia \| \| --- \| \| Direzione centrale risorse rurali, agroalimentari e forestali \| \| Servizio investimenti aziendali e sviluppo agricolo \| \| Via Sabbadini, 31 \| \| 33100 UDINE (I) \| Regione autonoma Friuli venezia Giulia Direzione centrale risorse rurali, agroalimentari e forestali Servizio investimenti aziendali e sviluppo agricolo Via Sabbadini, 31 33100 UDINE (I) Website: http://www.regione.fvg.it/asp/delibere/layout2008_2.asp?pag=1&num=2456&tx_dataDel=&key=&uf=&btnCerca=vai Other information: — Aid No: SA.36508 (13/XA) Member State: France Region: BOURGOGNE Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Aides visant à indemniser les agriculteurs pour le préjudice subi du fait d'arrachages obligatoires de parcelles de vignes contaminées par la flavescence dorée, dans le cadre de la lutte obligatoire contre cet organisme nuisible à la santé des végétaux Legal basis: \| — \| article L. 251-9 du code rural et de la pêche maritime \| \| --- \| --- \| — article L. 251-9 du code rural et de la pêche maritime \| — \| article L. 632-1 du code rural et de la pêche maritime \| \| --- \| --- \| — article L. 632-1 du code rural et de la pêche maritime \| — \| articles L. 1511-1 et suivants du code général des collectivités territoriales \| \| --- \| --- \| — articles L. 1511-1 et suivants du code général des collectivités territoriales \| — \| arrêté du 9 juillet 2003 relatif à la lutte contre la flavescence dorée de la vigne et contre son agent vecteur \| \| --- \| --- \| — arrêté du 9 juillet 2003 relatif à la lutte contre la flavescence dorée de la vigne et contre son agent vecteur Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,49 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 100 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 16.4.2013—31.12.2014 Objective of aid: Animal diseases (Art. 10 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING Name and address of the granting authority: \| bureau interprofessionnel des vins de Bourgogne / ministère de l'agriculture et de l'agroalimentaire \| \| --- \| \| BIV de Bourgogne \| \| 12 boulevard Bretonnière \| \| BP 150 \| \| 21204 BEAUNE Cedex \| \| MAAF \| \| DGAL \| \| 251 rue de Vaugirard \| \| 75732 Paris Cedex 15 \| bureau interprofessionnel des vins de Bourgogne / ministère de l'agriculture et de l'agroalimentaire BIV de Bourgogne 12 boulevard Bretonnière BP 150 21204 BEAUNE Cedex MAAF DGAL 251 rue de Vaugirard 75732 Paris Cedex 15 Website: http://agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/fiche_internet_flavescence_doree_cle012979.pdf Other information: — Aid No: SA.36528 (13/XA) Member State: Netherlands Region: GRONINGEN, FRIESLAND, NOORD-HOLLAND Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Subsidieverordening Waddenfonds 2012 Legal basis: Algemene Wet bestuursrecht Provinciewet Wet Gemeenschappelijke regelingen Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 5,00 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 90 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 1.5.2013—31.12.2013 Objective of aid: Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings (Art. 5 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006), Investment in agricultural holdings (Art. 4 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006), Production of quality agricultural products (Art. 14 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: All economic sectors eligible to receive aid Name and address of the granting authority: \| Gemeenschappelijke Regeling Waddenfonds \| \| --- \| \| Huis voor de Wadden \| \| Ruiterskwartier 121 A \| \| 8911 BS Leeuwarden \| Gemeenschappelijke Regeling Waddenfonds Huis voor de Wadden Ruiterskwartier 121 A 8911 BS Leeuwarden Website: http://www.waddenfonds.nl/fileadmin/waddenfonds/inhd_wadfonds/Projecten/pdf/WF_AB_subs_ver_28mrt2013.pdf Other information: — Aid No: SA.36542 (13/XA) Member State: United Kingdom Region: SCOTLAND Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Sustainable Land Management Incentive Scheme for the Protection of Drinking Water Sources (Scotland) 2013 Legal basis: This is a non-statutory service, participation in which is voluntary, aimed to ensure Scottish Water complies with its obligations under the Water (Scotland) Act 1980 and the Water Supply (Water Quality) Scotland Regulations 2001 Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: GBP 3,00 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 100 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 22.4.2013—31.3.2015 Objective of aid: Investment in agricultural holdings (Art. 4 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006), Technical support (Art. 15 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Name and address of the granting authority: \| Scottish Water \| \| --- \| \| Castle House \| \| Dunfermline \| \| KY11 8GG \| Scottish Water Castle House Dunfermline KY11 8GG Website: http://www.scottishwater.co.uk/protectdwsources Other information: — Aid No: SA.36549 (13/XA) Member State: Estonia Region: — Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Ohtliku taimekahjustaja tõrjeabinõude toetus Legal basis: \| 1) \| Põllumajandusministri 26.5.2011 määrus nr 45: „Ohtliku taimekahjustaja tõrjeabinõude rakendamise toetuse saamiseks esitatavad nõuded ning toetuse taotluse esitamise ja taotluse menetlemise kord” \| \| --- \| --- \| 1) Põllumajandusministri 26.5.2011 määrus nr 45: „Ohtliku taimekahjustaja tõrjeabinõude rakendamise toetuse saamiseks esitatavad nõuded ning toetuse taotluse esitamise ja taotluse menetlemise kord” \| 2) \| Maaelu ja põllumajandusturu korraldamise seadus, § 7 lg 1 p 7. \| \| --- \| --- \| 2) Maaelu ja põllumajandusturu korraldamise seadus, § 7 lg 1 p 7. Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,66 (in millions) Maximum aid intensity: 100 % Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 2.5.2013—31.12.2013 Objective of aid: Plant diseases — pest infestations (Art. 10 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006) Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Name and address of the granting authority: \| Põllumajanduse Registrite ja Informatsiooni Amet \| \| --- \| \| Narva mnt 3, Tartu 51009, Eesti. \| Põllumajanduse Registrite ja Informatsiooni Amet Narva mnt 3, Tartu 51009, Eesti. Website: http://www.agri.ee/siseriiklikud-toetused/ Other information: — ---
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nigc.gov/images/uploads/gamingordinances/sacfoxnationmo-sacfoxmoamend012398.pdf.json	Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri RR 1 Box 60 Reserve, KS 66434 Phone: (785) 742-7471 FAX: (785) 742-3785 OCT ~ R I9~7 R-38-97 WHEREAS: the~ac & Fox Nation of Missouri is duly organized in accordance with the Reorganization ~tCt of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) and hasa Constitution as approved by the Secretar~ of the Interior on March 2, 1937, amended and approved November 22, 1982, wjth a new Tribal Constitution amended and approved by the Secretary of the interioron July 20, 1990, pursuant to the above statue, and WfIEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri Tribal Council has been given full authority /by the Nation to act in all matters of business for the Nation, and WHEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation is striving for self-sufficiency and strong tribal government by providing economic development to improve the economy, health, education, and welfare of its Tribal members, and WHEREAS: the United States Congress enacted Public Law 199-497, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, and WHEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation desires to operate a gaming enterprise on Tribal lands, and WHEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation and the Sate of Kansas have negotiated a Class III Gaming Compact, approved by the Kansas Legislature, executed by the Governor and the Chairman of the Nation, and approved and published by the Secretary of the Interior, and WHEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation is its own Developer and Manager of its Gaming Casino, and WHEREAS: the Sac & Fox Nation has an approved Gaming Ordinance and interim Gaming Regulations, and WHEREAS: given that the Sac & Fox Casino and Gaming Commission have been operational throughout 1997, it is now appropriate to adopt permanent gaming regulations, and WHEREAS: permanent Regulations have been submitted by the Nations General Counsel, after consultation with the Gaming Commission and Casino, to the Tribal Council, and WFIEREAS: the Council has reviewed said permanent Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that, the permanent Gaming Regulation are approved and adopted to take effect immediately and replace the Interim Regulations; NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the Sac and Fox Gaming Commission provide a copy of said Regulations to the State Gaming Agency. CERTIFICATION The foregoing resolution was adopted subject to any technical modifications at a meeting of the Sac & Fox Natiop Tribal Council held on this __________ day of J~X~ 1997, at which ~ members of the Tribal Council were present, constituting a quorum, by a vote of 3 for, against, / abstaining. ii2 ( , Diana Secretary Robidoux-Weeks ~ ( Corbin Chairman Shuckahosee ~ Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri GAMING REGULATIONS OF THE SAC AND FOX NATION OF MISSOURI IN KANSAS AND NEBRASKA I. PREAMBLE~ (A) Development of Regulations (B) Role~of the Tribal Council (C) Role~of the Tribal Gaming Commission. DEFINITIONS --(A)- Employee (B) Game or Gaming Activity (C) Gaming Employee (D) Gaming Facility (E) Gaming Operation (F) Key Employee (G) License (H) Manufacturer-Distributor (I) Management Contractor (J) Management Interest (~) National Indian Gaming Commissioii or NIGC ~L) Non-Gaming Employees (M) Category III License (N) Player (0) Primary Management Official (P) Principal (Q) Standard Gaming Employee (R) Tribe CS) Tribal Council (T) Tribal Gaming Commission TRIBAL GAMING COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION (A) Staff; Personnel Policies. (B) Job Descriptions; Organization Chart (C) Budgets (D) Decision-making (A) Tribal Gaming Commission Delegated Powers and Responsi bilities 6 (B) Compact Requirements 7 (C) Security and Surveillance Policy-making Responsibilities; Written Policies Required . . 8 (D) Provision of Security, Surveillance, and Enforcement Services 8 Policy; Revocable Privilege License Categories License Application Procedures Background Investigations Applications Review Standards for Issuance of License . 1 ..1 II. III. 3 ..4 4 5 5 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 IV. REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT V. LI CENSES (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) .8 .9 10 14 . . 16 . . . 16 Sac and Fox Gaming R.gu1at~ona, 9/30/97 (G) Denial 16 (H) Category III License Approval 19 (I) License Approvals 19 (J) Procedures for Forwarding Applications and Reports for Key Employees and Primary Management Officials to~ the National Indian Gaming Commission . 19 (K) Report to the National Indian Gaming Commission 20 (L) Granting a Key Employee or Primary Management Official Gaming License 20 (M) License Limitations and Restrictions . . 21 (N) Hearings 22 (0) Appeals 22 (P) Waivers 22 (Q) Expirations 23 (R) Renewals 23 (S) Identification Badges 24 (T)_Emplpyment of Unlicensed Persons Prohibited . . . 25 (U) Facility License Requirements 25 Suspensions Civil Penalties Criminal Prosecution Revocations Hearings Appeals GAMING OPERATIONS (A) Hours of Operation (B) Wagers with Chips Only . (C) House Rules (D) Tournaments (E) Electronic Gaming Equipment (F) Gambling by Employees . . (G) Credit Prohibited (H) Employment Restriction . VI. PENALTIES (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) VII 278 28 293012 Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 2 I. PREAMBLE ~CT 2 8 ~7 (A) Development of Regulations The following regulations are issued pursuant to the powers vested in the Sac and Fox Tribal Council by the Sac and Fox Tribal Constitution and Tribal Gaming Ordinance. The Tribal Council may, from time to time, issue, amend, and repeal these regulations consistent with the policy and purposes of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance. (B) Role of the Tribal Council The tribal gaming operation, hereinafter also referred to as the Sac & Fox Casino, is wholly owned by the Sac and Fox Nation. As the duly elected representatives of the Sac and Fox Nation, the Tribal Council serves as the Board of Directors for the Sac & Fox Casino and has ultimate responsibility for the management, business decisionmaking, planning, day-to-day operations, personnel and human resources of the gaming operation, which it may, in its judgment, delegate in whole or in part to the management of the Sac & Fox Casino. The Tribal Council also has responsibility for the regulation of the Sac & Fox Casino except to the extent that it has delegated such regulatory authority to the Tribal Gaming Commission through the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and related regulations. It is the intent of the Tribal Council, subject to the right to make amendments to the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and related regulations, that the Tribal Gaming Commission operate independently with respect to the regulatory, licensing, background investigation and other activities specifically described in the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and related regulations. (C) Role of the Tribal Gaming Commission (1) General Role Pursuant to the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, the Tribal Council has created the Tribal Gaming Commission and delegated to it certain responsibilities for the regulation of the Sac & Fox Casino. The Tribal Gaming Commission has no role in the management, business decision-making, planning, day-to-day operations, personnel and human resources of the Sac & Fox Casino. The Tribal Gaming Commissions responsibilities are strictly limited to regulation of the Sac & Fox Casino operation and any powers delegated to the Tribal Gaming Commission by the Tribal Council for regulatory purposes shall not be used for nonregulatory purposes. In carrying out its responsibilities under the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and these gaming regulations, the Tribal Gaming Commission is ultimately accountable to the Tribal Council and the General Council of the Sac and Fox Nation. The Tribal Gaming Commission is an agency of the Sac and Fox Nation and is not an agency of the State of Kansas. In carrying out its functions, it is bound by the laws and regulations of the Sac and Fox Nation, the Tribal-State Compact, applicable Federal law, and Kansas law to the extent adopted by the Sac and Fox Nation. Only the Sac and Fox Nation, operating through its Tribal Council, has Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 1 authority to raise and resolve disputes with the United States or the State of Kansas. In the event of any such dispute, the Tribal Gaming Commission is obligated and shall advocate and enforce the position of the Sac and Fox Nation as declared by the Tribal Council or the General Council. (2) Standard of Review Pursuant to these regulations, the Tribal Gaming Commission is authorized to grant, deny, suspend or revoke gaming licenses. This extraordinary power is to be used judiciously, in the best interests of the Sac and Fox-Nation, and with respect for the rights of the individuals or entities involved, providing due process, including notice, a hearing, and the right to be represented by legal counsel, in accordance with the provisions of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, these regulations and the Tribal-State Compact. The Tribal Gaming Commission is only required to deny a license if the applicant is unable to meet the requirements of Section V(G) of these regulations or if the applicant violates Section 21 of the Tribal-State Compact. The Tribal Gaming Commission is only required to suspend or revoke a license if the applicant violates Section V(D) of these gaming regulations or Section 22 of the Tribal-State Compact which by reference includes violations of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance. All other violations, including violations of these gaming regulations and violations of the Tribal-State Compact appendices do not require denial, suspension or revocation of a license and the Tribal Gaming Commission, without prejudice to its authority to impose such a sanction, should investigate such violations to determine whether a lesser punishment is more appropriate and just. (3) Conflict of Interest In carrying out his or her duties, a Tribal Gaming Commissioner shall not make or participate in making decisions which involve balancing a substantial personal or financial interest, other than interests held in common by all members of the Sac and Fox Nation, against the best interest of the Nation. It shall be deemed a conflict of interest for a Tribal Gaming Commissioner to make or participate in making a decision which involves an immediate family member or any person living within the Tribal Gaming Commissionerss household. An immediate family member is a spouse, father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, or grandchild. In the event of a conflict of interest, as defined in this section, or even the appearance of a conflict of interest, the Tribal Gaming Commissioner shall recuse him or herself from making or participating in making the affected decision. Failure to recuse him or herself shall be grounds for suspension or removal from the Tribal Gaming Commission by the Tribal Council in accordance with Section IX.B of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance. Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 2 II. DEFINITIONS To the extent not already defined herein, all definitions contained in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), Tribal Gaming Ordinance, and the Tribal-State Compact are incorporated by reference into these regulations. (A) Employee has the same meaning as the term is used by the United States Internal Revenue Service. (B) Game or Gaming Activity means any activity, operation or game of chance in which any valuable consideration may be wagered upon the outcome determined by chance, skill, and in which any valuable prize is awarded to the player so wagering, and any activity in furtherance thereof, including owning, financing, managing, participating in, conducting or assisting in any way in any such activity which it is being conducted, directly or indirectly, whether at the site in person or off tribal land, but not including (1)~ social games played solely for prizes of minimal value; or(b) traditional forms of Indian gaming when played by individuals in connection with tribal ceremonies or celebrations. (C) Gaming Employee means any natural person 18 years or older employed in the operation or management of each gaming activity or operation, whether employed by or contracted to the Tribe or by any person or enterprise providing on or off-site services to the Tribe within or without the gaming facility regarding any gaming activity or operation, including, but not limited to, gaming operation managers and assistant managers; accounting personnel; surveillance personnel; cashier supervisors; dealers or croupiers; box men; floor men; pit bosses; shift bosses; cage personnel; collection personnel; gaming consultants, management companies and their principals; and any other natural person whose employment duties require or authorize access to restricted areas of each gaming activity or operation not otherwise opened to the public. (D) Gaming Facility means any building, room or rooms in which Class II or Class III gaming is conducted. (E) Gaming Operation means any enterprise owned by the Tribe on its Indian lands located within the boundaries of Kansas for the conduct of Class II or Class III gaming in a gaming facility. (F) Key Employee shall have the same meaning as provided for in the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and includes any employee who is directly or indirectly engaged in the administration or supervision of the gaming operations or physical security activities of such gaming operations. The following classes of employees are presumed to be actively and directly engaged in the administration or supervision of gaming: Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 3 (1) All individuals who are compensated in any manner in excess of $50,000 per annum; (2) All individuals who have the authority to supervise or direct a shift of any gaming or security activity, including but not limited to supervision or direction of the pit area, card rooms, keno or bingo games, mechanical or electronic gaming devices, or any persons having authority to supervise or direct such persons; (3) All individuals who supervise or direct other employees engaged in the control of gaming assets and revenues and record keeping, including the recording of cash and evidences of indebtedness, and the maintenance, review, or control of the records, accounts, and reports of transactions; (4) All individuals who have custodial responsibility for cash or gaming supplies; (5) All count room supervisors and personnel; (6) All individuals who supervise or direct other employees engaged in providing security or surveillance services to the gaming establishment; (7) All individuals who may approve or extend gaming credit in any amount, or whose recommendations in this regard are ordinarily sought or followed; (8) Any other individual the Tribal Gaming Commission specifically determines is important or necessary to the operation of the gaming establishment. (9) Any individual who serves as construction manager for gaming facilities or the gaming operation. The term key employee does not include any person licensed as a primary management official. (G) ItLicensehl means a written approval of the Tribal Gaming Commission authorizing a specific individual to engage in certain gaming or gaming-related activities. (H) Manufacturer-Distributor means any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation which assembles, produces, makes, prints, or supplies Class II or Class III gaming equipment or supplies for sale, lease, use or distribution to the Tribe or a licensed gaming operation for a Class II or Class III gaming activity. (I) Management Contractor means any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation or other entity which Bac ~nd Pox Gaming R.gialationa, 9/30/97 4 manages any Class II or Class III gaming activity or operation on behalf of the Tribe pursuant to a management contract approved by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission._ (J) Management Interest means the ability to effect significant policy for a gaming establishment. A primary management official is deemed to possess a management interest. (K) National Indian Gaming Commission or NIGC means the federal gaming regulatory body created by the Indian Gaming~ Regulatory Act (Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. §2701 et secT. (L) Non-Gaming Employees means employees of the gaming facility who are not gaming employees but who are employed in ancillary facilities located within the same building as the gaming facility. (M) Category III License means a written approval of the Tri-bal Gaming Commission authorizing non-gaming employees to engage in certain activities in ancillary facilities located within the same building as the gaming facility. (N) Player shall mean a person who participates in a game other than as an employee or contractor of the gaming operation. (0) Primary Management Official means (i) with respect to any management contractor, the person having management responsibility for a management contract; (ii) any person who has authority to hire and fire employees or to set up working policy for the gaming operation; or (iii) the chief financial officer or other person who has financial management responsibility. (P) Principal means with respect to any management contractor: (i) each of its officers and directors; (ii) each of its principal management employees, including any chief executive officer, chief financial officer, chief operating officer, or general manager; (iii) each of its owners or partners, if it is an unincorporated business; (iv) each of its shareholders who owns more than five percent of the shares of the corporation, if a corporation; and (v) each person other than a banking institution who has provided financing for the enterprise constituting more than ten percent of the total financing of the enterprise. (Q) Standard Gaming Employee means any natural person employed in the operation or management of each gaming activity or operation as a gaming employee who is not a primary management official or key employee. (R) Tribe means the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri. (S) Tribal Council means the governing body of the Sac and Fox Nation as established and defined by the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouris Constitution. Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 5 (T) Tribal Gaming Commission means the Tribal Gaming Commission established by the Tribal Council in accordance with the Tribal Gaming Ordinance. - III. TRIBAL GAMING COI2ilSSION ADMINISTRATION (A) Staff; Personnel Policies Subject to the approval of the -Tribal Council and the appropriation of- funds therefore, the Tribal Gaming Commission may hire, supervise, and discipline such personnel, including Tribal Gaming Inspectors, as the Tribal Gaming Commission may deem necessary to implement the Sac and Fox Gaming Ordinance and related regulations in an efficient and effective manner. The personnel policies of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri shall apply to all Tribal Gaming Commission employees unless alternative policies are adopted and approved by the Tribal Council. (B) Job Descriptions; Organization Chart A job description including job title, position supervisor, responsibilities, authorities, and minimum qualifications shall be provided for each position. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall maintain an organization chart that clearly shows the lines of control and supervisory authority between all committees, supervisors and employees of the Tribal Gaming Commission. (C) Budgets The Tribal Gaming Commission shall each year prepare and submit to the Tribal Council for its review and approval annual operating and capital expenditure budgets. (D) Decision-making Decisions of the Tribal Gaming Commission shall be made by majority vote of the Commissioners at a duly called meeting with a quorum of two Commissioners present. IV. REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT (A) Tribal Gaming Commission Delegated Powers and Responsibilities The Tribal Gaming Commission is delegated Tribal Council powers to: monitor compliance with the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, Tribal-State Compact, and related regulations and to investigate and act to prevent any violations thereof; conduct or oversee necessary personal background and criminal history investigations of license applicants; approve and deny applications for gaming licenses; issue gaming licenses; restrict, suspend, or revoke licenses or impose penalties or other sanctions established by these regulations against the holder of a license; conduct hearings to consider an applicants appeal of a Tribal Gaming Commission decision to deny, restrict, suspend or revoke any license, or application or to consider a license applicants Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulationa. 9/30/97 6 -I request for a waiver of license standards; impose any lawful sanctions or penalties; and perform other Tribal Council duties as the Tribal Council may decide. The Tribal Gaming Commission is not delegated Tribal Council authority to contract with the State of Kansas or any other third party, without the prior approval of the Tribal Council, for the performance of background and criminal history investigations. (B) Compact Requirements Pursuant to the Tribal-State Compact, the Tribal Gaming-Commission shall: (1) advise the State of any intent to revise the standards set forth in Appendix A of the Compact and the Gaming Rules set forth in Appendix B of the Compact and shall request the concurrence of the State Gaming Agency of such revisions; (2) establish a_list of persons barred from the--gaming facility and shall exclude persons engaging in disorderly conduct or other conduct jeopardizing public safety in the gaming facility; (3) receive consumer complaints within the gaming facility and shall assist in seeking voluntary resolution of such complaints; (4) require the audit of the gaming activities of the Tribe not less than annually, by an independent certified public accountant, in accordance with the auditing and accounting standards for audits of casinos of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and the provisions of section 23 of the Tribal-State Compact; (5) employ tribal gaming inspectors who shall be required to obtain a key employees gaming license; (6) have at least one tribal gaming inspector in the gaming facility during all hours of gaming operation, who shall have unfettered access to any and all areas of each gaming activity or operation for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, the gaming regulations and the Compact. The tribal gaming inspector shall report immediately all violations of the Compact or applicable laws and regulations to the Tribal Gaming Commission, which shall forward such report to the State Gaming Agency within 72 hoi.~rs after such violation is discovered; (7) investigate any reported violation of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, Tribal-State Compact and regulations promulgated thereto and shall require that any such violation be corrected upon such terms and conditions as the Tribal Gaming Commission determines to be necessary. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall report any suspected violation of the Compact and applicable law to the State Gaming Agency. After the Tribal Gaming Commission has completed its investigation and imposed any fine or other sanction for a violation, the completed investigation report and such disposition Sac ~nd Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 7 shall be forwarded to the State Gaming Agency immediately. (C) Security and Surveillance Policy-making Responsibilities; Written Policies Required The Tribal Gaming Commission shall supervise and establish written policies and procedures for the gaming operations security and surveillance force. When convened to discuss security and surveillance policies and procedures, the Tribal Gaming Commission membership shall also include the chief executive officer of the gaming operation or his or her designee serving ex officio. Under no circumstances shall the chief executive officer, either directly or indirectly, participate in or influence any decision of the Tribal Gaming Commission concerning a gaming license. (D) Provision of Security, Surveillance, and Enforcement Services Physical security and surveillance services for gaming facilities owned by the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri shall be developed and provided by the Sac & Fox Casino, subject to review and approval by the Tribal Gaming Commission. V. LICENSES (A) Policy; Revocable Privilege (1) It is declared policy of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri that all gaming facilities, all persons having a financial or management interest in such games, and all employees of such gaming operations shall be licensed and regulated so as to better protect the public health, safety, morals, good order, and welfare of the community. Any gaming license which is issued by the Tribal Gaming Commission shall be deemed to be a revocable privilege and no person holding such a license is deemed to have acquired any vested rights therein. (2) The following entities shall require a valid gaming license (a) Gaming Facility; (b) Management Contractor; (c) Primary Management Official; (d) Key Employee; (e) Standard Gaming Employee; (f) Non-Gaming Employees (Category III licenses only required); and (g) Manufacturer-Distributor (with contracts with the Tribe in the amount of $10,000 or more during any one calendar year). (3) An application for a Sac and Fox tribal gaming license is seeking the granting of a privilege, and the burden of proving his/her qualification to receive any license is at all times on the Sac and Pox Ganing R.gulationa. 9/30/97 8 applicant. An applicant must accept any risk of adverse public notice, embarrassment, criticism, or other action or financial loss which may result f~rom action with respect to an application and expressly waive any claim for damages as a result thereof. (4) An application for a license constitutes a request to the Tribal Gaming Commission for a decision upon the applicants general suitability, character, integrity, and ability to participate or engage in, or be associated with, the gaming industry in the manner or posit–on sought by the application. (5) To protect the public good, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall err on the side of caution when considering any license application. (6) The granting of a license by the Tribal Gaming Commission does not constitute a commitment on behalf of the Tribal Gaming Commission or any other party to hire or continue to employ the licensee (7) These regulations do not apply to (i) social games played solely for prizes of minimal value; or (ii) traditional forms of Indian gaming when played by individuals in connection with tribal ceremonies or celebrations. (B) License Categories (1) Facility License No games may be played at any place, facility, or location within the Sac and Fox Nation tribal lands unless the Chief Executive Officer or manager of the gaming operation first obtains and maintains in good standing a valid facility license issued in accordance with these regulations. (2) Management Contractor License No individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, or other entity other than the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri may enter into a valid management contract unless s/he first obtains and maintains in good standing a valid management contractor license issued in accordance with these regulations. Licensing and background investigations shall be conducted on the management contractor, its primary management officials, and it principals. (3) Primary Management Official License No person shall be employed by or serve as a primary management official in a gaming operation unless such person first obtains and maintains in good standing a valid primary management official license issued in accordance with these regulations. (4) Key Employee License No person shall be employed as a key employee by a gaming operation or by the Tribal Gaming Commission unless such person first obtains and maintains in good standing a valid key employee license issued in accordance with Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 9 these regulations. Tribal gaming inspectors are required to obtain a key employee license. (5) Standard Gaming Employee License No person shall be employed as a standard gaming employee in a gaming operation unless such person shall first obtain and maintain in good standing a valid standard gaming employee license issued in accordance with these regulations. ~t6) Non-gaming Employee Work License-s No person shall be employed as a non-gaming employee unless such person shall first obtain and maintain in good standing a valid Category III license issued in accordance with these regulations. (7) Manufacturer-distributor License No manufacturerdistributor shall enter into any contract or other agreement with --a gaming operation in the amount of $10,000 or more during any one calendar year unless such manufacturer-distributor first obtains and maintains in good standing a valid manufacturer-distributor license issued in accordance with these regulations. (8) Duplication Any person possessing a valid primary management official license need not obtain a key employee, manufacturer-distributor, or Category III license. (C) License Application Procedures (1) General RecTuirements Applicants for a gaming license must complete the appropriate application form and submit the form, all necessary additional documents, and the application fee, as may be required, to the Tribal Gaming Commission. The application will not be regarded as complete until the Tribal Gaming Commission receives all requested information from the applicant and application and additional investigation fees, if any. (2) Application Forms; Contents; Amendments (a) Every application or report must be filed on forms furnished or approved by the Tribal Gaming Commission and must contain and be accompanied by such documents and information as may be specified or required. (b) It is grounds for denial of an application, revocation of license , termination of employment, or disciplinary action for any person to make any untrue statement of material fact in any application or report filed with the Tribal Gaming Commission or to willfully omit any material fact in such application or report. (c) All information required to be included in an application must be true and complete as of the date of the Tribal Gaming Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulatiena, 9/30/97 10 .1 Commission action sought by such application. An applicant shall promptly supply any factual information occurring after the original application. Failure by an applicant to promptly update his or her application to include all material facts shall be deemed by the Tribal Gaming Commission as a willful omission of information. (d) Every application for any gaming license , other than a facility license, shall include, at a minimum, the following information: (1) Full name, other names used (oral or written), social security number(s), birth date, place of birth, citizenship, gender, and all languages (spoken or written); (ii) Currently and for the previous 5 years: business and employment positions held, ownership interests in those businesses, business and residence addresses, and drivers license numbers; (iii) The names and current addresses of at least three personal references, including one personal reference who was acquainted with the applicant during each period of residence listed under subsection (2) of this section; (iv) Current business and residence telephone numbers; (v) A description of any existing and previous business relationships with Indian tribes, including ownership interests in those businesses; (vi) A description of any existing and previous business relationships with the gaming industry generally, including ownership interests in those businesses; (vii) The name and address of any licensing or regulatory agency with which the person has filed an application for a license related to gaming, whether or not such license was granted; (viii) For each felony for which there is ongoing prosecution or a conviction, the charge, the name and address of the court involved, and the date and disposition if any; Sac and Pox Ganing R.gulationa. 9/30/97 11 (ix) For each misdemeanor conviction or ongoing misdemeanor prosecution (excluding minor traffic violations), within 10 years of the date of the application, the name and address of the court involved and the date and disposition; (x) For each criminal charge (excJ.uding minor traffic charges), whether or not there is a conviction, if-such criminal charge was within 10 years of the date of the application and is not otherwise listed pursuant to subsection (8) or (9) of this section, the criminal charge, the name and address of the court involved, and the date and disposition; (xi) The name- and address of any licensing or--- regulatory agency with which the person has filed an application for a business or occupational license, whether or not such license was granted; (xii) Two (2) current photographs; (xiii) The applicants commitment to provide and the provision of any other information the Tribe, Tribal Gaming Commission, National Indian Gaming Commission or, whenever applicable, the State, deems relevant; (xiv) Fingerprints consistent with procedures adopted by the Tribe according to 25 C.F.R. § 522.2 (h); (xv) All requested financial information consistent with IGRA requirements. (e) Every application for a facility license shall include, at minimum, the following information: (i) The name, address, and telephone number of the gaming operation; (ii) The name, address, and telephone number of the gaming operations chief executive officer or senior manager; (iii) The name, address, and telephone number of the management company, if any, and the name, address, social security number, birth date, and percentage interest in the management Sac and Fox Ganir~g R.gulationa, 9/30/97 12 company of each person possessing a financial interest in the management company; (iv) An operating plan detailing all information required in section VI(K) of these regulations, including the annual budget; (v) A list of all primary management official and key employee names, including the position and annual salary of each individual listed;~ (vi) The complete current or proposed house rules of the gaming operation; and (vii) The current plan for the protection of public safety as well as for the physical security of - patrons at the gaming facility as-provided for by Section 10(D) of the Compact. (f) An application may be amended at the discretion of the Tribal Gaming Commission at any time prior to the Tribal Gaming Commissions final action on the application. (g) Any document filed under any of the provisions of the Sac and Fox Tribal Gaming Ordinance may be incorporated by reference in a subsequent application if it is available in the files of the Tribal Gaming Commission, to the extent that the document is currently accurate. (h) Any person denied a license may not submit, and the Tribal Gaming Commission may not accept, another application from that person for at least six months after the date the initial application was denied. (3) Fingerprints An application for any license shall not be complete until the applicant furnishes to the Tribal Gaming Commission his or her fingerprints in duplicat& on fingerprint impression cards, in accordance with procedures established by the Tribal Gaming Commission. (4) Photographs Each applicant for a license shall be required to submit two identical photographs with their application. The photographs must be satisfactory to the Tribal Gaming Commission and must have been taken not more than 3 months before the application is filed. (5) Application and Investigation Fees (a) Unless provided for otherwise by action of the Tribal Council, each application for a license, or Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 13 1 renewal thereof, must be accompanied by a non-refundable application fee in amounts to be established by the Tribal Gaming Commission, with the approval of the_Tribal Council. To the extent that such fees are collected to pay for the State background investigation, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall forward those fees, along with the completed application to the State Gaming Agency. (b) In addition to any non-refundable application fees paid, the Tribal Gaming Commission may require an applicant to pay such supplementary investigative fees and costs as may be determined necessary by the Tribal Gaming Commission. The Tribal Gaming Commission may estimate the supplementary investigative fees and costs and require the applicant to pay the estimated fees and costs in advance as a condition precedent to beginning or continuing an investigation. (c) The Tribal Gaming Commission may not act upon any application unless all application and investigation fees and costs, if any, have been paid in full. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall deny an application if the applicant has failed or refused to pay all application and investigation fees and costs. (d) The Tribe may enter into an agreement with the Tribal Gaming Commission to guarantee an applicants payment of all or any part of the required application and investigation fees. The agreement must state that the Tribe will pay on the applicants behalf any payments not timely made by the applicant regardless of whether or not the applicant continues to be employed by the gaming operation. The Tribal Gaming Commission may take preliminary or final action on an application before the required application and investigation fees are received only if payment of the fees is guaranteed by an agreement with the Tribe. CD) Background Investigations (1) Within 14 calendar days after receipt of a complete application and such supplemental information as the Tribal Gaming Commission may require, except as provided for under the TribalState Compact and Section V(D) (4), below, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall begin its investigation of the applicants background to determine if the applicant meets the minimum license standards. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall investigate the criminal history of each applicant for a license and the personal background and character of each applicant for a license. At its own discretion the Tribal Gaming Commission may also investigate the personal background and character of any applicant for a Category III license. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall perform, Sac and Fox Gam.thg R.gulationa, 9/30/97 14 at a minimum, a background investigation which meets the standards set forth in Appendix C of the Tribal-State Compact. (a) Applicant for Any Gaming License The criminal background of an applicant for any gaming license shall be investigated by submitting the applicants vital information, including but not limited to: full name; any other names used, date and place of birth; citizenship, drivers license numbers; social security number; and physical description to State or County law enforcementagency, or federal law enforcement or federal gaming regulatory agency and requesting a criminal history report. (b) Applicant for Any Gaming License - Additional Requirements In addition to other investigations, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall submit the fingerprints of each license applicant to a responsible. agency of the state or federal government and request a Federal Bureau of Investigation report of the applicants criminal history. If the applicant lived outside the United States for more than six months during the preceding ten years the Tribal Gaming Commission shall also submit the applicants vital information to INTERPOL and request an international criminal history report for the applicant. (2) The Tribal Gaming Commission is not limited to the above investigations and shall make additional investigations and inquiries as required by federal law or regulation or as needed to determine with reasonable certainty that an applicant either does or does not meet the minimum standards for issuance of a gaming license. (3) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall attempt to complete its background investigation within 30 days following receipt of a complete application. If the investigation cannot be completed within 30 days the Tribal Gaming Commission shall notify the applicant, in writing if possible, why the investigation is not complete and when it expects to complete the investigation. (4) As provided for in the Tribal-State Compact, the Class III background investigation for primary management officials, key employees, standard gaming employees, management contractors and manufacturers/distributors shall be performed by the State and shall be presumed adequate for the purposes of these regulations unless the Tribal Gaming Commission determines that further investigation is warranted. The Tribal Gaming Commission is responsible for the investigation of misconduct of non-gaming employees and for the background investigations of Class II manufacturers-distributors, primary management officials, key employees, and standard gaming employees. Upon approval of the Tribal Council, the Tribal Gaming Commission may contract with Sac and Fox Caning Regulation.. 9/30/97 15 private, state, and/or federal investigation agencies to perform the required background and/or criminal history investigations. (5) The background investigation is not identical to a criminal investigation. There is no assumption when undertaking a background investigation that a criminal or illegal act may have been committed by someone. Because the background investigation will provide the Tribal Gaming Commission with confidential and sensitive information about applicants, great care should be taken ~to protect that information from any-inappropriate use. (E) Applications Review Within 14 calendar days following completion of the background investigation the Tribal Gaming Commission shall review each application and all background investigation and criminal history reports to determine if the applicant meets the standards for issuance of the requested license. (F) Standards for Issuance of License No license shall be granted unless and until the applicant has satisfied the Tribal Gaming Commission that the applicant: (1) Is a person of good character, honesty, and integrity; (2) Is a person whose background, reputation, and associations will not result in adverse publicity for the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri; (3) Meets the eligibility standard set forth in Section VII.D. of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance; and (4) Would not be denied a license for cause in accordance with Section V.G, below, or Section 21 of the Tribal-State Compact. (G) Denial (1) Mandatory Denials The Tribal Gaming Commission must deny an application for any class of license if, in the Tribal Gaming Commissions opinion, the applicant does not meet the standards :~~required for issuance of the requested license. In addition, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall deny a license to any applicant whenever the applicant or any person with a five percent (5~) or more ownership interest therein: (a) Has withheld pertinent information or has made false statements on the gaming license applications; (b) Has attempted to bribe a Council member, Tribal Gaming Commission member or any other person in an attempt to avoid or circumvent tribal law or any other applicable law; Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 16 .7 (c) Has offered something of value, or a loan, financing or other thing of value to a Tribal Gaming Commission member, a subordinate employee or any person participating in any gaming activity; (d) Has knowingly promoted, played or participated in any gaming activity operated in violation of tribal law; (e) Has been knowingly involved in the falsification of books or records whichrelate to a transaction connected with the operation of gaming activity; (f) Has been convicted of, or has entered a plea of nob contendere to, any crime involving gaming or embezzlement; (g) Has been determined by the Tribal. Gaming Commission, the National Indian Gaming Commission or the State~-Gaming Agency to have present or prior activities, criminal record, if any, or reputation, habits and associations which pose a threat to the public interest or to the effective regulation of gaming, or create or enhance the dangers of unsuitable, unfair, or illegal practices in the conduct of gaming, provided, that any conviction more than five years before the commencement of employment by the Tribe shall not be considered under this Subsection. (h) Has denied the Tribe or the State access to any place at which gaming required to be licensed under the Tribal-State Compact is being conducted or who has failed to produce for inspection or audit any book, record, document, or other item required by the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, Tribal-State Compact or any regulations promulgated pursuant to either; (i) Has failed to pay any tribal taxes and additions to taxes, including penalties and interest; (j) Has been found guilty of any violation or attempt or conspiracy to violate any law, rule or regulation pertaining to gaming in any jurisdiction for which suspension or termination of employment or a license might be imposed in such jurisdiction; or (k) Has been suspended from operating any gaming in another jurisdiction or who has had a license to conduct such gaming canceled, revoked, suspended or limited for any reason. (2) Permissive Denials (a) Without limiting the Tribal Gaming Commissions discretion to deny any application, if, in the Tribal Gaming Commissions judgment, such a denial is in the interests of Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 17 1 the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or public, the Tribal Gaming Commission may deny an application if the applicant: (i) Committed, attempted, or conspired to commit any crime of moral turpitude,larceny, any felony or a gross misdemeanor involving theft, embezzlement, fraud, or violence; (ii) Was identified in the published reports of any federal or state legislative or executive body as being a member or associate of organized crime, or as being of notorious and unsavory reputation; or (iii) Had a gaming license revoked by this Tribal Gaming Commission or the gaming commission or gaming regulatory body of any federally recognized Indian Tribe, State,.or foreign country; (iv) Failed to exercise discretion and sound judgment to prevent incidents which might reflect on the reputation of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri; (v) Permitted persons who are visibly intoxicated to participate in gaming activity; (vi) Catered to, assisted, employed, or associated with, either socially or in business affairs, persons of notorious or unsavory reputation or who have extensive police records, or persons who have defied investigative or other bodies acting on behalf of the United States, or the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri, or employing either directly or through a contract, or any other means, of any firm or individual in any capacity where the reputation of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri is liable to be damaged because of the unsuitability or unethical methods of the firm or individual; (vii) Employed in any gaming operation any person whom the Tribal Gaming Commission, any other gaming regulatory agency, or any court has found guilty of cheating or using any improper device in connection with any game, whether as a licensee, or player, except that the Tribal Gaming Commission may waive this restriction where the violation occurred in the context of a dispute between a tribe and a state over the scope of permitted games; (b) In addition to the foregoing, the Tribal Gaming Commission, with the concurrence of the Tribal Council, may deem any activity on the part of a licensee, his agents, or employees that is in any way contrary to the public health, Sac and Pox Gaing Regulationi, 9/30/97 18 safety, morals, good order, and general welfare of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri, or that would reflect or tend to reflect discredit on the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri, as an unsuitable method of operation and cause for denial of a license Cc) The Tribal Gaming Commission may deny an application at any time during the application process, including after granting preliminary approval to the application. To the extent not prohibited by State or Tribal law, the -Tribal Gaming Commission shall promptly notify an applicant that his/her application was denied and shall specify the reasons for the denial, including a list of criminal conviction(s), date(s), and location(s), if any, that contributed to the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision to deny the application. If an application was denied as a result of information contained in- the applicants FBI identification_record, the applicant shall also be advised of the procedures to change, correct, or update the record as set forth in Title 28 CFR, Section 16.34. (H) Category III License Approval If, in the Tribal Gaming Commissions judgment, the applicant meets the standards for issuance of a license and all application and investigation fees are fully paid, the Tribal Gaming Commission may approve the application and issue the license. (I) License Approvals If, in the Tribal Gaming Commissions judgment, the applicant meets the standards for issuance of a license and all application and investigation fees, if any, are fully paid, the Tribal Gaming Commission may grant its preliminary approval of the application. At its discretion, the Tribal Gaming Commission may also issue a temporary license. A temporary license shall not be valid for more than 60 days. Upon completion of the background investigation and the review process provided for in these regulations, the Tribal Gaming Commission may issue a regular license. (J) Procedures for Forwarding Applications and Reports for Key Employees and Primary Management Officials to the National Indian Gaming Commission (1) When a key employee or primary management official begins work at a gaming operation authorized by the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and these regulations, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall forward to the National Indian Gaming Commission a completed application for employment and conduct the background investigation and make the determination referred to in accordance with these regulations. (2) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall forward the report referred to in Section V (K) of these regulations to the National Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulation., 9/30/97 19 Indian Gaming Commission within 60 days after an employee begins work or within 60 days of the approval of this Title by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission. (3) The gaming operation shall not employ as a key employee or primary management official a person who does not have a license after 90 days. (K) Report to the National Indian Gaming Commission (1) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall prepare and forward to the National Indian Gaming Commission an investigative report on each background investigation of a primary management official and key employee. An investigative report shall include all of the following: (a) Steps taken in conducting a ---background investigation; (b) Results obtained; (c) Conclusions reached; and (d) The bases for those conclusions. (2) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall submit, with the investigative report, a copy of the eligibility determination made under Section VII.D. of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance and Section V(F) of these regulations. (3) If a license is not issued to an applicant, the Tribal Gaming Commission: (a) Shall notify the National Indian Gaming Commission; and (b) May forward copies of its eligibility determination and investigative report (if any) to the National Indian Gaming Commission for inclusion in the Indian Gaming Individuals Records System. (4) With respect to key employees and primary management officials, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall retain applications for employment and reports (if any) of background investigations for inspection by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission or his or her designee for no less than three (3) years from the date of termination of employment. CL) Granting a Key Employee or Primary Management Official Gaming License (1) If, within a thirty (30) day period after the National Indian Gaming Commission receives a report, the National Indian Gaming Commission notifies the Tribal Gaming Commission that it has no objection to the issuance of a license pursuant to a license Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulatiou, 9/30/97 20 .1 application filed by a key employee or a primary management official for whom the Tribal Gaming Commission has provided an application and investigative report to the National Indian Gaming Commission, the Tribal Gaming Commission may issue a license to such applicant. (2) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall respond to a request for additional information from the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission concerning a key employee or a primary management official who i-s the subject of a report. Such-arequest shall suspend the 30-day period under subsection (a) of this section until the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission receives the additional information. (3) If, within the thirty (30) day period described above, the National Indian Gaming Commission provides the Tribal Gaming Commission with a statement itemizing objections to the issuance of a license to a key employee or to a primary management official for whom the Tribal Gaming Commission has provided an application and investigative report to the National Indian Gaming Commission, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall reconsider the application, taking into account the objections itemized by the National Indian Gaming Commission. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall make the final decision whether to issue a license to such applicant. (4) The Tribal Gaming Commission may issue a license, subject to the provisions of the Tribal Gaming Ordinance, Tribal-State Compact, and related regulations to all other eligible individuals and entities without submission to the National Indian Gaming Commission. (5) If, after the issuance of a license, the National Indian Gaming Commission receives reliable information indicating that a key employee or a primary management official is not eligible for employment under 25 CFR § 558.2, and the National Indian Gaming Commission so notifies the Tribal Gaming Commission, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall (1) suspend such license in accordance with this Title, (2) notify in writing the licensee of the suspension and the proposed revocation, and (3) commence liOense revocation procedures. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall notify the National Indian Gaming Commission of the Nations decision whether to revoke or reinstate the license. (6) If, after the issuance of a license, an event occurs that would have made the licensee ineligible for a license if such event had occurred prior to the issuance of the license, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall (1) suspend the license in accordance with this Title, (2) notify in writing the licensee of the suspension and the proposed revocation, and (3) commence license revocation procedures. (M) License Limitations and Restrictions No license shall be Bac and Pox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 23. valid unless signed by the Chairperson or designate of the Tribal Gaming Commission. The Tribal Gaming Commission may limit the term of the license or place such conditions thereon_as it may deem necessary to protect the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or public interest. (N) Hearings All persons denied a license shall be informed of their right to a hearing before the Tribal Gaming Commission. Hearings to consider the denial of a license shall be conducted in accordance with the hearing provisions of section VI with~the following additional requirements: (1) The applicant must state in his/her written request for a hearing the reasons s/he believes the application should be approved. (2) The appi-icant shall also include copies of alldocuments supporting the applicants position, including police records and reports, character references, and other relevant information. (3) Failure by the applicant to provide this information shall be deemed just cause to deny the applicants request for a hearing or, if the hearing is held ont he premise that the required information was provided, the Tribal Gaming Commission may deem the omitted information as a willful attempt to deceive the Tribal Gaming Commission and shall deny the application. (0) Appeals Any applicant denied a license following a hearing by the Tribal Gaming Commission may appeal the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision. The appeal must be made in accordance with the hearing and appeal provisions of Section VI of these regulations. (P) Waivers (1) Any enrolled member of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or other Native American with established ties tothe Sac and Fox tribal lands denied an application for a Category III license may request a waiver of the Category III license standards. Waivers may not be considered for any non-Native American resident of the Sac and Fox tribal lands, community or any other person not enrolled as a member of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri. Waivers may not be considered when the application is for a license. The eligible applicant must show that a waiver is in the best interests of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or the Tribal Gaming Commission may not grant the requested waiver. (2) The procedures for requesting and considering a waiver are the same as those for hearings before the Tribal Gaming Commission with the following additional requirements: Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulationa. 9/30/97 22 1 (a) If the requested waiver involves any of the following criminal offenses, the waiver applicant must provide copies of all police and court records relating to his/her conviction(s), probation officer reports, character references, and any other information relevant to proving the applicant is now of good character: (i) Any felony conviction involving crimes of violence, dishonesty, theft, or moral turpitude within the last-five (5) years; or (ii) Any other felony conviction within the last two (2) years. (3) The Tribal Gaming Commission may also require that any applicant for a waiver provide the Tribal Gaming Commission with copies of police, court, and other records related to any criminal or civil charges made against the applicant. The--waiver applicant will follow all other procedures for Tribal Gaming Commission hearings and must appear in person before the Tribal Gaming Commission to present his/her arguments that the issuance of a license would be in the best interests of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri. (Q) ExiDirations (1) Except for a facility license and a manufacturerdistributor license, the expiration date of each license shall be determined by the licensees birth date. The license shall expire on the licensees next birth date if this date occurs six months or later from the date the license was issued. The license shall expire one year from the licensees next birthday if the next birthday occurs within six months of the license issue date. (2) A manufacturer-distributor license shall expire not later than one year from the date it was issued. (3) A facility license shall expire not later than one year from the date it was issued. (4) The expiration schedules in this section describe the maximum period for which a license may be granted. The Tribal Gaming Commission may issue any license for a shorter period if the Tribal Gaming Commission deems the shorter period is necessary to adequately protect the interests of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or the public. (R) Renewals Subject to the power of the Tribal Gaming Commission to deny, revoke, suspend, or limit licenses, any gaming license in force may be renewed for the next succeeding period upon proper application for renewal and payment of applicable license and investigation fees as required by law and the regulations of the Tribe or the requirements of the Tribal Gaming Commission. The Sac and Pox Gandng R.gulationa, 9/30/97 23 Tribal Gaming Commission shall encourage license holders to apply for a license renewal at least 30 days prior to expiration of the current license, but the Tribal Gaming Commission may not accept a renewal application more than 120 days prior to expiration of the current license (S) Identification Badges (1) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall issue an identification badge to every person granted a license. Th-e identification badge shall include the licensees photograph, name, license, department and five digit identification number unique to the individual, name of the gaming operation by which they are employed or to which they provide services, expiration date of the license, Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri or Casino or Commission logo, and such other identifying marks deemed necessary by the Tribal Gaming Commission to readily identify legitimate badges from counterfeit badges. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall direct the preparation and issuance of identification badges pursuant to procedures established by the Tribal Gaming Commission. An identification badge may not be issued until after the applicants application is approved and the license signed by the chairman or designee of the Tribal Gaming Commission. An identification badge may be issued to the holder of an approved temporary license. (2) The licensee shall be required to carry the identification badge on his or her person or wear in plain view at all times s/he is on duty, or in the case of a primary management official of a management contractor, whenever s/he is at the gaming establishment. A licensee is required to promptly show his/her identification badge to any person requesting to inspect the badge. (3) Every gaming employee shall at all times while on duty wear a identification license badge issued by the Commission. Undercover security personnel performing legitimate security or monitoring functions are not required to wear said badge. (4) The licensee shall be required to surrender his/her photo identification badge when: the badge expires; when a new license is issued; when the licensees association with the gaming operation ends, whether or not the termination is voluntary; or when the license is suspended or revoked. (5) Any person who has lost, damaged or destroyed his/her photo identification badge must report the loss to the Tribal Gaming Commission as soon as possible, but in no case later than within 24 hours after the loss or discovery of the loss. Replacement of the first lost photo identification badge may be made for a fee of $25. Subsequent lost photo identification badges may be replaced for a fee of $50. Sac and Fox Gaming Ragulation., 9/30/97 24 (6) Renewal of photo identification badges shall be made for a fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) (T) Employment of Unlicensed Persons P~ohibited A licensee shall not employ any person or enter into any contract or agreement for services with any person in a capacity for which that person is required to obtain a license if that person does not possess the proper and valid license as required by these regulations. The gaming operation shall immediately discharge any employee and cancel any con-tract or agreement upon notificationby the Tribal Gaming Commission that the employees or contractors license has been revoked by the Tribal Gaming Commission or that the employee or contractor does not possess the required license. (U) Facility License Requirements (1) License Fee There shall be no fee for receiving a facility license. (2) Operating Plan (a) Every facility licensee shall at all times maintain on file with the Tribal Gaming Commission a current operating plan, verified by the affidavit of the operations chief executive officer, including, but not limited to: days and hours of operation; the maximum number and type of gaming tables or devices expected to be uncovered or in use at any time during the year; the number of gaming tables or devices expected to be in actual use during the first month of the report year; and the duly approved operating budget. The approved operating budget shall be submitted to the Tribal Gaming Commission within one week of its approval by the operations manager but not later than two weeks prior to the beginning of the operations new fiscal year. (b) Any significant changes to the operating plan shall be reported to the Tribal Gaming Commission in writing no more than two weeks following the end of the month in which the change occurred. Significant changes include, but are not limited to, a change of 15%- or more in the number of gaming tables or devices uncovered or in use; a change of 15% or more in the net profit forecast for the balance of the current year; or a change in the operations fiscal year or accounting policies. (3) Primary Management Official/Key Employee Report (a) Each facility licensee shall submit an annual primary management official/key employee report to the Tribal Gaming Commission on a form to be furnished by the Tribal Gaming Commission. Sac and Fox Gaing R.gulationa, 9/30/97 25 1 (b) The annual primary management official/key employee report shall identify every primary management official and key employee of the operation and their annual wage or salary_ compensation. The report shall also include an organization chart for the operation and a description of each primary management officials and key employees duties and responsibilities, and the authority delegated to each individual identified in the report. Cc) Any changes, additions, or deletions to any information contained within -the annual key employee report which occurs subsequent to the filing of the report and prior to the filing of the next years report shall be reported to the Tribal Gaming Commission in writing no more than two weeks following the month during which the change, addition, or deletion occurred. (4) Financial Reports (a) Annual audited financial report. The operations chief executive officer shall ensure an annual audit is commenced by an independent CPA within 30 days following the end of the operations fiscal year. Within two weeks following its receipt by the operations chief executive officer and in no case later than three months after the close of the operations fiscal year, every facility licensee shall provide the Tribal Gaming Commission with a complete and audited financial statement of gaming operations for that fiscal year. The financial statement and audit report shall be prepared by an independent certified public accountant. (b) Monthly financial reports. Before the 25th day of the following month, every facility licensee shall provide the Tribal Council with monthly and year-to-date reports of the gaming operations financial performance. The reports shall include, at a minimum, detailed income statements and balance sheets. Cc) The Tribal Council or the Tribal Gaming Commission may, at its sole discretion, inspect or audit the financial records, management procedures, or other aspects of a licensed operations activities. The Tribal Council or the Tribal Gaming Commission may employ independent auditors or investigators to perform such inspections or audits as the Tribal Council or Tribal Gaming Commission deems necessary. (5) Posting of Facility License A facility license by the Tribal Gaming Commission must be prominently displayed at all times upon the licensed premises in such position as it may be observed by persons participating in the gaming activities. Sac and Fox Gaming R.gulatiena, 9/30/97 26 1 VI. PENALTIES (A) Suspensions (1) Emergency Suspensions The chief executive officer or his/her subordinates may seize an individuals identification badge only, not license, and exclude that individual from the gaming establishment for up to 72 hours if, in the chief executive officers judgment, the licensees actions or commissions pose a threat to the integrity of the gaming operation, the safety of the general public, patrons, or other employees, or the image and reputation of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri. The chief executive officer shall immediately notify the Tribal Gaming Commission of the emergency suspension. At its discretion, the Tribal Gaming Commission may take formal suspension action against the individual. - (2) Formal Suspensions (a) The Tribal Gaming Commission may issue an order suspending a license if the Tribal Gaming Commission has reasonable cause to believe that: (i) the suspension is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, morals, good order, or general welfare of the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri; or (ii) the licensee may have violated any condition or requirement imposed on the licensee by the Tribal Gaming Commission or applicable laws or regulations. (b) The Tribal Gaming Commission shall suspend or revoke a license if it violates Section 22 of the Tribal-State Compact. (c) The suspension order becomes effective when it is signed by the chairman of the Tribal Gaming Commission and served upon the holder of the license (d) The order suspending the license must state the reason for the suspension. (e) The suspension order shall state that the licensee shall forfeit his/her right to a hearing and any appeal if s/he fails properly to request a hearing before the Tribal Gaming Commission within 30 days following the effective date of the order. (f) By the end of the next business day following the effective suspension date of a license, the Tribal Gaming Sac and Fox Gaping Ragulationa, 9/30/97 27 I Commission shall notify the chief executive officer of the gaming operation employing or contracting services of the suspended licensee of the Tribal Gaming Commissions action. The chief executive officer shall immediately suspend the employee or contract and shall not pay the employee or contractor any wages, benefits, or other compensation except for legitimate services actually rendered prior to the suspension. If the suspension involves the license of the chief executive officer or the facility, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall notify the Tribal Counc~il. (g) The Tribal Gaming Commission may suspend a license for any period of time up to one year in length. (h) The Tribal Gaming Commission may reinstate a license only after the licensee resolves to the Tribal Gaming Commissions satisfaction t-he cause for making the suspension. (B) Civil Penalties The Tribal Gaming Commission may impose a civil penalty or penalties against any licensee reasonably determined by the Tribal Gaming Commission to have violated any of these regulations, whether or not the Tribal Gaming Commission has suspended the license. If the Tribal Gaming Commission deems a penalty is appropriate, it shall notify the licensee and the State Gaming Agency of the Tribal Gaming Commissions intent to impose the penalty and set a time and date to hear the licensees rebuttal of the Tribal Gaming Commissions determination. The licensee shall be required to pay any penalty before the license may be reinstated. (C) Criminal Prosecution The Tribal Gaming Commission shall promptly submit any knowledge or evidence of criminal wrongdoing that it may discover to appropriate law enforcement officials for prosecution. (D) Revocations In addition to any penalty the Tribal Gaming Commission may elect to impose against a licensee, the Tribal Gaming Commission may revoke a suspended gaming license if the Tribal Gaming Commission determines that the licensee: (a) Does not meet the minimum standards or requirements for issuance of a license; (b) Failed to disclose, misstated, or otherwise misled the Tribal Gaming Commission about any fact contained within any application for a license; (c) Violated any of the terms or conditions under which the Tribal Gaming Commission granted the license; or (d) Failed to request a hearing before the Tribal Gaming Commission to reinstate a suspended license. Sac and Pox Gaming R.gulatiena, 9/30/97 28 The Tribal Gaming Commission shall suspend or revoke a license if it violates Section 22 of the Tribal-State Compact. Any person or other legal entity who has had a license revoked by the Tribal Gaming Commission shall not be eligible to apply for a new license for one year after the effective date of the revocation. (E) Hearings (1) Any party subject to an action by the Tribal Gaming Commission imposing apenalty or denying, suspending or revoking a license: (a) Has a right to a hearing before the Tribal Gaming Commission on the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision or order; (b) Must - make a written request to the Tribal Gaming Commission for a hearing within 30 days following the effective date of the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision or order. Failure to properly request a hearing in a timely manner waives the persons right to a hearing or any other appeal of the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision. (2) After receipt of a written request for a hearing, the Tribal Gaming Commission shall schedule a hearing for not later than fourteen calendar days after the request was received. Following the hearing the Tribal Gaming Commission shall make a decision to uphold, modify, or reverse the order imposing the denial, suspension, revocation, or penalty(s) (3) Throughout the hearing and any appeals that may follow, the appellant shall have the following rights: (a) The right to appear personally before the Tribal Gaming Commission; (b) The right to face and question the appellants accuser; and (c) The right to representation by any party of the appellant s choosing. (4) The Tribal Gaming Commission must determine that the offense or other cause for the denial, suspension, revocation, or penalty more likely than not occurred, or the Tribal Gaming Commission shall withdraw the order or penalty. The Tribal Gaming Commission shall issue its decision in writing. (5) The licensee may request and the chairman of the Tribal Gaming Commission shall grant a time extension or extensions of any reasonable period necessary for the licensee to prepare for the hearing. Sac and Pox Ganiug R.gulationa, 9/30/97 29 (6) The Tribal Gaming Commission may amend its order at any time. (F) Appeals (1) Appeals to the Tribal Council (a) The licensee against whom a penalty was imposed or whose license was suspended or revoked or an applicant denied a license and who, following a hearing before the Tribal Gaming Commission, remains dissatisfied with the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision may appeal that decision to the Tribal Council. The licensee must file a notice of appeal to the Tribal Council in writing within 30 days after the Tribal Gaming Commission issued its final decision or the right to this and further appeals shall be forfeited. (b) At the Tribal Chairmans direction, the Tribal Council shall meet within 30 days following receipt of the written appeal and consider the appellants request. (c) The Tribal Council shall review the Tribal Gaming Commissions written decision and the Tribal Gaming Commissions hearing records and exhibits. The Tribal Council may reverse or modify the Tribal Gaming Commissions decision only if the Tribal Council determines that the decision was arbitrary or capricious or the Tribal Gaming Commission clearly erred in its interpretation or application of these regulations. At its discretion, the Tribal Council may or may not hold a hearing. (d) The Tribal Council shall issue its determination in writing within ten calendar days following the date of its decision. (e) The decision of the Tribal Council shall be final and not otherwise reviewable. VII. GAMING OPERATIONS (A) Hours of Operation All games permitted by these regulations and the Tribal Gaming Ordinance may be conducted 24 hours per day, seven days per week throughout the year unless otherwise ordered by the Tribal Gaming Commission or the Tribal Council. (B) Wagers with Chips Only Except as may otherwise be permitted by house rules approved by the Tribal Gaming Commission, a wager may be accepted in any card game only when the wager is made with chips issued by the Sac & Fox Casino within which the wager is made. Sac aM Pox Gaming Rsgulationa, 9/30/97 30 (C) House Rules _(1) Filing The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Sac & Fox Casino shall develop and submit to the Tribal Gaming Commission detailed house rules governing all games offered or played in the facility. Any changes or amendments to the rules shall be immediately forwarded to the Tribal Gaming Commission with a written description of the effect of the change or amendment. All rules are subject to approval by the Tribal Gaming Commission and, to the extent re~tfired by the Compact, Section 7(B) (3)7 the State Gaming Agency. (2) Posting A summary of the house rules, including wager limits, and a notice that the complete house rules are available for review upon request, shall at all times be posted by the CEO of the Sac & Fox Casino in a conspicuous and publicly accessible location. -At least one copy shall be posted in-each room where gaming occurs. Betting limits applicable to each gaming table shall be displayed at such gaming table. Management shall take all steps necessary to promptly comply with any persons request to review the complete house rules. (D) Tournaments Tournaments of poker or other card games authorized by the Sac and Fox Gaming Ordinance are permitted. The Sac & Fox Casino may charge and retain a buy-in fee from all tournament participants. All other entry fees shall be returned to the persons participating as players in the tournament. All tournaments shall be conducted with tournament chips that have no cash value. (E) Electronic Gaming Equipment No electronic, computer or other technologic aid to any Class II game, or any electronic gaming device, may be used or possessed on Sac and Fox tribal lands unless each said device has been authorized, inspected and approved by the Tribal Gaming Commission or its designee, and any such use or possession is further conditioned upon strict compliance with any requirements imposed by the Tribal Gaming Commission concerning verification and monitoring of the reliability, integrity and security of each said device and each component thereof prior to the introduction of any such equipment into service. (F) Gambling by Employees (1) No employee of the Sac & Fox Casino shall be permitted to participate as a player in any game operated and by the Sac & Fox Casino except as provided for herein. (a) Casino Personnel required to have a Category 1 background investigation in accordance with Appendix C of the Compact, regardless of their license classification, shall not participate in any gambling within the gaming facility. B~c and Fox Ga~.thg Rsgulationa, 9/30/97 31 1 (b) Video gaming supervisors and technicians, Reconciliation or Mechanical Information Systems staff may gamble through the use of table games and other gaming equipment, except that they may not gamble through the use of video gaming equipment. (C) Video gaming attendants and change personnel may gamble through the use of table games, video gaming devices and other gaming equipment. (d) Table game and security employees-may gamble through the use of video gaming and other gaming equipment, except that they may not gamble through the use of table games. (e) All non-gaming employees may gamble through the use of table games, video gaming equipment and other gaming equipment. (f) Notwithstanding the foregoing, an employee may only participate as a player in a game not banked by the Sac & Fox Casino as long as the employee is not assigned employment responsibilities which would conflict, or appear to conflict, with his/her participation as a player in that game. (2) A person employed by the licensed establishment to start poker games (props) may participate as a player while on duty as long as such participation is under the direction of the Sac & Fox Casinos management, and provided that neither the licensed establishment nor any gaming management employee receives any portion of said persons winnings or reimburses said person for any losses. (3) Under no circumstances may a Tribal Gaming Commissioner, tribal gaming inspector, or any employee of the Tribal Gaming Commission participate in any game. (4) This section shall not be construed to allow minors or persons otherwise ineligible to participate in the games as a player from so participating. (G) Credit Prohibited No credit shall be extended by a gaming operation to any player. This prohibition shall not be construed, however, to prevent players or customers from utilizing bank cards, credit cards, and other forms of personal credit when the credit is guaranteed by an independent financial institution. (H) Employment Restriction No person who is either an immediate family member or who resides in the household of a Tribal Gaming Commissioner or Tribal Council member shall be eligible for employment in the gaming operation. Upon the appointment of a Tribal Gaming Commissioner or election or appointment of a Tribal Council member, any person who is not eligible for employment S~c and Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 32 -I within the gaming operation because of this provision shall receive 30-days notice and then his or her employment shall be terminated. and Fox Gaming R.gulationa, 9/30/97 33
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/55/557F1FEA27AAFE9084B8AC4A284FA27B_qds13.pdf.json	AL-QUDS Al - Arabi Volume 17 - Issue 5171 Friday 13 January 2006 ‡1⁄4 ±¥≤∂ W−(« Ë– ±≥ ‡ ≤∞∞∂ ©d1UM1® w1⁄2U¦« Êu1⁄2U ±≥ WFL'« μ±∑± œbF« ‡ ...dAŽ WFÐU)« WM)« 13 W{U1— 3ô« ”Q w ·b1⁄4 ŸdÝ√ dB rÝUÐ q− ÂbIK WOI1d ô« w* Âb?I« ...dJ d?B?0 V2?2M0 VŽô —u?BM0 s1√ kH?2?×1 ∫“d?21Ë— ‡ ...d1⁄4U?I« o 3ô« ”Q WuDÐ w* ·b1⁄4 Ÿd?Ý√ VŠUF VIKÐ oÐU?)« pU0e« VŽôË UMOF?)2« —uBM0 ·b1⁄4 ¡U?łË Æ±πμ∑ ÂUŽ w* U?NRöD1⁄2« cM0 WuD3« a1—Uð —«b?0 vKŽ WO?I1dô« 3ô« ”Q?? s0 ‰Ëô« —Ëb« w ÊuÐU??G«Ë d??B??0 ...«—U??3?0 W?1«bÐ s0 W??O1⁄2UŁ ≤≥ b??FÐ Í“«dŠ« vKŽ U0UŽ ±± —Ëd0 rž—ò “d21Ëd —uBM0 ‰uI1Ë ±ππ¥ ÂUŽ f1⁄2u2Ð WOI1dô« W1ËdJ« wðU?O??Š w ·b1⁄4 r1⁄4« Ád?3?2?Ž«Ë Ád?–« X“ U?0 wM1⁄2« ô« w?U?G« ·b?N« «c1⁄4 s0 œËb×0 dOž U0UL21⁄4« ‰U1⁄2 Ê« b?FÐ WFÝ«Ë ...dNý wM×M0 ·bN« Ê« p– w* V3)«Ë Æå...«—U3« VIŽ —bF w2« n×B«Ë WOUF« ¡U31⁄2ô« ôUË ·b?N« «c1⁄4 sŽ X3?2 w2« n×?B«Ë ö?:« s0 r2{ œb?FÐ kH?2Š«ò ·U?{«Ë «c1⁄4Ë ÆWOÝU?OI« ÂUR—ö fOMOł WŽu?Ýu0 w* ö−)0 `3F« t1⁄2« ·b?NUÐ wðœUFÝË s0 WuD3« pKð w* d?B0 V22M?0 ÃËdš V3)Ð b1b?A« Êe(« sŽ wM{u?Ž ·bN« Æå±Ø≤ wU0 b1 vKŽ ©W1eN« dŁ«® WO1⁄2UL¦« —Ëœ ÂU?0« d?B?0 V2?2M?* W1«b?3« WÐd?{ s0 «d1d9 ÀöŁ b?F?Ð —u?BM0 ·b1⁄4 ¡U?łË W1u?R ...d? œb?Ý rŁ ...œ—U1 ≥μ b?FÐ vKŽ `3?F« v2?Š ...dJUÐ —u?BM0 Âb?IðË ÊuÐU?G« d?B0 “u?H2 ·«b1⁄4« WŁö?¦Ð p– b?FÐ wM0 Íc« ÊuÐUG?« v0d0 ”—U?Š „U3?ý XMJÝ wK1⁄4ô« vKŽ pU0eK “uH« ·b1⁄4 VŠU?F u1⁄4 —uBM0Ë ÆWO1⁄2UL¦« —Ëb b?FBðË dHFØ¥ —u?BM0 VFË ÆÃd3?)1⁄2U1⁄4u−Ð ±ππ¥ ÂU?Ž XL?OR« w2«Ë W?OI1d?ô« dÐu)« ”Q? w ÂUŽ pU?0eK rC1⁄2«Ë b1b(« WJ)« ÍœU1⁄2 v« qI21⁄2« rŁ wK1⁄4ô« ·u?HF w* TýU1⁄2 u1⁄4Ë W??OK;« ôuD?3« w* U??b1⁄4 μ∞ pU??0e« l?0 “d??Š«Ë t«e??2??Ž« v2??Š tÐ qþË ±ππ≤ Í—Ëœ W1b1⁄2« b?Š« b1b?(« WJ)« ÍœUM UÐ—b?0 U?}U?Š qL?F1Ë W?OI1d?ô«Ë W?OÐd?F«Ë ÆdB0 w1⁄2U¦« r)I« wMO2Mł—« VŽô l b'UF21 w1⁄2u2« w'UHB« w)1⁄2u2« Í—Ëb« VI q0UŠ w)RU?HB« ÍœU1⁄2 ‰UR ∫Í« wÐ u1 ‡“d21Ë— ‡ f1⁄2uð o ÍœU1⁄2 s0 u21dÐ Ëb1⁄2U0—« uOH?O wMO2Mł—ô« VŽö« r{ t1⁄2« fOL)« f0« ÂbI« ...dJ Ê« w)RUH?B« ÍœU1⁄2 fOz— ·UŠe« s1b« ÕöF ‰U?RË ÆwK1“«d3« ËdOMO0 uJO?2OKð« ÆÂUŽ ...b* o1d?H« ·uHF v?« tLC u?21dÐ Ëb1⁄2U0—« l0 wLÝ— ‚U?Hðô qFuð ÍœUM« u?21dÐ Ëb1⁄2U0—« VFË ÆW?I?HBK W?}U« W?LO?I« sŽ qOFU?Hð Í« ·U?Še« nAJ1 rË r{ wðQ1Ë ÆËdOMO0 uJO2OKð« v« tU?I21⁄2« q3R ...b×2« U1ôu«Ë 52Mł—ô« w* W1b1⁄2ô bF?Ð o1dH« ·u?HF e1eF?2 W1u2?A« ôUI?21⁄2ô« ...d2?* w* VŽö« «cN? w)RUH?B« sŽ ◊U?I1⁄2 XÝ ‚—U?HÐ w)1⁄2u?2« Í—Ëb?« W1b1⁄2« W?LzU?R w* lÐ«d« e?d« v« t?F?ł«dð Æ—bB2« włd2« w* d?HF v« ·b1⁄4 W?−O?2MÐ w1⁄2U?G« ÁdOE1⁄2 vKŽ Âb?I« ...dJ u?žuD« V22M0 “U?* ÆådO2)M«ò WM1b0 VFK0 vKŽ ¡UFÐ—ô« ¡U)0 ULNMOÐ XFLł w2« W1œu« ...«—U3« «œ«b?F?2?Ý« —UÞ« w* Xł—b1⁄2« w2« ...«—U?3« Ác1⁄4 ‰ö?š b?O?Šu« ·b?N« q−?ÝË VŽö« ̈d?B0 Íd?−?2Ý w2?« ≤∞∞∂ 3ö WO?I1d?ô« WuD3« U?OzU?NM 53?2?2M« Æ∑± WIORb« w ÍœUHË« wužuD« WŽu?L:« sL?{ ‰Ëô« —Ëb« U)?UM0 ÷u2?OÝ u?žuD« V22M0 Ê« v« —U?A1 5Š w ̈W?OÞ«dI1b« u?G1⁄2uJ«Ë ôu?G1⁄2«Ë ÊËdO?0UJ« U?32?2M0 V1⁄2U?ł v« WO1⁄2U?¦« U1dO−O1⁄2Ë ÍuÐU31“ U322M0 V1⁄2Uł v« WFÐ«d« WŽuL:« w* w1⁄2UG« V22M« VFK1 Æ‰UGOM)«Ë WM1b0 U?O31—bð «dJ)?F0 U?OUŠ Íd?−1 Èc« užuD« V2?2M0 dU?)1 Ê« dE2M1Ë W1dB« WLFU?F« v« ©WLFUF« f1⁄2uð »uMł «d20uKO ≤∑∞® WO?)1⁄2u2« åfRUHFò d?šô« u1⁄4 Íd−1 Íc« w1⁄2U?G« V2?2M« dU?)?OÝ U?LMOÐ ̈q3I?« X3)« Âu1 ...d1⁄4U?I« ̈WO?)1⁄2u2« W?LFUF« wRd?ý rK ±μ∞ bFÐ vKŽ ̈åd?O2)M«ò WM1b0 U?O31—bð «dJ)?F0 Æq3I« 5MŁô« Âu1 dB0 v« ̈W1œË ...«—U?30 w* q?3I« b?Šô« Âu1 w)1⁄2u?2« Ád?OE1⁄2 w1⁄2UG?« V22M« w?I2KO?ÝË fOL?)« f0« ¡U)?0 Íd−O?Ý Íc« w)1⁄2u2« V2?2MLK UN?Žu1⁄2 s0 WO1⁄2U?¦« ÊuJ2Ý w2« ≤∞∞∂ 3ö WOI1dô« WuD3« UOzUNM «œ«bF2Ý« w3OK« ÁdOE1⁄2 l0 W1œË ...«—U30 ÆÍ—U'« dNA« s0 s1dAF« s0 ¡«b2Ð« dB0 w Íd−2Ý VOG1 b' UMO21⁄2—uO vd ”—UŠ Íd WÐU0ô« V3Ð dNý« WŁöŁ VŽö« sŽ vËô« W?ł—b« Í—Ëœ w fUM?1 Íc« UMO?21⁄2—u?O? ÍœU1⁄2 ‰U?R ∫“d?21Ë— ‡ U?0Ë— o Íd* ÊUO2ÝU3OÝ ÁU0d0 ”—UŠ VOG1 Ê« lRu2« s0 t1⁄2« ¡UFÐ—ô« ÂbI« ...dJ wUD1ô« ÆÈd?)}« t?2?3d w3?OKB« ◊UÐd« w? t2ÐU?F« b?FÐ dN?ý« WŁöŁ ...b* U1—U?3« sŽ ...«—U?3??0 s0 ...d?O?šô« o?zU?Rb« w WÐU??Fô« s0 ©U?0U?Ž ≤μ® Íd??* w)1⁄2d?H?« v1⁄2U?ŽË ÂbDF« U?0bMŽ ¡UŁö?¦« U?}UD1« ”Q w* ”u?2Mu1 ÂU?0« U1⁄4d?)?š w2« UMO?21⁄2—uO? WKOKI« ÂU1ô« w* «—«d?R ¡U3Þô« c?22?OÝË ÆU?21ô«“ uKOÝ—U?0 fUM« o1dH« rłU?N0 t?łu1Ë ÆWÐUFô« Ãö?F WO?Š«dł W?OKL?F Íd* Ÿu?Cš 5F?21 «–« U0 ÊQ?AÐ W0œU?I« Í—Ëb« w* lÐ«d« e?d?« q2?×1 Íc« UMO?21⁄2—u?O? ...d?O?)?* W1u?R W?LD Íd?* »U?O?ž o1dH« wŽU?)0Ë —bB2« ”u?2Mu1 sŽ WDI1⁄2 ±≤ ‚—UHÐË WDI1⁄2 ≥∑ b?OFdÐ wUD1ô« UMO21⁄2—u?O* o«ËË Æq3?I« rÝu« UÐË—Ë« ‰UDÐ« Í—Ëœ WuDÐ w ÊUJ0 vKŽ ‰u?B×K wUD1ô« ËeOH1dð v« ”U?2OÝ ÊUO2ÝU3?OÝ wÞU}2Šô« tÝ—UŠ ‰U?I21⁄2« vKŽ qFHUÐ W?ł—b« Í—Ëœ w* VFK« ...d?3?š v« wðU?Ë— u?—U?0 YU?¦« ”—U?(« d?I?2?H1 U?LMOÐ ÆwU(« rÝu« W1«bÐ q3R U0—UÐ ÍœU1⁄2 s0 UMO21⁄2—uO v« rC1⁄2« Íd* ÊUË ÆvËô« uOK1u wK1“«d3« rłUN« w1⁄2U3Ýô« w U2Oš v« rCMOÝ vËô« W?ł—b« Í—Ëœ w f?UM1 Íc« wU?2?O?š ÍœU1⁄2 ‰U??R ∫“d?21Ë— ‡ b1—b?0 o v« rCMO?Ý uOK1u? Êu)U?ł wK1“«d3« r?łUN« Ê« ¡UF?Ð—ô« ÂbI« ...dJ w1⁄2U?3Ýô« o1dH VF?K1 rłUN« ÊUË ÆÕU?−MÐ WO?3D« ’u×H« Á“U?O2ł« b?FÐ o1dH« ·u?HF lRu1 Ê« lRu2« s0Ë ÆÍbMu?N« œ—ËuMO s0 ...—UŽô« qO?3Ý vKŽ wJO−K3« ud?2ÝË Â«uŽ« WFÐ—« ...b* wU?2Oš ·uHF v« ‰UI2?1⁄2ö fOL)« «bž «bIŽ ©U0U?Ž ±π® uOK1u u?OK1u “d?Š«Ë ÆÂb?I« ...dJ ÍbMu?N« œU%ô« s0 tÐ W?FU?)« ozUŁu« ‰uFË b?FÐ wU?2O?š q2?×1Ë ÆrÝu« «c1⁄4 ·«b1⁄4« ...d?A?Ž »U3?AK q1“«d?3« V2?2M0 VŽô u1⁄4Ë w1⁄2UŁ w ◊u?3N« WIDM0 sŽ ◊U?I1⁄2 w1⁄2ULŁ ‚—U?HÐ w1⁄2U3?Ýô« Í—Ëb« w* dýU?F« ed« ÆWuD3UÐ t rÝu0 »uM'« v« wULý Í—u VŽô ‰UI21⁄2« WIH0 qA v« ‰U?I21⁄2ö wU?Lý Í—u? VŽô ÂU0« ...—œU1⁄2 W?Fd d?¦Fð ∫“d?21Ë— ‡ ‰uO?Ý o ÍœU1⁄2 ÷d?ŽË Æ‰U?I??21⁄2ô« mK3?0 ‰u?Š U?ö?š V?3?)Ð W?OÐuM'« U1—u?? W1b1⁄2« b?Š« U1—u w Âb?I« ...dJ vËô« Wł—b« W1b1⁄2« Í—Ëœ w* fUM1 Íc« b21U1⁄2u1 Êu?OAM1« jÝu« jš V?Žô ¡«d?ý w1⁄2UÐU??}« X1« ”u?3??0«d?ł U1u??łU1⁄2 ÍœU1⁄2 vKŽ W??OÐuM'« r Íc«Ë w1⁄2UÐU?}?« ÍœUM« t?3KÞ Íc« mK3« Ê« ô« „U1⁄4 !u?1 s1⁄4« wU?L?A« Í—uJ« VFK« W?Fd* `2ð rË ÆwÐuM?'« Í—uJ« ÍœUMK U3?ÝUM0 sJ1 r tMŽ »U?IM« nAJ1 ...d1e?'« t?3?ý s0 wU?L?A?« dDA« w3?Žô s0 d?O?¦JK W?O?ÐuM'« U1—u? Í—Ëœ w* fOL)« f0« wÐuM?'« Í—uJ« ÍœUMK wMH« d\|b« „uÐ !uOł s1⁄4« ‰URË ÆW?L)I« UGK3?0 VKÞ X1« ”u3?0«dł U1ułU1⁄2 sJ s1⁄4« U?0bš vKŽ ‰u?B(« w* Vž—« XMò ÆåWIHB« d¦Fð p– bFÐ ÆÆÆp– qÐUI0 W1UGK «dO3 UOzUNM? q1⁄4Q2« w* qA* Íc« W}U?LA« U1—u V22M0 ·u?HF w* s1⁄4« „—UýË ÂU?F« s0 oŠô XRË w?* U?O1⁄2U« U?N?H?O?C?2?)ð w2« Âb?I« ...dJ W?K3?I« rU?F« ”Q? ...b?Š«Ë ...d0 rU?F« ”Q U?OzU?N1⁄2 w* W}?UL?A« U1—u V2?2M0 „—U?ý bRË ÆwU?(« ...d?LK UOzU?NMK XK1⁄4Q?2?* WOÐuM'« U?1—u U?0« Æ«d2K?J1⁄2« w* ±π∂∂ ÂUŽ w* p– ÊU?Ë Æw«u2« vKŽ WÝœU)« ≤∞∞∏ v2Š w1⁄2Uô« tJUý l ÁbIŽ œb1 Á«uUÝ« t?I1d l0 Áb?I?Ž Á«u0U?Ý« b«d?Oł w1⁄2Uô« wËb« r?łUN« œb?0 ∫» ·« ‡ 5dÐ o f0« —U?A?21⁄2ô« WF?Ý«u« åbKOÐò W?H?O?×F d?– U?0 V)?Š ≤∞∞∏ ÂUŽ v2?Š tJU?ý ÆfOL)« lORu?2« vI31Ë ‚UHð« v« UMKFuð b?I qł«ò tuR Á«u0U?Ý« sŽ WHO?×B« XKI1⁄2Ë Æ¢UOKJý ÊuJOÝ Íc« bIF« vKŽ ̈±πππ ÂU?Ž cM0 tJU?ý ·u?H?F w* U1⁄2U?ž w* œuu« ©U?0U?Ž ≤∑® Á«u?0U?Ý« VFK1Ë id« Ë« »U−1ôUÐ œd« w{U« ©d3L23Ý® ‰uK1« w tM0 X3KÞ ÍœUM« ...—«œ« X1⁄2UË Æq3I« ©uO1⁄2u1® Ê«d1eŠ w öF« wN2M1 Íc« ÁbIŽ b1b9 Õ«d2R« vKŽ ...dAŽ WFÐU)« WKŠd« bFÐ w1⁄2Uô« Í—Ëb« VOðdð w* lÐ«d« ed« tJUý q2×1Ë ÆWDI1⁄2 ¥¥ pK1 YOŠ bOFÐ ‚—UHÐ —bB21 aO1⁄2uO0 Êd1UÐ ÊUÐ ULKŽ ̈WDI1⁄2 ≥± bOFdÐ g2OHÝU u wÐdB« l b'UF21 UO u0 UJAð ...dJ Í—UGK3?« Í—Ëb« qDÐ UOu?F UJ)Að ÍœU1⁄2 ‰U?R ∫“d21Ë— ‡ UO?uF o dHOË« wÐdB« v0d« ”—UŠ l0 bRUFð t1⁄2« ¡UFÐ—ô« X1⁄2d21⁄2ô« vKŽ tFRu0 ÂbI« ·uH?F w* ©U0U?Ž ≥±® g2O?HÝU?u q×?OÝË ÆÂ«u?Ž« WŁöŁ ...b g2O?HÝU?u Êu)0U?Ý o1d v« qI21⁄2« Íc« g2?O)U0 ÊU1œ tMÞ«u?0 q×0 UOu?F UJ)Að sJ1 r Íc« oÐU?)« œ«d?łu?OÐ pO1⁄2e?OK1“ v0d?0 ”—U?Š ‰URË Æw?d2« —u?3?Ý UJ)Að q¦?0 dO3 o1d l0 b?RUF2K ...œUF?)UÐ dFý«ò o1d* Í« l0 bI?FÐ UD3ðd0 ÆåUOuF U?OÐdF V2?2M0 l0 WOËœ U1—U?3?0 ÀöŁ VF Íc« g2O?HÝU?u ·U?{«Ë UO?uF UJ)Að ...b?ŽU)0Ë Í—U?GK3« Í—ËbUÐ “uH« u1⁄4 wb1⁄4ò œu?Ýô« q3'«Ë Æåq3I« rÝu« UÐË—Ë« ‰UDÐ« Í—Ëb q1⁄4Q2« vKŽ ...—Ëœ ‰Ë« ‚öD1⁄2« vKŽ Êd nB1⁄2 bFÐ q3I« WFL'« ...d1⁄4UI« w oKDMð ≤μ ‡« WOI1d ô« 3ô« ”Q WuDÐ o?KDMð ∫» ·« ‡ U?O?Ýu??I?O1⁄2 o Âu1 ≤μ ‡« UNð—Ëœ w WOI1dô« 3ô« ”Q XIKD1⁄2« X1⁄2U?Ë d?B?0 w q3?I« WF?L?'« ©d1«d?3® ◊U?3ý ±∞ w* ...d?0 ‰Ëô UO?LÝ— ̈ÂuÞd???)« w?* ÍbK3?« VFK« v?KŽ ±πμ∑ ©u?O1⁄2u1® Ê«d1eŠ ∏ v« œu?Fð U?NðdJ sJ w* å«bOMO«ò ‚bM w* lL?2ł« U0bMŽ ±πμ∂ rU?Ý e?1e?F« b?3??Ž ÊU1d?B« ‰U?G?ðd?3« rOK(« b3?Ž ÊuO1⁄2«œu)«Ë nOD bL?×0Ë bL?×0 rOK(« b?3ŽË b?L×?0 ÍËbÐË œ«bý ...dJ «uARUMO? q1Ë œd* wI1d« »uM'«Ë WIÐU)0 ‚öÞ«Ë wI1dô« œU%ô« fOÝQð ÆWOI1dô« ...—UI« U322M« 5Ð b?FÐ WO?)O?ÝQ2?« WO?FL?'« bI?F1⁄2«Ë w* åqOðË« Ê«d?žò ‚bM* w* dN?ý« WO1⁄2U?LŁ ...«—U?????3« s?0 50u?1 q3?????R ÂuÞd?????)« Ê«œu?)« 5Ð vËô« ...—ËbK W?OŠU?22?ô« ±≠≤ ...dOšô« “u* sŽ d?HÝ« w2« dB0Ë ·bN« qO−)ð ·dý ̈X√— ÍdB« ‰U1⁄2Ë Æ UOzUNM« w* ‰Ëô« u1⁄4 U¦UŁ U322M0 vËô« ...—Ëb« XL{Ë U?OI1d?« »uMł bF?3?2Ý« U?LMOÐ UOÐu?OŁ« X1⁄2U? w2« Íd?BMF« e?OO?L?2« W?ÝUO?) WËœ ‰ËU UNLÝ« dB0 XK−ÝË ÆUN−N2Mð w U??O?Ðu??OŁ« vK?Ž U1⁄4“u??HÐ VI?K« “d??% W?31b« U?NK−?Ý d?HF≠¥ W?O1⁄2U?¦« ...«—U?3« ÆUNFOLł U?NÐUA?0 u1—UMO)« ÊU? ‡±πμπ dB?0 ‡ dB0 UN2UC2Ý« w2« WO1⁄2U¦« WuD3« w* ...«—U?3« w? Æ U?3?2??2M0 WŁöŁ W??—U?A0 d?HF≠¥ U?OÐuOŁ« vKŽ d?B0 “U?* vËô« ÆVIKUÐ XEH2Š«Ë ±≠≤ Ê«œu)« vKŽ rŁ dB?0 s0 q rE1⁄2 Ê« bFÐ ∫∂≤ U?OÐuOŁ« ‡ U??OÐu??OŁ« —Ëœ ¡U??ł Wu?D3« Ê«œu??)«Ë X)?Ý« w?2« X)« ‰Ëb« Èb?Š« U??N1⁄2u? «œU?%ô« œb??Ž mKÐË ÆwI1d??ô« œU?%ô« ÊUJ WF)ð wI1dô« œU%ô« v« W3)2M« —U?O??2?šô U??O?H??B?2« ÷u??š s0 bÐ ô VIK« WK0U?Š dB0 v« ÊU?UC1 53?22M0 U1⁄4“uHÐ f1⁄2uð XK1⁄4QðË ÆW?LEM« UOÐuOŁ«Ë UL?N2?I«—Ë U1⁄2U?žË U1dO?−O1⁄2Ë »d?G« vKŽ Ê«œu)« vKŽË UOMO v?KŽ UN3KG2Ð «bMžË« Æ»U×)1⁄2ôUÐ W3?IŽ UOÐu?OŁ« XD2ð ‰Ëô« —Ëb« wË Xłd?š« U?L? ≤≠¥ U?N?}KŽ U1⁄4“u?HÐ f1⁄2uð WOzUNM« ...«—U3« wË Æ©±≠≤® «bMžË« dB0 b1bL?2« bFÐ ≤≠≤ dB?0Ë UOÐu?OŁ« XœUFð qO−?)ð s0 UOÐu?OŁ« XMJ9Ë XRu« œb?L ÆvËô« ...dLK VIK« “«dŠ«Ë 5b1⁄4 vKŽ U?1⁄4“u??HÐ W???¦UŁ f1⁄2u?ð ¡U??łË ÆdHF≠≥ «bMžË« w U?32?2M0 W2?Ý X—Uý ∫∂≥ U1⁄2U?ž ‡ 52ŽuL−?0 vKŽ XL)RË WFÐ«d« WuD3« U??OÐu??O?Ł«Ë f1⁄2uðË U1⁄2U??ž v?Ëô« XL??{ WO1⁄2U¦« XL{Ë «d« w* U?NðU1—U30 XLOR«Ë XL??O?R«Ë Ê«œu?)?«Ë U1d?O??−?O1⁄2Ë d??B?0 VIK« U1⁄2Už “dŠ« ÆwÝU0u w* UNðU1—U30 ...«—U3« w dH?F≠≥ Ê«œu)« vKŽ U1⁄4“uHÐ ÆWOzUNM« UOÐuOŁ« vKŽ UN3K?G2Ð W¦UŁ dB0 XKŠË ÆdHF≠≥ U??O??I1d??« X?U??C??2??Ý« ∫∂μ f1⁄2uð ‡ XL?{Ë ̈f1⁄2uð w* WuDÐ ‰Ë« W?}UL?A« ‰U???GM)?«Ë f1⁄2uð v?Ëô« W??Žu???L???:« f1⁄2uð w* U?NðU1—U?3?0 XL?O?R«Ë U?OÐu?OŁ«Ë qŠU?Ý W?O1⁄2U?¦« XL??{ U?LMOÐ ̈W?L?FU?F« ÆU1⁄2UžË uG1⁄2uJ«Ë ÃUF« ...«—U??3?0 b??FÐ VIK?UÐ U1⁄2U?ž X?EH?2??Š« vN21⁄2«Ë f1⁄2uð l?0 UN2?FLł ...d?O¦0 W?OzUN1⁄2 ·b1⁄4 U1⁄2U?ž XK−?ÝË ̈≤≠≤ wKFô« U?N2?RË qŠU?Ý XKŠË ÆwU?{ô« XRu« w “u?H« ≠± ‰UGM)« vKŽ vKŽ U1⁄4“uHÐ W¦UŁ ÃUF« ÆdHF U?FÐUÞ WuD?3« c?2ð« ∫∂∏ U?OÐu?OŁ« ‡ U?32?2M0 WO1⁄2U?LŁ U?NO?* X—Uý –« «e?O2 vËô« W??Žu?L??:« XL??{ ÆvËô« ...d??LK dz«e'«Ë ÃUF« qŠU?ÝË «bMžË«Ë UOÐuOŁ« XL{Ë ̈UÐUÐ« f1œ« w* UNðU1—U30 XLOR«Ë u?G1⁄2uJ«Ë U??ÝU?AMO? u?G1⁄2uJ?« W?O1⁄2U?¦« Æ‰UGM)«Ë U1⁄2UžË qO«“«dÐ “«d?Š« s0 UÝU?AMO u?G1⁄2uJ« XMJ9Ë ≠± VIK« WK0U?Š U1⁄2U?ž vKŽ U1⁄4“u?HÐ VIK« ÆdHF VO???B1⁄2 s0 ÊUJ Y?U??¦« e??d?« U??0√ ≠± U?O?Ðu?OŁ« vKŽ U1⁄4“u??HÐ ÃU?F« q?ŠU?Ý ÆdHF Ê«œu?)« ·U??C?2??Ý« ∫∑∞ Ê«œu?)« ‡ r ...d« Ác1⁄4 tMJ ̈WO1⁄2U¦« ...dLK UOzUNM« W?OzUNM« ...«—U?3« w “UË W?FdH« u?H1 ÆdHF≠± U1⁄2Už vKŽ u1⁄4 d?ODš ·«b?1⁄4 “ËdÐ ...—Ëb« b?N?ý W?O1⁄2UL?Ł q−Ý Íc« u?uÐ Ê«—u włU?F« W??2?Ý q−??Ý Ê« u?u??3 o3??ÝË Æ·«b1⁄4« w W)Lš UNM0 WIÐU)« ...—Ëb« w* ·«b1⁄4« ÆUOÐuOŁ« b{ ...bŠ«Ë ...«—U30 U322M0 W?O1⁄2ULŁ WuD3« w* X—UýË ÃUF« qŠU?ÝË ÊËdO?0UJ«Ë Ê«œu)« w1⁄4 U1⁄2U?žË ̈©ÂuÞd?)« W?Žu?L−?0® U?OÐu?OŁ«Ë U?O?MO?žË d?B??0Ë U?ÝU??AMO? u??G1⁄2uJ«Ë Æ©w1⁄2«bO0 Íœ«Ë WŽuL−0® qŠU?Ý vKŽ U1⁄4“uHÐ W?¦UŁ dB?0 XKŠË Æ±≠≥ ÃUF« w* ÊËd?O?0UJ« XKŠ ∫∑≤ ÊËd?O?0UJ« ‡ U?N??2?LE1⁄2 w2« W?uD3« w* YU?¦?« e?d« ̈≤≠μ d??Oz«e« vKŽ U?1⁄4“u?HÐ U??N??{—« vKŽ vKŽ U1⁄4“uHÐ VIK« u?G1⁄2uJ« “dŠ« ULMOÐ XŽ“ËË ÆW?OzU?NM?« ...«—U?3« w* ≤≠≥ vU?0 vËô« XL{ 52?ŽuL−?0 vKŽ U3?22M« u??žu?ðË vU??0Ë U???OMO???Ë ÊËd??O???0UJ« u?G1⁄2uJ« W?O1⁄2U?¦«Ë ̈©Íb1⁄2ËU1 W?ŽuL?−?0® W?ŽuL?−?0® Ê«œu)«Ë d?Oz«e«Ë »d?G«Ë Æ©ô«Ëœ U?0 —«dJð w* d?B??0 XKA?* ∫∑¥ d?B?0 ‡ XU??C??2??Ý« U??0bMŽ ±πμπ ÂU??Ž t??2KF?? d)š ...d« Ác1⁄4 UNMJ ÆWuD3« “dŠ«Ë ≥≠≤ dOz«e« ÂU?0« wzUNM« nB1⁄2 —Ëb« w ◊u?A« w* d??H?F≠≤ X0b?Ið U?N1⁄2U?Ð U?LKŽ Æ‰Ëô« YU?¦« eJ0d« ‰ö2?ŠUÐ dB?0 XH2?«Ë ÆdHF≠¥ uG1⁄2uJ« vKŽ UN3KG2Ð U1⁄4“uHÐ dOz«e« V?OB1⁄2 s0 VIK« ÊUË ≠≤ ...œUF« WOzUNM« ...«—U3« w* UO30«“ vKŽ ÆdHF ...«—U3« w ≤≠≤ ôœUFð ÊU?322M« ÊUË v« ÂU?J2???Šô« b???F?Ð vËô« W???OzU???N?M« Æ5OU{ô« 5ÞuA« w0u?−?N« U?N?FÐUD?Ð WuD3« e?O9Ë ...«—U?30 ±∑ w?* Ub1⁄4 μ¥ U?N?O q?−Ý YO?Š Æ...b?Š«u?« ...«—U?3« w ·«b1⁄4« ≥[≤ ‰b??F0 UO30«“Ë «bMžË«Ë dB?0 s0 q UNO* „—UýË dOz«“Ë ©...d1⁄4UI« WŽu?L−0® ÃUF« qŠUÝË WŽu?L−0® ”uA1—u?0Ë uG1⁄2uË U?OMOžË Æ©W1—bMJÝô« a1—Uð w* v?Ëô« ...d?LK ∫∑∂ U?O?Ðu?OŁ« ‡ ”U?Ý« vK?Ž U?OzU?N?M« XL?O?R« W?uD3« Ãu?21 YO?×Ð b?Š«Ë —Ëœ s0 Í—Ëb« ÂUE1⁄2 s0 œb??Ž vKŽ« “d?×?1 Íc« V2?2?M« öDÐ U322M0 U?OzUNM« w X—UýË Æ◊UIM« »dG«Ë U1dO−O1⁄2Ë «bMžË«Ë dB0Ë UOÐuOŁ« ‰Ëô« —Ëb« rO??R«Ë ÆÊ«œu??)«Ë d??Oz«e«Ë VIK« »d??G« “d?Š« Æ U??Žu?L??:« ÂUEMÐ ̈UOMO?ž vKŽ U0b?I2?0 ‰Ëô« ed« tö?2ŠUÐ ÆW¦UŁ U1dO−O1⁄2 ¡UłË W???Fd??? U1⁄2U???ž u??H?ð r ∫∑∏ U1⁄2U???ž ‡ ÂU?Ž “U$« —d?Ë U?OzUNM« W?U?C2?Ý« XœU?FðË U1—U?3?0 lÐ—« w “U?Ë ±π∂≥ VIKUÐ kH?2?×?2 U1d?O−?O1⁄2 l0 ...b?Š«Ë w X—UýË Æ «d0 ≥ U?NÐ U1⁄4“u* bFÐ bÐô« v« U??O?3??0«“Ë U1⁄2U?ž U??3?2??2M0 Wu?D3« w* ̈©«d« W?ŽuL−0® U?}KF« U2uË U1dO?−O1⁄2Ë u????G1⁄2uJ?«Ë «bMžË«Ë f?1⁄2uðË »d????G«Ë Æ©wÝU0u WŽuL−0® U?NL?Ý« U1dO?−O1⁄2 X1⁄2Ëœ ∫∏∞ U1d?O−?O1⁄2 ‡ WOI1dô« ôuD3« q−Ý w vËô« ...dLK U1⁄4—u?N?L?ł s?0 d?OEM« lDIM0 b??O1Qð b?FÐ q w* U??H« ∏∞ —u??C?(« W??3?)?1⁄2 XGKÐË X3KGðË ÆUdÞ U1dO−O1⁄2 U?NO X1⁄2U ...«—U30 ...«—U3« w dHF≠≥ dz«e?'« vKŽ U1dO−O1⁄2 ÆWuN)Ð WOzUNM« U??3??2?2?M0 U??OzU?N?M« w* X—U??ý ÃUF?« qŠUÝË dB?0Ë UO1⁄2«eM?ðË U1dO−?O1⁄2 dz«e??'«Ë U1⁄2U?žË ©”u??žô W?Žu??L?−??0® Æ©Ê«œU31« WŽuL−0® »dG«Ë UOMOžË ≠≤ dB0 vKŽ t3KG2Ð U¦UŁ »dG« qŠË ÆdHF ±π∏≤ ÂU?F« WuDÐ e?O9 ∫∏≤ U?O3?O ‡ VŽö?0 vKŽ XL?O?R« w2« ...b?O?Šu« U?N1⁄2UÐ WKD?Ð U1⁄2U??ž U1⁄4dŁ« v?KŽ Xłuð W??O???ŽUMF ö?dÐ UO?3O vKŽ U1⁄4“u?HÐ WFÐ«d« ...d?LK wKFô« 52?Ru« ¡U?N2?1⁄2« bFÐ ∑≠∏ ¡«e?'« w* X—U?ýË Æ±≠± ‰œU?F??2UÐ wU?{ô«Ë f1⁄2uðË ÊËdO?0UJ« U3?22M0 U?OzUNM« ©fKÐ«dÞ W??Žu??L?−??0® U1⁄2U??žË U??O?3??OË dz«e?'«Ë U?O?30«“Ë U?OÐu?OŁ«Ë U1d?O?−?O1⁄2Ë Æ©Í“UGMÐ WŽuL−0® t??łËd???š b??FÐ ∫∏¥ ÃU??F?« qŠU??Ý ‡ rU?F« ”Q w ‰Ëô« —Ëb?« w* WÐuF?BÐ VIK?« ÊËd?O??0U?J« V2??2M0 “d??Š« ±π∏≤ w* ±≠≥ U1dO−O1⁄2 vKŽ Á“uHÐ vËô« ...dLK W?HO?C« WËb« XIKðË ÆW?OzUNM« ...«—U?3« dŁ« ‰Ëô« —Ëb« s0 UNłËd2Ð W1u?R WFHF ÊËd?O?0UJ«Ë ≤≠± d?B?0 ÂU?0« U?Nð—U?)?š WuD3« w* X—Uý Æv«u2« vKŽ ≤≠dHF d?B?0Ë u?žuðË ÃU?F« qŠU?Ý U?3?2?2M0 U1⁄2UžË ©ÊU?łbOÐ« W?ŽuL?−0® ÊËdO?0UJ«Ë WŽu?L−?0® dz«e'«Ë U1d?O−?O1⁄2Ë ÍËôU0Ë Æ©w«uÐ dB?0 vKŽ UN?3KG2Ð W¦U?Ł dz«e'« XKŠ Æ±≠≥ ±π∏∂ ÂU?F« WuDÐ e?O9 ∫∏∂ d?B?0 ‡ «bÐË ̈©U??b1⁄4 ≥∞® ·«b1⁄4ô« WKI?Ð d?B??0 w u1⁄4 U1—U3« ÷uš s0 ·bN« Ê« U×{«Ë 5Ð WOzUNM« ...«—U3« X1⁄2UË ̈...—U))« ÂbŽ p– vKŽ q?Oœ d?O?š ÊËd??O?0UJ«Ë d??B?0 wU???{ô«Ë wK?Fô« 52???Ru« ¡U???N??2?1⁄2UÐ d0ô« dB0 r)% Ê« q3R w3K)« ‰œUF2UÐ Æ`Ołd2« ödÐ UN2×KB0 w ‰UGM)« U322M0 WuD3« w* X—Uý oO??3???0«“u«Ë ÃU??F« qŠU???ÝË d??B??0Ë »d?G«Ë U?O?3?0«“Ë ©...d?1⁄4U?I« W?Žu?L?−?0® W??Žu???L??−??0® ÊËd???O??0UJ«Ë d?z«e??'«Ë W¦UŁ ÃUF« q?ŠUÝ ¡UłË Æ©W1—bMJÝô« Æ≤≠≥ »dG« vKŽ U1⁄4“uHÐ ”QJ« »d??G« sC?2??Š« ∫∏∏ »d?G« ‡ dB0Ë dz«e?'« W—UA0 ...dA?Ž WÝœU)« ÊËdO0UJ«Ë ÃUF« qŠU?ÝË dOz«“Ë UOMOË ÆU1dO−O1⁄2Ë 5×???ýd« “dÐ« b???Š« »d??G?« ÊU??Ë ‰Ë« ÊU? Ê« b?FÐ UFu?B?š VIK« “«d?Šô w ‰Ëô« —Ëb« v?D2??21 wÐd??Ž V2??2M0 ÂU?Ž u?OJ?)J0 w* rU?F« ”Q? U??OzU?N1⁄2 wN???2??A1 ô U?0 d??ł ÕU1d?« sJ ±π∏∂ nB1⁄2 —Ëb« s0 Ãd?2?* nO?C« V2?2M« “d?Š« w2« ÊËd?O?0UJ« b1 vKŽ wzU?NM« tK−?Ý ·bNÐ U1d?O−?O1⁄2 vKŽ U1⁄4u?HÐ VIK« ÆöO0 tOłË— ÂU??0« tð—U???)??) U??FÐ«— »d???G« qŠ ¡UN21⁄2« bFÐ `Ołd2« ödÐ ¥≠≥ dz«e'« Æ±≠± ‰œUF2UÐ wU{ô«Ë wKFô« 52Ru« VI ‰Ë« dz«e'« “dŠ« ∫π∞ dz«e'« ‡ ÂUŽ ”QJ« XU?C2Ý« Ê« bFÐ U?N wI1d« w* ±≠μ U1d?O?−?O1⁄2 vKŽ d?O3? “u?HÐ ±ππ∞ ÊU?32?2M« vI2« r?Ł ÆWO?ŠU2?2ô« ...«—U?3« V22M« œbłË WOzU?NM« ...«—U3« w «œb−0 n« ±∞∞ ÂU?0« d?H??F≠± Á“u?* Ídz«e?'« Æå©”—U0® —«–¬ μò VFK0 vKŽ ÃdH20 n1d?ý Ídz«e?'« V2?2M« œU?‡‡‡‡‡RË Æd?łU?0 `?Ð«—Ë œU‡‡‡‡M0 ‰U??L?łË w1⁄2«“u« Êô n1œd« V2?2MUÐ d?B?0 X—U‡‡‡‡ýË ”Q?? U?OzU??NM b??F‡‡‡?2?)1 ÊU?? ‰Ëô« U??}UD?1« w* ...—d??I??0 X1⁄2U?? w2?« rU??F« Àö‡‡?‡‡¦« U???NðU1—U??3??0 d???)‡‡‡?‡2??* w* X—U?ýË Æ÷Uu« W?}U?š Xłd‡‡šË ÃU?F« qŠU??Ý U?3?2?2M0 U?C?1« WuD3« ÆUOMOË ‰UGM)«Ë ÊËdO0UJ«Ë UO30«“Ë YU???¦« e???d« w?* ‰U???GM)« X?KŠË ÆdHF≠± ‰UGM)« vKŽ UN3KG2Ð f1⁄2uð V2M U1—U3 ÈbŠ« s WDI b1—b uJO2Kð« V1—bð s WU'ô« dDš tł«u1 wJ1⁄2UOÐ pýË vKŽ uJ1⁄2UOÐ ”u—U? wMO2Mł—ô« UÐ ∫» ·« ‡ b1—b0 o W3⁄4O)« ZzU2M« V3)Ð w1⁄2U?3Ýô« b1—b0 uJO2Kð« V1—bð s0 WURô« U?L3?)?Š Âb?I« ...dJ w1⁄2U?3Ýô« Í—Ëb« w?* t«d?ý« X% o1d?HK ÆfOL)« f0« WOK;« n×B« d– ©u1U?0® Ê«d1eŠ w b1—b?0 uJO2?Kð« V1—bð vuð wJ1⁄2UOÐ ÊU?Ë ¡u??) Á—ËbÐ ‰U?I?« Ëb1⁄2U1⁄2d? —«e??O?Ý w?1⁄2U?3??Ýö U?H?Kš w{U« ÆZzU2M« vKŽ tðU?ŽU?Ý dš¬ gO?F1 wJ1⁄2U?OÐ Ê« å”¬ò W?HO?×?F X32?Ë ±≠dH?F ¡UFÐ—ô« d)š Íc« b1—b?0 uJO2Kðô WOMH« ...œU?OI« ”√— wzU?N1⁄2 sLŁ »U1« w WD)?Rd?Ý ÂU?0« Á—u?NL?ł ÂU?0«Ë t?{—« vKŽ ‚—UHÐ Í—Ëb« w* dA?Ž w1⁄2U¦« ed« q2×1 Íc«Ë ̈UO1⁄2U?3Ý« ”Q Æ—bB2« W1⁄2uKýdÐ sŽ WDI1⁄2 ≤≥ mK31 dO3 Ê« v« ...d?OA?0 UC?1« tð«– d0ô« v« åU?—U?0ò WH?O×?F X;«Ë 5ËR)?« 5Ð WD)Rd?Ý ÂU0« ...—U)?)« bFÐ b?IŽ Uz—UÞ U?ŽUL?2ł« ÆŸu{u« Y×3 wJ1⁄2UOÐË o1dH« sŽ U???31—bð v?KŽ ·«d???ýô« wJ1⁄2U???OÐ s?0 ÍœUM« ...—«œ« X3?KÞË WU?Rô« —«d?R ÊU* W?O1⁄2U?3?Ýô« n×B« V)?Š sJ ̈Âu?}« o1d?H« VUD1 YO?Š 5dD« 5?Ð W1œU« —u?0ô« vKŽ ‚U?Hðô« jI?* dE2M1 Áb?I?Ž W1UN1⁄2 v?2Š U?NUMO?Ý w2« Ë—u1 51ö?0 W?2?Ý mK30 »—b« Æ≤∞∞∑ ÂUŽ ©uOu1® “u9 w ...—dI« bFÐ ‚öÞô« vKŽ wMO2Mł—« »—b0 `$« ©U0UŽ μμ® wJ1⁄2UOÐ d32F1Ë v« ÁœUR t1⁄2« sŽ ö?C wK×0 VI s0 d?¦ô “—uO1⁄2uł U?uÐ œUR Ê« ‰UDÐ« Í—Ëb UN?2OL1⁄4« w* W1“«u« f1—ËœUðd3?O ”Q VI “«dŠ« W1—U??I« ”QJ«Ë ̈≤∞∞≥Ë ≤∞∞±Ë ≤∞∞∞ Â«u??Ž« «d??0 ÀöŁ UÐË—Ë« s0 qO?I2?)1 Ê« q3R ≤∞∞≥Ë ≤∞∞∞ w0U?Ž 5ðd?0 ©‰U2MMO?21⁄2ud?21⁄2«® V)?×Ð W?OKzU?Ž »U3?Ýô w{U« ©u?Ou1® “u9 lKD0 w* t?3?BM0 ÆtuR ̈±ππ≥ cM0 W?O«d?2?Šô« tðdO?)?0 ‰öš U?3I? ±μ wJ1⁄2UOÐ lL?łË Æ±ππ∑ ‡ ±ππ∂ rÝu0 wUD1ô« U0Ë— vKŽ ·dý« Ê« t o3ÝË f0« vU?Gðd3« UJO?HMÐ ÍœU1⁄2 rÝUÐ Àb×?20 ‰U?R W1⁄2u3?A wË sŽ U??U1—U? t1—b1⁄2« wÝËd?« ÕUM'« ·U?I1« —d??Ið t1⁄2« fO??L?)« ÊQAÐ oOI×2K lC21 v2?Š ÍœUMUÐ ÂbI« ...d o1d* l0 V1—b2« œuF1 sò Àb×?2« ‰URË ÆUJOHMÐË ‰UGðd?3« UNO bI?21⁄2« U×1dBð X3)1⁄2 w2?« U×1dB?2« `O{uð r21 r U?0 V1—b2« v« U?U1—U ÆåWOH×F WKÐUI0 w* t}« UU1—U? sŽ WOÝËd« å —u?3Ý wJ)?2Ou?Ýò WHO?×F XKI1⁄2Ë VFK ...œu?F« w dJHO?Ý t1⁄2« w{U« ¡UŁö¦« Âu?1 tuR ©U?0UŽ ≤∑® qD3 W?OÝU?Ýô« WKOJA2« w ÊUJ0 vKŽ qB?×1 r «–« UO?ÝË— w* qOKR œbŽ w* ÈuÝ wËb« wÝËd« VŽö« „—U?A1 rË Æ‰UGðd3« UJO?HMÐ »—b?0 ÊU0u? bU1⁄2Ë— ÍbMu?N« ...œUO?R X% U1—U?3« s0 Ê«d1eŠ w «—ULÝ ·u2Ou?Ý UOK1d s0 o1dH« v« t0ULC1⁄2« cM0 Æw{U« ©uO1⁄2u1® Ê«Ë tð—«bł U?3Łô WFdH« t?×M1 ô ÊU0u Ê« UU1—U? ‰URË UU1—U? sŽ qI1⁄2Ë Æ5OK1“«d3« 53?ŽöUÐ W1⁄2UF2?Ýô« qCH1 »—b« u×MÐ dšQ2ð W1⁄2u?3A Ê« bI2Ž« ÆnK220 bKÐ ‰U?Gðd3«ò UC1« tuR ÆåuJÝu0 sŽ U0UŽ ≤∞ Í—Ëœ w fUM1 Íc« w2?O?Ý ÂUN?−M0dÐ ÍœU1⁄2 ‰U?R ÊbM wË qFuð t1⁄2« fO?L)« f0« Âb?I« ...dJ ÍeOK$ô« ...“U?2L« W?ł—b« ÍœUMK w1⁄2U1b1⁄2UÐ d?2«Ë tL?łUN?0 lO3 ‰u?O1⁄2U3Ý« ÍœU1⁄2 l?0 ‚UHðô tłu2OÝË Æ©—ôËœ ÊuOK0 ±[∏≤® Ë—u1 Êu?OK0 ±[μ qÐUI0 w1⁄2U3Ýô« oŠô XRË w U?O1⁄2U3?Ý« v« Í«ułË—Ë« V2?2M0 rłUN?0 w1⁄2U1b1⁄2UÐ Æ‰uO1⁄2U3Ý« l0 bRUF2« w* WOB2A« œuM3« WARUM* Âu}« U1⁄2Ë—u? u?HOð—u?31œ s0 ÂU?N?−M0dÐ v« qI?21⁄2« w1⁄2U1b1⁄2UÐ ÊU?Ë t?O?Mł 51ö?0 W?ŁöŁ qÐU?I??0 w{U« »« fD)??ž« w w1⁄2U??3?Ýô« Íd?3?O e?OA1⁄2U?Ý qO?O1⁄2«œ b?√Ë Æ©—ôËœ Êu?OK0 μ[≥∞® wMOd?2?Ý« ¡«dA ÂU?N−M0dÐ l0 ‚U?Hðô t1œU1⁄2 qFuð ‰uO1⁄2U?3Ý« ÍœU1⁄2 fOz— ‰uO1⁄2U3Ý« w* VŽô t1⁄2«ò 5OH×BK Íd3O eOA1⁄2UÝ ‰URË ÆVŽö« WO?ÝUÝô« q0«uF« s0 X1⁄2U? o1dH« v« ‰U?I21⁄2ô« w* t2?3ž— ÆÊô« ÆåtLC ...b* ‰u?O1⁄2U??3?Ýô VFK «b?I??Ž w1⁄2U1b1⁄2UÐ lRu1 Ê« l?Ru?2« s0Ë ÆWFL'« ÂuO« WO3D« ’u×?H« Á“UO2ł« bFÐ ÂUF« nB1⁄2Ë 50UŽ ÆÂUN−M0dÐ l0 UN3F ...«—U30 ≥μ w ·«b1⁄4« W2Ý w1⁄2U1b1⁄2UÐ “dŠ«Ë ”Q? wzU?N1⁄2 lÐ— v« Í—Ëb« qDÐ W1⁄2u?KýdÐ q1⁄4Qð b1—b?0 wË w d?H?F≠∂ «—u0«“ vKŽ d?O?3J« ‰Ëô« “u?HÐ Âb?I« ...dJ UO?1⁄2U3?Ý« Æ±≠≥ UÐU1⁄4– “U* W1⁄2uKýdÐ ÊUË ÆwzUNM« sLŁ —Ëb« »U1⁄4– ÊuÝ—ôË ©±® ËdOOJÝ« W1⁄2uKýdÐ ·«b1⁄4« qO−)ð vKŽ »ËUMðË s0 ∏∞® e?OÐu w)??U?0Ë ©μ±® q0uÐ ÊU?Ë ©≥¥® Uðu?0Ë ©≤∞Ë ±π® rž— U1⁄2Ë—u? u?H?O?ð—u?31œ U?C1« wzU?NM« lÐ— m?KÐË Æ©¡«e?ł WK— ÆdHF≠≥ UÐU1⁄4– “U ÊU t1⁄2ô ≤≠± U1⁄2uÝUÝË« ÂU0« tð—U)š wb1⁄4 ©π∞® u???O??0Ë—Ë ©¡«e???ł WK— s?0 ∏∞® “u1⁄2u??0 q?−??ÝË ÆuHOð—u31œ ·b1⁄4 ©¡«eł WK— s0 μ∂® —u2JOË ̈U1⁄2uÝUÝË« bFÐ ©μπ® qOGOLO ·bNÐ ‰U1—UO?* vKŽ Á“uHÐ UO)MU* q1⁄4Qð UL wU2Ož l0 tœUF2Ð ‰uO1⁄2U3Ý«Ë ̈dHF≠≤ UÐU1⁄4– t}KŽ VKGð ÊU Ê« WŁöŁ qÐU??I?0 ©∂∂Ë μ≤® ÊUŁU1⁄2u??łË ©≤μ® U?2?ÝuJ ·«b1⁄4« W?Łö?¦Ð ÊU Ê« b?FÐ ̈©¡«eł WK— s0 ∏μ® UOM?1dOÐË ©±¥Ë ≥® wJ1d ·«b1⁄4« ≠dH?F uGO U?2KÝ l0 tœUF2Ð fO?2OÐË ̈UÐU1⁄4– dHF≠± t?}KŽ “U* Æ±≠± UÐU1⁄4– ôœUFð U1⁄2U Ê« bFÐ dHF pO2Kð« l0 b1—b0 ‰U1— UC1« wzUNM« sLŁ »U1« w* Âu}« wI2K1Ë ≠±® b1—b?0 uJ?O?2Kð« l0 WD)??Rd?ÝË ̈©d?H?F≠± »U1⁄4c?«® ËU?3KÐ Æ©dHF b'UF21 ÀuLð—uÐ ÂUNMðuð s 53Žô l ÍœU?1⁄2 ‰U????????R ∫“d????????21Ë— ‡ Êb?M? o Í—Ëœ w* f?UM?1 Íc« Àu?????L????)?ð—uÐ t?F?Ru?0 d?3?Ž Âb?I« ...dJ “U?2?L« «d?2K$« t1⁄2« fOL?)« f0« X1⁄2d21⁄2ô« vK?Ž wLÝd« e?O?H1œ Êu?ý jÝu« jš w3?Žô Èd?2?ý« ÂU?????NM?ðuð ÍœU?1⁄2 s0 f?1bM?0 Ë—b?????OÐË w* t?F?0 fUM1 Íc« w1⁄2bMK« d?O?3?)ðu1⁄4 ÆWuD3« fH1⁄2 Í« s?Ž Àu?????L?????)ð—u?Ð nA?J1 r?Ë ÂbRË ÆWI?HB« ÁcNÐ oKF2ð W}U?0 qOFUHð v« s1b1b'« 53Žö?« s1c1⁄4 ÀuL)ð—uÐ d9R?0 ‰ö?š ÂöŽô« q?zUÝËË 5F?−?A« ÆfO?L)« f0« t3?FK0 w* Áb?IŽ wU?×F „U?0«b1Uł —bM)J« wÝËd« Èd?2ý« b?RË Æ«dšR0 ÀuL)ð—uÐ rNÝ« s0 W3⁄4« w* μ∞ vKŽ t?FRu?0 d3Ž Àu?L)ð—u?Ð ·U{«Ë W?I?H?F Â«dÐ« w* q0Q1 t1⁄2« U?C1« X1⁄2d?21⁄2ô« Ë—U?0UÐ u1⁄2 w)1⁄2dH« ÂU?NMðuð l«b0 ¡«d?ý sJ1 rË ÆfOL)« f0« s0 oŠô XRË w qOJAð w* X?ÐUŁ œu?łË f1bM0Ë e?O?H1b ÍbMuN« ÂU?LC1⁄2« cM0 dO3?)ðu1⁄4 ÂUNMðuð u?L??Oð wËb« ÍbMK?MH«Ë “b?O??H1œ —U?łœ« Æo1dH« v« uOM1Uð wÐb1⁄2Ëd?Ð ÍœU1⁄2 ‰U??R sžU??NMÐu?? wË ...dJ? vËô« W?????ł—b« W?1b1⁄2« Í—Ëœ q?DÐ ŸUÐ t1⁄2« fO?L?)« f?0« „d/b« w Âb?I« ‰uÐd?H?O ÍœU1⁄2 v?« d?ł« ‰U?O1⁄2«œ t?F?«b?0 ‰UD?Ðô« Í—Ëœ VI? q0U????Š Íe????OK?J1⁄2ô« t2Nł s0 ÆWO3?FA« W3FK« ÁcN wÐË—Ëô« wLÝd« tFRu0 d?3Ž ÍeOKJ1⁄2ô« ÍœUM« b« ©U0UŽ ≤±® dł« l0 b?RUFð t1⁄2« X1⁄2d21⁄2ô« vKŽ ÆÂU?Ž nB1⁄2Ë Â«u?Ž« W?F?Ð—« ...b wd/b« XI??Hð«ò ÊU?O?Ð w* wd/b« ÍœUM« ‰U??RË qO??FU?Hð s?Ž nAJ« Âb??Ž vKŽ ·«dÞô« ÆåWIHB« U}«d2Ý« WuDÐ w „—UAð U uÐ«—Uý n2J« w VŽU2 rž— ‰uIð ∫“d?21Ë— ‡ ©U}«d2?Ý«® Ê—u3K0 o U1—U??0 WÐU??A« W?O??ÝËd« fM?2« W?L??$ WuDÐ w* W?—UA« —d?R U?N1⁄2« UuÐ«—U?ý ôuDÐ vË« fM2K W?Šu?2H« U?}«d2?Ý« rÝu??LK Èd??3?J« lÐ—ô« Âö??Ý b1⁄2«d??'« Æn2J« w Âô« s0 U?NðU1⁄2U?F?0 rž— wU?(« WK?DÐ ©U???0U???Ž ±∏® U???u?Ð«—U???ý XU???RË t1⁄2« U1⁄4uGKÐ« ¡U3Þô« Ê« WIÐU)« ÊËbK31Ë U??0 «–« WÐU??Fô« rRU?H?ð s0 dDš b??łu1 ô b?RË ÆÈd3J?« WuD3« w W?—UA« —d?R WuDÐ s?0 «d?šR?0 U??uÐ«—U?ý X3??×?)1⁄2« Ác1⁄4 V3??)Ð U??}«d??2?ÝUÐ X?Ýu? bu??ł ÆWÐUFô« f0« 5O?U??×?BK U?uÐ«—U??ý XU?RË s WÐUFô« Ê« w1⁄2uGKÐ« ¡U?3Þô«ò fOL)« ÆåVFK« wFÝuÐ Ê«Ë rRUH2ð W???OJ?O???−K3?« XK1⁄4Qð w?1⁄2b???O???Ý wË fO?L??)« f0« s1œ—U1⁄4 ÊUMO1⁄4 5?2?Ýu?ł w1⁄2b??O?Ý Wu?DÐ w W??OzU?NM?« ...«—U?3??LK vKŽ U1⁄4“u?* dŁ« U}«d?2ÝUÐ fM2K W?OËb« vË« wH* ÆU?u)21⁄2“u? U1⁄2ö2HÝ W?OÝËd« Íœd??H? wzU??N?M« q3???R —Ëb« wð«—U???3??0 W???H?MB« “U????* WuD3?UÐ «b???O????)« v« ...bzU???F« s1œ—U1⁄4 ÊUM?O1⁄4 W??)??0U??)« WÐU?Fô« ¡«d?ł q1uÞ »U??O?ž b?FÐ VŽö« W??ÝœU?)« W??HMB« U??u?)??21⁄2“u?? vKŽ ±≠∂Ë ≥≠∂ W−O2MÐ 52}U?220 52ŽuL−0 ÆWIORœ ∑± dL2Ý« ...«—U30 bFÐ W?OJO?−K3« fM2« W?L?$ ‚u?Hð ÊU?Ë w XLOR« w2« ...«—U3« ‰«uÞ U0U9 U×{«Ë ÊUM?O1⁄4 X1⁄2U???Ë ÆW??3?Þ—Ë ...—U??Š ¡«u???ł« w1⁄2b?OÝ W?uD3Ð “U ©U?0U?Ž ≤≥® s1œ—U1⁄4 ≤∞∞¥ ÂUŽ w* WŠu2?H« U}«d2Ý« WuDÐ rŁ w W????—U???A?« s0 s?JL???2?ð r U????N1⁄2« ô« WÐU?F« V3?)Ð w{U« ÂU?F« w* 52uD3« WuD3K W?O?zU?NM« ...«—U?3« w ÆW?3?d« w* l0 s1œ—U?1⁄4 ÊUMO1⁄4 wI??2K?ð W?F??L??'« «b??ž w1⁄2u?U??O?ý UJ)??O?)1⁄2«d?? W?}U‡‡‡?‡‡D1ô« “U* w2«Ë W?uD3« w* WFÐU)?« WHMB« WH?MB« Uu?Ýb1U ‰uJO1⁄2 W?OJOA?2« vKŽ ¥≠∂ W−O2MÐ 52}U220 52ŽuL−0 WM0U¦« wzU???NM« q?3??R —Ëb?« ...«—U??3???0 w* ≥≠∂Ë ÆWO1⁄2U¦« fM2?« W??3??Žô X?U??R U??O??u???F wË UH?OAðU?21⁄2«—U qO?)O?Ý WÐUA« W1—U?GK3« b{ ·UM3⁄42ÝUÐ ÂbI22Ý UN1⁄2« fOL)« f0« Æd?ORU?IF« V3?)Ð 50U?Ž ...b* UN?UI1« —«d?R w 5O?U?×??BK U?H?O?AðU??21⁄2«—U? XU?RË wËb« œU%ô« —«bF« s0 Âu1 b?FÐ UOuF ·UM3⁄42ÝU?Ð ÂbIðQÝò UNU?I1UÐ «—«dR fM2K ÂU??0« f?M2K w?Ëb« œU??%ô« —«d???R b??{ Ê«“u w W??O??{U1d« r?OJ×??2« W??LJ×??0 w* WKI?2?)0 W?LJ×?0 dR«Ë Æå«d?)1u?)Ð 52?OMO?F« ÊUÐ d?O?RU?IF?« W×?UJ0 ‰U?−?0 WuD?Ð ‰ö??š W??3??Žö« s0 Uðc??š« 5?2K« w{U« ©u1U?0® —U1« w?* W?Šu?2?H« U?)1⁄2d? “u9 w* u??O?uÞ w* U??)?UM?« Ã—U?šË ...œU?0 U1U?IÐ vKŽ ÊU1u?2% U?21⁄2U? ©u?Ou1® XU???RË ÆU??O???{U1— ...—uE;« Êu?Ë—b1⁄2U1⁄2 åVOJO?ò W?H?O??×?B W1—U??GK3« W?3??Žö« U1UIÐ œu?łË V3Ý Ê« WO?)1⁄2dH« W?O{U1d« X1⁄2U U?N1⁄2« u1⁄4 UN?O2MO?Ž w* ...—uE;« ...œU« 5M'« b?I?Hð Ê« q3R XRu« «c?1⁄4 w ö0U?Š «d?3?2?20 Ê« W?H?O?×?B« XU?RË Æp– b?FÐ Ê« ô« W3?Žö qLŠ —U?32š« Èd?ł« UO?)1⁄2d* ÆWO3KÝ ¡Uł t2−O21⁄2 UuÐ«—Uý U1—U WOÝËd« fM2« W3Žô
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.occ.gov/topics/charters-and-licensing/weekly-bulletin/2020/wb-04192020-04252020.pdf.json	## Click here for booklet Click here for CAS ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-CEBRANCHCLOSING312715 OLD NB NORTH SIDE OFFICE 100 NORTH MAIN STREET EVANSVILLE IN VANDERBURGH ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312709 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA ROSECRANS BANKING CENTER 1740 ROSECRANS STREET SAN DIEGO CA SAN DIEGO ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/21/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312731 U.S. BANK NA HANSON 7250 HANSON ROAD HANSON KY HOPKINS ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312743 BMO HARRIS BANK NAHARRIS MONTGOMERY BRANCH 1970 CATERPILLAR DRIVE MONTGOMERY IL KENDALL ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312744 BMO HARRIS BANK NAPALATINE FACILITY 800 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY PALATINE IL COOK ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/25/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312745 BMO HARRIS BANK NAEVANSTON BRANCH 1638 MAPLE AVENUE EVANSTON IL COOK # WEEKLY BULLETIN FOR PERIOD 04/19/2020 - 04/25/2020 The absence of a comment period end date indicates the comment period has expired or a comment period is not applicable. Please refer to the Public Notice and Comment booklet by clickin Also, searches on any application filed with the OCC can be made using the Corporate Applications Search (CAS) to by clicking here: ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/25/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312754 BMO HARRIS BANK NAHORTONVILLE BRANCH 132 EAST MAIN STREET HORTONVILLE WI OUTAGAMIE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312755 BMO HARRIS BANK NANEW HOLSTEIN BRANCH 1820 WISCONSIN AVENUE NEW HOLSTEIN WI CALUMET ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312756 BMO HARRIS BANK NABLACK CREEK BRANCH 101 NORTH MAIN STREET BLACK CREEK WI OUTAGAMIE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312759 BMO HARRIS BANK NADENMARK BRANCH 100 WISCONSIN AVENUE DENMARK WI BROWN ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/25/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312760 BMO HARRIS BANK NACOUNTY MARKET BRANCH 220 SOUTH 18TH AVE WAUSAU WI MARATHON ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312766 BMO HARRIS BANK NARICHLAND CENTER BRANCH 108 EAST COURT STREET RICHLAND CENTER WI RICHLAND ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312767 BMO HARRIS BANK NAJANESVILLE SOUTHSIDE BRANCH 2608 CENTER AVENUE JANESVILLE WI ROCK ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312768 BMO HARRIS BANK NARICHLAND CENTER DRIVE-UP BRANCH 1467 HIGHWAY 14 EASTRICHLAND CENTER WI RICHLAND ## 2 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312770 BMO HARRIS BANK NAELLSWORTH BRANCH 388 WEST MAIN STREETELLSWORTH WI PIERCE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312773 BMO HARRIS BANK NAPENDLETON BRANCH 115 WEST STATE STREET PENDLETON IN MADISON ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/20/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312774 BMO HARRIS BANK NAEASY BANKING 7500 YORK AVENUE EDINA MN HENNEPIN ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/22/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312775 BMO HARRIS BANK NAMAIN STREET VILLAGE 7601 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH RICHFIELD MN HENNEPIN ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/22/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312776 BMO HARRIS BANK NANOT GIVEN 11077 WEST FOREST HOME AVENUE HALES CORNERS WI MILWAUKEE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/22/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312779 BMO HARRIS BANK NATHE GARLANDS OF BARRINGTON RETIREMENT COMMUNITY BRANCH 1000 GARLANDS LANE BARRINGTON IL COOK ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/21/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312846 U.S. BANK NA CARSON OFFICE 609 BROADWAY CARSON IA POTTAWATTAMIE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/23/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING312847 U.S. BANK NA NORTH COURT STREET OFFICE 2504 NORTH COURT STREET OTTUMWA IA WAPELLO ## 3 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/23/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING313016 BMO HARRIS BANK NALINDENHURST - VILLAGE AT VICTORY LAKES 1075 VICTORY DRIVE LINDENHURST TX LAKE ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING314212 PNC BANK NA SOUTH PARK BRANCH 2777 SOUTH PARK ROAD BETHEL PARK PA ALLEGHENY ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING314216 PNC BANK NA BETHEL PARK 5035 LIBRARY ROAD BETHEL PARK PA PA ALLEGHENY ### Details RECEIPT 4/20/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-LBBRANCHCLOSING314301 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA SPOTSWOOD ENGLISHTOWN ROAD 365 SPOTSWOOD ENGLISHTOWN RD MONROE NJ MIDDLESEX ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312581 FULTON BANK, NA BANGOR BRANCH 1309 BLUE VALLEY DRIVE PEN ARGYL PA NORTHAMPTON ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312582 FULTON BANK, NA HARPERS CHOICE BRANCH 5485 HARPERS FARM RD COLUMBIA MD HOWARD ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312749 CAMDEN NB HAMPDEN 58 MAIN ROAD NORTH HAMPDEN ME PENOBSCOT ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312786 CAMDEN NB CORINTH CORNER OF ROUTES 15 AND 53 EAST CORINTH ME PENOBSCOT ## 4 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312787 CAMDEN NB MILO 53 MAIN STREET MILO ME PISCATAQUIS ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312818 PEOPLE'S UNITED BANK, NA BREWSTER BRANCH 1515 ROUTE 22, STE. D1 BREWSTER NY PUTNAM ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312819 PEOPLE'S UNITED BANK, NA BURNETT BLVD S & S BRANCH 59 BURNETT BLVD. POUGHKEEPSIE NY DUTCHESS ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312820 PEOPLE'S UNITED BANK, NA SOUTH ROAD S & S BRANCH 2540 SOUTH RD. POUGHKEEPSIE NY DUTCHESS ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312821 PEOPLE'S UNITED BANK, NA NEWBURGH S & S BRANCH 1429 ROUTE 300 NEWBURGH NY ORANGE ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312822 PEOPLE'S UNITED BANK, NA HYDE PARK STOP & SHOP 3999 ALBANY POST ROAD HYDE PARK NY DUTCHESS ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312899 HSBC BANK USA NA MILLER PLACE BRANCH 691 ROUTE 25A MILLER PLACE NY SUFFOLK ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312901 FULTON BANK, NA CUMBERLAND PARKWAY BRANCH 1423 S. MARKET STREETMECHANICSBURG PA CUMBERLAND ## 5 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312902 FULTON BANK, NA BRIGHTSIDE OPPORTUNITIES CENTER 515 HERSHEY AVENUE LANCASTER PA LANCASTER ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312903 FULTON BANK, NA DOVER BRANCH 3 SOUTH MAIN STREET DOVER PA YORK ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312904 FULTON BANK, NA ELKTON CROSSINGS BRANCH 975 EAST PULASKI HIGHWAY ELKTON MD CECIL ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312905 FULTON BANK, NA MIFFLINBURG BRANCH OFFICE 32 EAST CHESTNUT ST MIFFLINBURG PA UNION ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/24/2020 BRANCH CLOSINGS2020-NEBRANCHCLOSING312906 FULTON BANK, NA SMITHSBURG BRANCH 22413 JEFFERSON BOULEVARD SMITHSBURG MD WASHINGTON ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/20/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2019-WEBRANCHNEW-309220 SECURITY NB OF OMAHA JORDAN CREEK 200 S JORDAN CREEK PARKWAY WEST DES MOINES IA DALLAS ### Details APPROVED 4/20/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-CE-BRANCHNEW313954 CORNERSTONE NB & TR CO CORNERSTONE NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY - SCHAUMBURG IL BRANCH 650 EAST ALGONQUIN ROAD, SUITE 100 SCHAUMBURG IL COOK ### Details RECEIPT 4/20/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-CE-BRANCHNEW314298 NORTH SHORE BANK, FSB PLEASANT STREET BRANCH 510 E. PLEASANT ST. MILWAUKEE WI MILWAUKEE ## 6 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details APPROVED 4/22/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW313898 BANK OF AMERICA, NAONE FLATBUSH 1 FLATBUSH AVENUE BROOKLYN NY KINGS ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW313933 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA THE SHOPPES AT UNIVERSITY PLACE SWC NORTH TRYON STREET AND J W CLAY BLVD CHARLOTTE NC MECKLENBURG ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW313934 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA FIFTH AND ATWOOD SWC 5TH AVENUE AND ATWOOD STREET PITTSBURGH PA ALLEGHENY ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW313935 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA WILKINSBURG NEC PENN AVENUE AND PITT STREET PITTSBURGH PA ALLEGHENY ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314061 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA MARKET STATION SEC 17TH STREET AND BLAKE STREET DENVER CO DENVER ### Details APPROVED 4/24/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314063 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA GEORGE ST AND CHURCH NEC GEORGE STREET AND BAYARD STREET NEW BRUNSWICK NJ MIDDLESEX ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314066 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA CHERRYDALE POINT SEC POINSETT HWY AKA HWY 276 & N PLEASANTBURG DR AKA HWY 29 GREENVILLE SC GREENVILLE ### Details APPROVED 4/24/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314068 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA MICHIGAN AND TRUMBULL NWC MICHIGAN AVENUE AND TRUMBULL AVENUE DETROIT MI WAYNE ## 7 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details APPROVED 4/24/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314096 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA GLASSBORO DELSEA DRIVE NWC DONALD BARGER BLVD AND DELSEA DR AKA RTE 47 GLASSBORO NJ GLOUCESTER ### Details RECEIPT 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314261 PNC BANK NA PNC MOBILE LAKE COUNTY IL NONE GIVEN NONE GIVEN IL LAKE 5/21/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314263 PNC BANK NA PNC MOBILE KANE COUNTY IL NONE GIVEN NONE GIVEN IL KANE 5/21/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314264 PNC BANK NA PNC MOBILE COOK COUNTY IL NONE GIVEN NONE GIVEN IL COOK 5/21/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/20/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314266 BANK OF AMERICA, NAMAYFIELD HEIGHTS 1318 SOM CENTER ROAD MAYFIELD HEIGHTS OH CUYAHOGA 5/20/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314306 HUNTINGTON NB BEREA DRIVE THRU 31 E. BRIDGE ST. BEREA OH CUYAHOGA 5/24/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/22/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314314 BANK OF AMERICA, NAFORESTVILLE 7765 BEECHMONT AVE CINCINNATI OH HAMILTON 5/22/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/22/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314315 BANK OF AMERICA, NAVALLEY FAIR MALL 3601 SOUTH 2700 WEST, STE G128 WEST VALLEY CITY UT SALT LAKE 5/22/2020 ## 8 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details RECEIPT 4/23/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314322 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA CORNELL AND MURRAY NEC NW CORNELL ROAD AND NW TRAIL AVENUE PORTLAND OR WASHINGTON 5/22/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/23/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314323 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA GREENWAY TOWN CENTER SWC SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD AKA HWY 210 & SW 121ST AVE TIGARD OR WASHINGTON 5/22/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/23/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-LB-BRANCHNEW314324 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA SE 82ND DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 212 SWC SE 82ND DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 212 CLACKAMAS OR CLACKAMAS 5/22/2020 ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/22/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-SOBRANCHNEW-312431 WOODFOREST NB TUPELO (WALMART) - MS - BRANCH 2270 W MAIN ST TUPELO MS LEE ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-SOBRANCHNEW-313407 LONE STAR NB MORTGAGE CENTER 4500 N. 10TH ST. MCALLEN TX HIDALGO ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 BRANCH ESTABLISHMENT 2020-SOBRANCHNEW-313673 FIRST NB TEXAS FIRST CONVENIENCE BANK - AUSTIN - CONGRESS AVENUE 8801 SOUTH CONGRESS AVE. AUSTIN TX TRAVIS ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 BUSINESS COMBINATIONS 2020-NECOMBINATION314330 WEBSTER BAK, N.A. STATE FARM BANK, FSB ONE STATE FARM PLAZA, E-6 BLOOMINGTON IL MCLEAN 5/24/2020 ## 9 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details APPROVED 4/24/2020 BUSINESS COMBINATIONS 2020-SOCOMBINATION313794 COMMERCIAL BANK OF TEXAS, N.A. CAPTEX BANK, NA 106 HAMILTON STREET TRENTION TX FANNIN ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 CONVERSIONS 2020-CE-CONVERSION314328 MID CENTRAL FSB MID-CENTRAL NATIONAL BANK 520 JEFFERSON ST S WADENA MN WADENA ### Details RECEIPT 4/20/2020 FIDUCIARY POWERS2020-CE-FIDUCIARY314309 THE PARK NB N/A 50 NORTH THIRD STREET NEWARK OH LICKING ### Details RECEIPT 4/20/2020 NEW BANK CHARTER 2020-WE-CHARTER314303 MONZO BANK USA, NAMONZO BANK USA, NA TO BE DETERMINED SAN FRANCISCO CA SAN FRANCISCO 5/22/2020 ### Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/20/2020 RELOCATION 2019-LB-RELOCATION311194 BANK OF AMERICA, NANORTHBROOK 1200 SHERMER ROAD NORTHBROOK IL COOK ### Details APPROVED 4/21/2020 RELOCATION 2020-LB-RELOCATION313840 HSBC BANK USA NA NORTHERN BOULEVARD BRANCH 220-40 NORTHERN BOULEVARD FLUSHING NY QUEENS ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 RELOCATION 2020-LB-RELOCATION314217 PNC BANK NA BETHEL PARK 5035 LIBRARY ROAD BETHEL PARK PA PA ALLEGHENY 5/24/2020 ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 RELOCATION 2020-LB-RELOCATION314295 SANTANDER BANK, NAFINANCIAL DISTRICT 2 GOLD STREET NEW YORK NY NEW YORK 5/24/2020 ## 10 ## ACTION DATE TYPE APPLICATION NUMBER BANK NAMEBRANCH NAME TARGET BANK LOCATION CITY STATE COUNTYCMT PD END Details CONSUMMATED EFFECTIVE 4/20/2020 RELOCATION 2020-NE-RELOCATION313257 CORNERSTONE BANK, NA COLLEGE SQUARE CIRCLE BRANCH 744 NORTH LEE HIGHWAY LEXINGTON VA ROCKBRIDGE ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 SUBSIDIARIES & EQUITIES 2020-LBSUBS&EQUITIES314332 CAPITAL ONE, NA N/A 1680 CAPITAL ONE DRIVE MCLEAN VA FAIRFAX ### Details RECEIPT 4/24/2020 SUBSIDIARIES & EQUITIES 2020-LBSUBS&EQUITIES314333 CAPITAL ONE, NA N/A 1680 CAPITAL ONE DRIVE MCLEAN VA FAIRFAX ## 11
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca7.15-2997.15.0.pdf.json	No: 15-2997 ___________________________________________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ___________________________________________________________________________ JACOB LEWIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EPIC SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ___________________________________________________________________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN, CASE NO. 15-CV-82-BBC HONORABLE JUDGE BARBARA B. CRABB ___________________________________________________________________________ BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE JACOB LEWIS __________________________________________________________________________ WILLIAM E. PARSONS DAVID C. ZOELLER CAITLIN M. MADDEN KATELYNN M. WILLIAMS HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 (608) 257-0040 DANIEL A. ROTTIER JASON J. KNUTSON BREANNE L. SNAPP HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 (608) 255-6663 FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE JACOB LEWIS Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 i No: 15-2997 ___________________________________________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ___________________________________________________________________________ JACOB LEWIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EPIC SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ______________________________________________________________________________ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE __________________________________________________________________________ Pursuant to 7th Cir. R. 26.1, the undersigned makes the following disclosures: 1. The full name of the party represented in this case by the attorneys named below is Jacob Lewis. 2. The following law firm has appeared before the district court and this Court: HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. by William E. Parsons, David C. Zoeller, Caitlin M. Madden, and Katelynn M. Williams. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 ii Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, this 9th day of December, 2015. /s/ Caitlin M. Madden HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. William E. Parsons wparsons@hq-law.com David C. Zoeller dzoeller@hq-law.com Caitlin M. Madden cmadden@hq-law.com Katelynn M. Williams kwilliams@hq-law.com 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 Telephone: 608-257-0040 Facsimile: 608-256-0236 HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. Daniel A. Rottier rottier@habush.com Jason J. Knutson jknutson@habush.com Breanne L. Snapp bsnapp@habush.com 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Telephone: 608-255-6663 Facsimile: 608-255-0745 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 iii No: 15-2997 ___________________________________________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ___________________________________________________________________________ JACOB LEWIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EPIC SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ______________________________________________________________________________ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE __________________________________________________________________________ Pursuant to 7th Cir. R. 26.1, the undersigned makes the following disclosures: 1. The full name of the party represented in this case by the attorneys named below is Jacob Lewis. 2. The following law firm has appeared before the district court and this Court: HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER, S.C., by Daniel A. Rottier, Jason J. Knutson, and Breanne L. Snapp. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 iv Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, this 9th day of December, 2015. /s/ Caitlin M. Madden HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. William E. Parsons wparsons@hq-law.com David C. Zoeller dzoeller@hq-law.com Caitlin M. Madden cmadden@hq-law.com Katelynn M. Williams kwilliams@hq-law.com 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 Telephone: 608-257-0040 Facsimile: 608-256-0236 HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. Daniel A. Rottier rottier@habush.com Jason J. Knutson jknutson@habush.com Breanne L. Snapp bsnapp@habush.com 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Telephone: 608-255-6663 Facsimile: 608-255-0745 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 v TABLE OF CONTENTS DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE .....................................i TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................ v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................vii JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT ............................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE ..................................................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE....................................................................................... 3 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT .............................................................................. 6 ARGUMENT................................................................................................................ 10 I. THE RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COLLECTIVE ACTION FOR MUTUAL AID AND PROTECTION IS A SUBSTANTIVE RIGHT PROTECTED BY THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT............................................................. 10 A. Section 7 Rights to Collective Activity Are Fundamental, Substantive Rights Protected by the NLRA and Include an Individual’s Right to Represent a Group of Employees in a Collective Legal Action........................................................................................ 11 B. The Class Waiver Clause in Epic’s Agreement Strips Employees of the Section 7 Right to Act Collectively for Mutual Aid and Protection............................................................................................ 15 C. This Court Must Afford the National Labor Relations Board’s Interpretation of the NLRA Deference.............................................. 17 II. THERE IS NO CONFLICT BETWEEN THE NLRA AND THE FAA; THEREFORE, THE COURT MUST GIVE EFFECT TO BOTH STATUTES.. 20 A. The Federal Arbitration Act Puts Agreements to Arbitrate on Equal Footing with Other Contracts............................................................ 22 B. The FAA Does Not Require Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements that Waive Substantive Federal Rights. ........................................... 23 C. The Saving Clause of the FAA Specifically Precludes Enforcement of a Contract That Waives Substantive Federal Rights. ...................... 27 III. THE NLRA DOES POSSESS THE CONTRARY CONGRESSIONAL COMMAND TO OVERRIDE THE FAA ............................................................. 31 IV. THE CASES CITED BY EPIC ARE INAPPOSITE AND UNPERSUASIVE... 36 A. The Fifth Circuit’s Decision in D.R. Horton v. NLRB Failed To Harmonize the NLRA and FAA as Required. ................................... 37 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 vi B. Epic Overstates Holdings of Other Courts on the Question of Whether No-Class Arbitration Provisions Violate Substantive Rights Under the NLRA ................................................................................ 40 V. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, THIS CASE MUST BE REMANDED TO CONSIDER UNCONSCIONABILITY AND CONTRACT ARGUMENTS ....... 43 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................. 44 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH FRAP 32(a)(7)(B)................................... 45 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE..................................................................................... 46 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 vii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 556 U.S. 247 (2009)...................................................... 24 200 E. 81st Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Beyoglu & Marjan Arsovski, 362 NLRB No. 152, 2015 WL 4572913 (July 29, 2015) ............................................................. 6, 8, 13, 17 ABF Freight System, Inc. v. NLRB, 510 U.S. 317 (1994) .................................... 18, 36 Adams v. Citicorp Credit Servs., Inc., 93 F. Supp. 3d 441 (M.D.N.C. 2015)............. 41 Altex Ready Mixed Concrete Corp. v. NLRB, 542 F.2d 295 (5th Cir.1976) .......... 6, 12 American Exp. Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, 133 S. Ct. 2304 (2013) 10, 21, 26, 31 Appelbaum v. AutoNation Inc., No. SACV 13-01927 JVS, 2014 WL 1396585 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2014) ..................................................................................................... 40 AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011) ........................................... passim Barrentine v. Ark.-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728 (1981) ............................... 35 Birdsong v. AT&T Corp., No. C12-6175 TEH, 2013 WL 1120783 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2013) ......................................................................................................................... 40 Booker v. Robert Half Intern., Inc., 413 F.3d 77 (D.C. Cir. 2005) ............................. 24 Brady v. Nat’l Football League, 644 F.3d 661 (8th Cir. 2011)............................. 12, 24 Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (2011)................. 33 Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440 (2006)................................. 7 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) ............................................................................................................................ 17, 19 Chico v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc., No. CV 14-5750-JFW (SSx), 2014 WL 5088240 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2014) ............................................................................................ 40 Cilluffo v. Cent. Refrigerated Servs., No. EDCV 12-00886 VAP (OPx), 2012 WL 8523507 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2012).......................................................................... 40 Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105 (2001) ............................................ 33 CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood, 132 S. Ct. 665 (2012).................................... 23, 31 Cunningham v. Leslie's Poolmart, Inc., No. CV 13-2122 CAS CWX, 2013 WL 3233211 (C.D. Cal. June 25, 2013) .......................................................................... 40 D.R. Horton v. NLRB, 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013) .......................................... passim Delock v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc., 883 F. Supp. 2d 784 (E.D. Ark. 2012).... 40 Dixon v. NBCUniversal Media, LLC, 947 F. Supp. 2d 390 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)............. 41 Doctor’s Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, 517 U.S. 681 (1996)....................................... 30 Eastex, Inc. v. NLRB, 437 U.S. 556 (1978)......................................................... passim Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 viii Fardig v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., No. SACV 14-561 JVS ANX, 2014 WL 2810025 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2014) ......................................................................................... 40 Fimby-Christensen v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., No. 5:13-CV-01007-EJD, 2013 WL 6158040 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2013) .......................................................................... 40 Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20 (1991)................. 14, 22, 23, 24 Green v. Zachry Indus., Inc., 36 F. Supp. 3d 669 (W.D. Va. 2014)............................ 39 Hadnot v. Bay, Ltd., 344 F.3d 474 (5th Cir. 2003) ..................................................... 24 Hall Street Associates, LLC v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008).................... 6, 19, 22 Harco Trucking, LLC, 344 NLRB 478, 2005 WL 762110 (2005) ............................... 13 Herrington v. Waterstone Mortgage Corp., No. 11-CV-779-BBC, 2012 WL 1242318 (W.D. Wis. Mar. 16, 2012, aff’d, 993 F. Supp. 2d 940, 946 (W.D. Wis. 2014) .......... 5 Hickey v. Brinker Int'l Payroll Co., L.P., No. 1:13-CV-00951-REB-BNB, 2014 WL 622883 (D. Colo. Feb. 18, 2014)............................................................................... 40 In re D.R. Horton, Inc., 357 NLRB No. 184, 2012 WL 36274 (2012)................. passim Indiana Gear Works v. NLRB, 371 F.2d 273 (7th Cir. 1967)..................................... 13 J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Intern., Inc., 534 U.S. 124 (2001).......... 20 J.I. Case Co. v. NLRB, 321 U.S. 332 (1944).......................................................... 16, 25 Jasso v. Money Mart Express, et. al., 879 F. Supp. 2d 1038 (C.D. Cal. 2012) .......... 40 Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale’s, Inc., 755 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2014)................. 42 Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins, 455 U.S. 72 (1982).............................................. passim Knight v. Rent-A-Ctr. E., Inc., No. CIV.A. 4:13-1734-MGL, 2013 WL 6826963 (D.S.C. Dec. 23, 2013) .............................................................................................. 39 Kremer v. Chemical Constr. Corp., 456 U.S. 461 (1982) ........................................... 21 Kristian v. Comcast Corp., 446 F.3d 25 (1st Cir. 2006) ............................................. 24 LaVoice v. UBS Fin. Servs., Inc., No. 11 CIV. 2308 BSJ JLC, 2012 WL 124590 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2012)........................................................................................... 41 Le Madri Rest., 331 NLRB 269, 2000 WL 718228 (2000).......................................... 13 Leviton Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 486 F.2d 686 (1st Cir. 1973) ........................................... 12 Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26 (1998).......... 32 Lloyd v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., No. 11 CIV. 9305 LTS, 2013 WL 4828588 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2013) ........................................................................................... 41 Longnecker v. American Exp. Co., 23 F. Supp. 3d 1099 (D. Ariz. 2014) ................... 40 Lutheran Heritage Village-Livonia, 343 NLRB No. 75, 2004 WL 2678632 (2004) .. 15 Mackey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc., 486 U.S. 825 (1988) ............... 29 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 ix Marx v. General Revenue Corp., 133 S. Ct. 1166 (2013)............................................ 29 Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Epstein, 516 U.S. 367 (1996) ........................... 21 Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614 (1985) .......................................................................................................................... passim Mohave Elec. Coop., Inc. v. NLRB, 206 F.3d 1183 (D.C. Cir. 2000).......................... 12 Morris v. Ernst & Young, No. 13-16599 (9th Cir. argued Nov. 17, 2015) ................. 42 Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974)........................................................... 8, 20, 27 Morvant v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc., 870 F. Supp. 2d 831 (N.D. Cal. May 7, 2012) ......................................................................................................................... 40 Moss Planing Mill Co., 103 NLRB 414, 1953 WL 11064 (1953), enf’d, 206 F.2d 557 (4th Cir. 1953) .......................................................................................................... 13 Murphy Oil USA, Inc. and Sheila M. Hobson, 361 NLRB No. 72, 2014 WL 5465454 (Oct. 28, 2014) .................................................................................................. passim Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. NLRB, No. 14-60800, 2015 WL 6457613 (5th Cir. Oct. 26, 2015) ......................................................................................................................... 37 National Licorice Co. v. NLRB, 309 U.S. 350 (1940).................................. 6, 16, 25, 29 NLRB v. City Disposal Sys. Inc., 465 U.S. 822 (1984) ................................... 12, 17, 32 NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937).................................. 11, 34 NLRB v. Local Union No. 103, 434 U.S. 335 (1978)................................................... 18 NLRB v. Stone, 125 F.2d 752 (7th Cir. 1942)................................................. 25, 26, 29 Ortiz v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 3d 1070 (E.D. Cal. 2014) ................. 40 Owen v. Bristol Care, Inc. 702 F.3d 1050 (8th Cir. 2013).......................................... 40 Pelton Casteel, Inc. v. NLRB, 627 F.2d 23 (7th Cir. 1980) .................................. 13, 40 Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R.R. Co. v. Railway Labor Executives’ Ass’n, 491 U.S. 490 (1989)........................................................................................................................ 20 Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967)....................... 28 Richards v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 744 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2013) cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 355 (2014) ..................................................................................................... 41, 42 Rogers v. Baxter Intern., Inc., 521 F.3d 702 (7th Cir. 2008) ..................................... 20 Securities Indus. Ass’n v. Board of Governors of Federal Reserve Sys., 468 U.S. 137 (1984)........................................................................................................................ 21 Shady Grove Orthopedic Assoc., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010) ....... 14 Shearson/Am. Express, Inc. v. McMahon, 482 U.S. 220 (1987)................................. 31 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 x Siy v. CashCall, Inc., No. 2:13-CV-00953-PAL, 2014 WL 37879 (D. Nev. Jan. 6, 2014) ......................................................................................................................... 40 Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB, 467 U.S. 883 (1984)......................................................... 8, 18 Sutherland v. Ernst & Young LLP, 726 F.3d 290 (2d Cir. 2013)......................... 14, 41 Sylvester v. Wintrust Fin. Corp., No. 12 C 01899, 2014 WL 10416989 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 26, 2014) ................................................................................................................... 39 Torres v. United Healthcare Servs., Inc., 920 F. Supp. 2d 368 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) ...... 41 Trinity Trucking & Materials Corp., 221 NLRB 364, 1975 WL 6428 (1975), enf’d mem., 567 F.2d 391 (7th Cir. 1977) cert. denied, 438 U.S. 914 (1978) .................. 13 Trompler, Inc. v. NLRB, 338 F.3d 747 (7th Cir. 2003)......................................... 12, 17 United Parcel Serv., Inc., 252 NLRB 1015, 1980 WL 12506 (1980), enf’d, 677 F.2d 421 (6th Cir. 1982) ................................................................................................... 13 Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros, S.A. v. M/V Sky Reefer, 515 U.S. 528 (1995)... 8, 20, 22 Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. 468 (1989)....................................................................................... 22 Walthour v. Chipio Windshield Repair, LLC, 745 F.3d 1326 (11th Cir. 2014)......... 41 Zabelny v. CashCall, Inc., No. 2:13-CV-00853-PAL, 2014 WL 67638 (D. Nev. Jan. 8, 2014) ......................................................................................................................... 40 Statutes 29 U.S.C. § 157..................................................................................................... passim 29 U.S.C. § 158............................................................................................. 6, 11, 15, 32 29 U.S.C. § 216............................................................................................................. 14 9 U.S.C. § 2........................................................................................................... passim Other Authorities Hearings Before the Comm. on Education and Labor on S. 1958, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. 1414 (1935)................................................................................................ 34, 35 Hearings Before the Comm. on Education and Labor on S. 2926, 73rd Cong., 2nd Sess. 47 (1934).......................................................................................................... 34 Rules Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 ......................................................................................................... 14 Treatises III S. Williston, Williston on Contracts § 1630 (1920) ......................................... 22, 30 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 1 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT The Appellant’s jurisdictional statement is complete and correct. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 2 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE Whether the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin properly held that Epic Systems Corporation’s arbitration agreement, which bars employees from bringing wage claims collectively, is an illegal contract and therefore may be invalidated under the Federal Arbitration Act’s saving clause because it interferes with employees’ right to act collectively for their mutual aid and protection in violation of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 3 STATEMENT OF THE CASE On April 2, 2014, Epic Systems Corporation (“Epic”) disseminated an arbitration agreement to its employees which explicitly foreclosed their ability to bring a class wage claim in either judicial or arbitral forums (“the Agreement”). (Dkt. #12.2, Short Appendix (“S.A.”) 11-13.) Acceptance of this Agreement was a condition of continued employment. The Agreement applies to “covered claims,” which it defined as: “any statutory or common law legal claims...alleging the underpayment or overpayment of wages, expenses, loans, reimbursements, bonuses, commissions, advances, or any element of compensation.” (S.A. 11.) The Agreement bans employees from bringing their wage claims collectively or as part of a class: Waiver of Class and Collective Claims. I also agree that covered claims will be arbitrated only on an individual basis, and that both Epic and I waive the right to participate in or receive money or any other relief from any class, collective, or representative proceeding. No party may bring a claim on behalf of other individuals, and any arbitrator hearing my claim may not: (i) combine more than one individual’s claim or claims into a single case; (ii) participate in or facilitate notification of others of potential claims; or (iii) arbitrate any form of a class, collective, or representative proceeding. (S.A. 11.) The Agreement also includes a clause which states that if the “Waiver of Class and Collective Claims” (hereafter “Class Waiver”) is unenforceable, “then any claim brought on a class, collective, or representative action basis must be filed in a court of competent jurisdiction.” (S.A. 12-13.) Therefore, if a court invalidates the Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 4 Class Waiver for any reason, under the terms of the Agreement, Epic requires employees to bring any collective or class claims in court rather than in arbitration. Appellee Jacob Lewis (“Lewis”), formerly employed by Epic as a “Technical Writer,” filed the instant case on February 10, 2015 on behalf of himself and a similarly-situated class of technical writers. Since the filing of this action, nine additional Technical Writers have filed consents to join the case. Lewis’s complaint alleges that Epic deprived Technical Writers of overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and Wisconsin law. On April 13, 2015, Epic filed a motion to dismiss Lewis’s case and compel individual arbitration, alleging that Lewis is bound by the Agreement and the Class Waiver. In Lewis’s response to Epic’s motion to dismiss, Lewis raised three arguments against enforcement of the Agreement. First, the Agreement was unconscionable as it unreasonably favored Epic and did not reflect a meeting of the minds. (S.A. 1.) Second, the Agreement was not supported by consideration because Epic retained the unilateral right to alter or abandon its terms. (S.A. 1.) Finally, the Class Waiver violated the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) because it interfered with employees’ right to engage in collective legal action for their mutual aid and protection. On September 11, 2015, the district court found that Epic’s Class Waiver violated the NLRA. (S.A. 1-5.) The district court did not rule on Lewis’s alternative contract arguments, finding the NLRA violation dispositive. (Id.) Following the Court’s reasoning in Herrington v. Waterstone Mortgage Corp., No. 11-CV-779- Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 5 BBC, 2012 WL 1242318, at 6 (W.D. Wis. Mar. 16, 2012, aff’d, 993 F. Supp. 2d 940, 946 (W.D. Wis. 2014)), the Class Waiver illegally interfered with Epic’s employees’ Section 7 rights under the NLRA. (S.A. 1-5.) The district court invalidated the Class Waiver, recognizing the filing of collective and class lawsuits is “concerted activity” protected by Section 7 of the NLRA, and giving “considerable deference” to the National Labor Relations Board’s interpretation of the NLRA as protecting the substantive right to engage in such concerted activity. (S.A. 4.) Per the terms of the Agreement, the invalidation of the Class Waiver required this case to be heard in court. Accordingly, the district court enforced these terms and denied Epic’s motion to dismiss. Epic filed its notice of appeal the same day. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 6 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT This case presents no conflict between the FAA and the NLRA. A contract requiring employees as a condition of employment to waive their substantive right to act collectively for mutual aid and protection is illegal under the NLRA. See National Licorice Co. v. NLRB, 309 U.S. 350, 361 (1940); Murphy Oil USA, Inc. and Sheila M. Hobson, 361 NLRB No. 72, 2014 WL 5465454, at 3 (Oct. 28, 2014). The express terms of the FAA require the invalidation of such a contract. See 9 U.S.C. § 2. The Court can, and must, give effect to both the NLRA and the FAA by refusing to enforce this arbitration agreement. The NLRA protects employees’ right to “engage in...concerted activities for the purpose of...mutual aid or protection” from employer restraint or interference. 29 U.S.C. §§ 157, 158. Both courts and the Board, the agency charged with interpreting and enforcing the NLRA, have declared that an individual employee filing a legal claim on behalf of fellow employees is concerted activity and is therefore a substantive right protected by the NLRA. See, e.g., Altex Ready Mixed Concrete Corp. v. NLRB, 542 F.2d 295, 297 (5th Cir.1976); 200 E. 81st Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Beyoglu & Marjan Arsovski, 362 NLRB No. 152, 2015 WL 4572913, at 1-2 (July 29, 2015). Congress passed the FAA with the intention of placing agreements to arbitrate disputes on the same legal footing as any other contract and made abundantly clear the limits on a party’s power to compel arbitration. Hall Street Associates, LLC v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576, 581 (2008) (citing Buckeye Check Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 7 Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440, 443 (2006)). The FAA states that an agreement to submit to arbitration “shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” 9 U.S.C. § 2 (emphasis added). As such, under the plain language of the FAA and in line with the congressional purpose of the FAA, contract defenses such as illegality are applicable and may invalidate arbitration agreements, just as they would any other contract. Epic neither addresses this central issue nor demonstrates an actual conflict between the FAA and the NLRA. Instead, Epic erects and attacks a series of straw men in asking this Court to enforce an illegal contract which compels employees to give up their substantive right to join together in litigation against employers. Epic first belabors a point irrelevant to the question before this Court by contending that its Agreement is valid and covers the claims at issue in this case. (Appellant’s Brief (“Appellant’s Br.”) 15-19.) This misplaced argument has no bearing on employees’ substantive right under the NLRA to bring collective claims and the enforcement of this right consistent with the FAA. Epic then argues that the lower court improperly deferred to the Board’s interpretation of the FAA, grossly misstating the district court’s decision. In fact, the lower court deferred only to the Board’s interpretation of the NLRA, not the Board’s interpretation of the FAA. The Board, acting under the authority granted to it by Congress, has interpreted Section 7 of the NLRA to confer a substantive right on employees to act collectively for their mutual aid and support, and has Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 8 determined that this right includes an individual employee filing a collective complaint on behalf of fellow workers. In re D.R. Horton, Inc., 357 NLRB No. 184, 2012 WL 36274, at 2 (2012); Arsovski, 2015 WL 4572913, at 1-2. The lower court’s deference to this determination is appropriate; courts must defer to the Board’s interpretation of the statute it is charged to enforce, but not to the Board’s interpretation of other statutes. See Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB, 467 U.S. 883, 891, 899 (1984). After establishing that the NLRA protects employees’ substantive right to collective legal action, the Court must consider whether the agreement to arbitrate impermissibly requires employees to waive a substantive right. See Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins, 455 U.S. 72, 84-86 (1982). If so, according to the express terms of the FAA and Supreme Court precedent, the agreement to arbitrate is unenforceable, as with any other contract requiring a party to waive a substantive right. See 9 U.S.C. § 2; Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614, 628 (1985). According to Epic, however, the FAA creates super contracts which can disable or override generally applicable contract defenses or federal substantive rights. This argument defies the plain language of the FAA’s saving clause and ignores the courts’ duty to interpret federal statutes in a manner that gives effect to both where possible. See Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros, S.A. v. M/V Sky Reefer, 515 U.S. 528, 533 (1995) (citing Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 551 (1974)). The Fifth Circuit’s decision in D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB failed to read the NLRA and FAA in harmony. See 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013). Nevertheless, Epic asserts that because Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 9 many district courts have blindly followed the Fifth Circuit, this Court should too— without bothering to explain why the Fifth Circuit’s flawed reasoning is correct. The Fifth Circuit’s failure to even attempt to give effect to both the NLRA and the FAA flouts decades of jurisprudence requiring courts to interpret statutes in harmony where possible. As such, this Court should not follow the Fifth Circuit’s D.R. Horton decision. Epic also leans heavily on the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion to ostensibly support its position that courts must enforce any agreement to arbitrate that comes across the docket. See 563 U.S. 333 (2011). But the facts and legal principles of Concepcion differ so greatly from this case as to make the decision inapposite. Concepcion concerned California’s unconscionability rule which invalidated most agreements to arbitrate and specifically targeted arbitration, a significant factor in the Court’s decision. Id. at 343. This case concerns a federal statute, the NLRA, and the substantive rights it grants to employees, not judicial application of a state statute. Here, Lewis maintains only that courts must treat agreements to arbitrate like any other contract, the FAA’s express purpose. Because courts would invalidate any other contract stripping workers of a substantive right under the NLRA, the Court should not enforce Epic’s Agreement, putting it on equal footing with all other contracts. Unlike Concepcion, at stake here is the substantive right of workers to join together to litigate over the circumstances of their employment. The NLRA has faithfully protected this fundamental right since its inception. Epic cannot vaguely Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 10 invoke a pro-arbitration policy to justify its deprivation of its employees’ substantive right and to better its bottom line.1 This Court must interpret the NLRA and the FAA in harmony, which is necessary given that the FAA’s saving clause clearly empowers courts to invalidate arbitration contracts that would be illegal under any other name. This Court should affirm the district court’s ruling that Epic’s Class Waiver violates the substantive rights of Epic’s employees under the NLRA. ARGUMENT I. THE RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COLLECTIVE ACTION FOR MUTUAL AID AND PROTECTION IS A SUBSTANTIVE RIGHT PROTECTED BY THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT Parties cannot be required to waive statutory rights through an agreement to arbitrate. See Mitsubishi Motors, 473 U.S. at 637 (agreements to arbitrate are acceptable “so long as the prospective litigant effectively may vindicate its statutory cause of action in the arbitral forum”); American Exp. Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, 133 S. Ct. 2304, 2310 (2013) (agreement to arbitrate would clearly be invalidated should it “forbid[] the assertion of certain statutory rights.”). The NLRA, interpreted and enforced by the Board, protects the substantive right of employees to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of mutual aid and protection. 29 U.S.C. § 157. Legal action on behalf of a class of employees has long been recognized 1 As noted by the New York Times in a recent three-part series, mandatory no-class arbitration clauses have exploded in both the consumer and employment context, limiting the ability of individuals to seek remedies for consumer and employment grievances. See Jessica Silver-Greenberg & Robert Geberloff, Arbitration Everywhere, Stacking the Deck of Justice, N.Y. Times, Oct. 31, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/business/dealbook/arbitration-everywhere-stackingthe-deck-of-justice.html?_r=0. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 11 by the Board and the courts as a protected activity under the NLRA. See, e.g., Eastex, Inc. v. NLRB, 437 U.S. 556, 565-67 (1978). Because a contract which requires an individual to waive a substantive right is illegal, the Class Waiver in Epic’s Agreement is unenforceable under the saving clause in the FAA allowing contract defenses to invalidate an agreement to arbitrate. A. Section 7 Rights to Collective Activity Are Fundamental, Substantive Rights Protected by the NLRA and Include an Individual’s Right to Represent a Group of Employees in a Collective Legal Action. It is beyond question that the NLRA protects a substantive right to engage in collective legal action. The Board and courts widely recognize this right. In fact, this is the core right of the NLRA, which protects the right of employees to “engage in ...concerted activities for the purpose of...mutual aid or protection.” 29 U.S.C. § 157 (“Section 7” rights); In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274, at 7; Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 1. The NLRA makes this right legally enforceable; under Section 8 of the NLRA, it is an “unfair labor practice for an employer to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section [7].” 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1). Employees’ right to engage in concerted activities under Section 7 of the NLRA is a “fundamental right.” NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1, 33 (1937). Courts must broadly interpret the actions that constitute concerted activities under Section 7. See Eastex, 437 U.S. at 565-67 (observing that Section 7 is intended to protect “concerted activities” for the broad purpose of “mutual aid or Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 12 protection,” which covers employees seeking “to improve terms and conditions of employment or otherwise improve their lot as employees through channels outside the immediate employee-employer relationship”); see also NLRB v. City Disposal Sys. Inc., 465 U.S. 822, 835 (1984) (Congress did not intend to limit Section 7 “protection to situations in which an employee’s activity and that of his fellow employees combine with one another in any particular way” or “to have this general protection withdrawn in situations in which a single employee, acting alone, participates in an integral aspect of a collective process”); Trompler, Inc. v. NLRB, 338 F.3d 747, 748 (7th Cir. 2003). Both the courts and the Board recognize that employees’ filing of a legal complaint including a class or collective action is a “concerted activity” under Section 7 of the NLRA. See, e.g., Eastex, 437 U.S. at 565-67 (“concerted activities” for “mutual aid or protection” covers employees’ resort to administrative and judicial forums); Brady v. Nat’l Football League, 644 F.3d 661, 673 (8th Cir. 2011) (“a lawsuit filed in good faith by a group of employees to achieve more favorable terms or conditions of employment is ‘concerted activity’ under § 7 of the [NLRA]”); Altex Ready Mixed Concrete, 542 F.2d at 297; Leviton Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 486 F.2d 686, 689 (1st Cir. 1973); Mohave Elec. Coop., Inc. v. NLRB, 206 F.3d 1183, 1189 (D.C. Cir. 2000); In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274, at 2, 12 (2012) (listing cases and holding that the longstanding “right to engage in collective action—including collective legal action—is the core substantive right protected by the NLRA and is the foundation on which the [NLRA] and Federal labor policy rest.”); Harco Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 13 Trucking, LLC, 344 NLRB 478, 2005 WL 762110, at 2-3 (2005); Le Madri Rest., 331 NLRB 269, 2000 WL 718228, at 14 (2000); United Parcel Serv., Inc., 252 NLRB 1015, 1980 WL 12506, at 7 (1980), enf’d, 677 F.2d 421 (6th Cir. 1982); Trinity Trucking & Materials Corp., 221 NLRB 364, 1975 WL 6428, at 2 (1975), enf’d mem., 567 F.2d 391 (7th Cir. 1977) cert. denied, 438 U.S. 914 (1978); Moss Planing Mill Co., 103 NLRB 414, 1953 WL 11064, at 3 (1953) (concerted wage claim), enf’d, 206 F.2d 557 (4th Cir. 1953). Further, a single employee’s filing of a class or collective action on behalf of others constitutes protected “concerted activity.” Individual employees engage in protected “concerted activities” under Section 7 where “the employee’s actions themselves at least contemplate some group activity.” Pelton Casteel, Inc. v. NLRB, 627 F.2d 23, 28 (7th Cir. 1980). That is, the individual employee’s activity must be “for the purpose of inducing or preparing for group action to correct a grievance or a complaint.” Id. (citing Indiana Gear Works v. NLRB, 371 F.2d 273, 276 (7th Cir. 1967)). The Board has explicitly held that a single employee filing an FLSA action individually and on behalf of similarly situated employees satisfies this requirement. See Arsovski, 2015 WL 4572913, at 1-2 (“this potential to initiate or to induce or to prepare for group action...collectively seeking legal redress...satisfies the concert requirement of Section 7.”) (internal citations omitted). At issue in this case is whether Epic’s Class Waiver deprives Lewis of his substantive right to act collectively under the NLRA. While Epic and other courts considering this issue have focused on whether the collective action mechanism in Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 14 the FLSA or the class action procedure outlined in Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 are substantive rights, this is not the argument Lewis makes here, nor is this the reasoning underlying the district court’s decision. Courts have found that federal statutes such as FLSA or ADEA that allow collective action procedures do not furnish employees with the substantive right to bring collective claims. See, e.g., Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 32 (1991); Sutherland v. Ernst & Young LLP, 726 F.3d 290, 296-97 (2d Cir. 2013). Lewis does not argue that he has a substantive right to act collectively under either the FLSA or Rule 23. Rather, Lewis maintains that Epic’s Class Waiver does not just deprive Lewis of a procedural device, it abrogates his substantive federal statutory right under Section 7 of the NLRA. The Supreme Court considered the distinction between “procedure” and “substance” in Shady Grove Orthopedic Assoc., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co., determining that the class action mechanism under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 is a procedural rather than a substantive right. 559 U.S. 393, 406-409 (2010). Where a rule governs only “the manner and means by which the litigants’ rights are enforced,” it is a procedural right. Id. at 407 (internal citations omitted). In contrast to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and the collective action mechanism under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), the right to engage in concerted activity is a substantive right under the NLRA. Therefore, the Court’s inquiry is whether the NLRA protects a substantive right to act collectively. A long history of legal precedent and Board decisions supports that such a right exists. Epic does not dispute that collective legal action is a central substantive right Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 15 protected by Section 7 of the NLRA. Section 8 of the NLRA prohibits interference with this right. 29 U.S.C. § 158. The text of Epic’s Class Waiver clearly prevents employees from collectively filing any action; the Class Waiver bans not only the filing of such actions in court, but also prohibits employees from arbitrating their claims as a class, or grouping their arbitrations in any way. (S.A. 11.) This proscription on collective legal action blatantly interferes with employees’ right to act concertedly, a substantive right protected by the NLRA. 29 U.S.C §§ 157, 158. B. The Class Waiver Clause in Epic’s Agreement Strips Employees of the Section 7 Right to Act Collectively for Mutual Aid and Protection. An employer-mandated arbitration contract that deprives employees of the Section 7 right to pursue their claims on a class or collective basis violates Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA, which provides that employers may not “interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 157....” 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1); Herrington v. Waterstone Mortgage, 993 F. Supp. 2d 940, 943 (W.D. Wis. 2014). Specifically, to determine whether a workplace rule violates Section 8(a)(1), the first consideration is whether the rule explicitly restricts activities protected by Section 7. Lutheran Heritage Village-Livonia, 343 NLRB No. 75, 2004 WL 2678632, at 1 (2004). The Board has determined that provisions requiring employees to waive their right to act collectively are explicit restrictions on activity protected by Section 7. Interpreting Section 7 and 8 of the NLRA in tandem, the Board held: Just as the substantive right to engage in concerted activity aimed at improving wages, hours or working conditions through litigation or arbitration lies at the core Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 16 of the rights protected by Section 7, the prohibition of individual agreements imposed on employees as a means of requiring that they waive their right to engage in protected, concerted activity lies at the core of the prohibitions contained in Section 8. In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 7; see also Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 6 (reaffirming its conclusion in D.R. Horton that the filing of collective litigation is a protected Section 7 right). Here, Epic failed to acknowledge the Board’s reasonable interpretation of the NLRA as conferring on employees’ substantive federal right to collective legal action. Epic gives short shrift to the unequivocal language of Section 8(a)(1). In fact, Epic ignores altogether the district court’s conclusion that its Agreement violates that provision by interfering with its employees’ right to collective legal action. Packaging interference with a Section 7 right in the guise of “arbitration” does not give Epic a pass on complying with the NLRA. J.I. Case Co. v. NLRB, 321 U.S. 332, 337 (1944) (“Individual contracts no matter what the circumstances that justify their execution or what their terms, may not be availed of to defeat or delay the procedures prescribed by the National Labor Relations Act.”). See also National Licorice Co., 309 U.S. at 361 (holding that individual contracts in which employees “stipulate[] for the renunciation...of rights guaranteed by the [NLRA]” are unenforceable). If taking collective legal action is a substantive right under the NLRA, as the Board and the courts have established, then no contract, even an arbitration contract, may force an employee to give up that right. Epic’s Agreement, via the Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 17 Class Waiver, prevents its employees from acting collectively for their mutual benefit and thus unlawfully restricts their Section 7 rights. It violates Section 8 of the NLRA and is illegal and unenforceable. C. This Court Must Afford the National Labor Relations Board’s Interpretation of the NLRA Deference. Courts must defer to the Board’s determination that the NLRA protects the right of employees to bring collective action lawsuits. So too must courts defer to the Board’s conclusion that an individual employee filing a class or collective lawsuit on behalf of similarly situated employees is engaged in “concerted activities” protected by Section 7. See Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 844 (1984); Arsovski, 2015 WL 4572913, at 1-2. In particular, where a statute is “silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue,” the court must defer to the agency’s interpretation, if that interpretation is reasonable. Chevron, 467 U.S. at 842-44. The Supreme Court has consistently deferred to the Board’s construction of the NLRA, including its interpretation of which actions constitute protected concerted activities. See City Disposal Sys. Inc., 465 U.S. at 829-30 (“we have often reaffirmed that the task of defining the scope of § 7 ‘is for the Board to perform in the first instance as it considers the wide variety of cases that come before it.’” (citing Eastex, Inc., 437 U.S. 556 at 568)); see also Trompler, Inc., 338 F.3d at 748 (recognizing that “Congress has delegated to the Board the authority to make rules filling gaps” in the NLRA, and that the “lack of definition of protected concerted activities is such a gap”); ABF Freight System, Inc. v. NLRB, 510 U.S. 317, 324 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 18 (1994); Sure-Tan, 467 U.S. at 891; NLRB v. Local Union No. 103, 434 U.S. 335, 350 (1978) (giving “considerable deference” to the Board’s “defensible construction of the statute”). The Court must defer to the Board’s conclusion that an individual employee filing a class or collective action on behalf of other employees is “concerted activity” and a substantive right under the NLRA. Epic’s brief misleadingly fixates on whether the Board’s interpretations of the FAA should be provided any deference, while ignoring the deference due to the Board’s interpretation of the statute it does enforce, the NLRA. Epic’s assertion that “the Board’s Horton decision is not entitled to deference by the courts, since the Board purported to assign itself authority that it does not possess in order to interpret the FAA” disingenuously misstates the Board’s decision in In re D.R. Horton. (Appellant’s Br. 31.) In fact, the Board in In re D.R. Horton diligently adhered to the letter of the FAA itself (namely, the Section 2 saving clause) and to Supreme Court precedent prohibiting prospective waiver of federal substantive rights. See In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 12. Here, the district court did the same, deferring to the Board’s reasonable interpretation of the NLRA as protecting the federal substantive right to collective legal action, and relying on Supreme Court precedent prohibiting the violation of that right in invalidating Epic’s Class Waiver. (S.A. 1-5); see also Herrington, 993 F. Supp. 2d 940. Deference to the Board’s definition of “concerted activities” does not encroach on the FAA. For example, in In re D.R. Horton, the Board held that engaging in collective legal action is a protected Section 7 right under the NLRA. 2012 WL Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 19 36274 at 2-3; see also Eastex, 437 U.S. at 565-67. As such, the Board determined that a class waiver clause in an arbitration agreement impermissibly restricted employees’ Section 7 rights by preventing employees from jointly seeking legal redress through collective action. In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 4. This analysis does not involve interpreting the FAA, only the NLRA. In making this decision, the Board did not “wholly ignore other and equally important Congressional objectives” (Appellant’s Br. 31)—to the contrary, it carefully weighed the requirements of the FAA. The Board explicitly noted that when administering the NLRA, it “must be and is mindful of any conflicts between the terms of policies of the Act and those of other federal statutes,” and, if such a conflict exists, it must “undertake a careful accommodation” of both statutes. In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 10. In so doing, the Board noted that the purpose of the FAA is to prevent courts from treating arbitration agreements less favorably from other private contracts. Id. at 11; see also Hall Street Associates, 552 U.S. at 581. Just as courts would not permit any other private contract to interfere with substantive rights granted by the NLRA, so too must an agreement to arbitrate accommodate those substantive rights. In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 11. Under Chevron, this Court must defer to this reasonable interpretation of the NLRA, as the Board is the agency charged with interpreting it. 467 U.S. at 842-43. Further, this Court can defer to the Board’s interpretation of the NLRA without encroaching on the FAA. As described in detail in Part II below, the Board’s determination that class waivers violate the NLRA can and must be harmonized Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 20 with the FAA, based on Supreme Court precedent and the language of the FAA itself. II. THERE IS NO CONFLICT BETWEEN THE NLRA AND THE FAA; THEREFORE, THE COURT MUST GIVE EFFECT TO BOTH STATUTES Cases in which the FAA prevails over other state or federal statutes, such as Concepcion and Italian Colors, do not relieve the Court of conducting the necessary analysis to determine if there is indeed a conflict between the statutes at issue here. The FAA’s saving clause, which retains generally applicable contract defenses, provides grounds for the two federal statutes to be read in harmony. The FAA cannot be used to overpower a generally applicable contract defense, such as a contract waiving that which cannot be legally waived under the NLRA. This Court can and must give effect to both the NLRA and FAA. Epic’s brief self-servingly assumes that the FAA and NLRA conflict such that the NLRA must provide a “contrary congressional command” that overrides the FAA. But this unfounded assumption puts the cart before the horse: when considering two federal statutes, a court’s first question must be whether they cover the same subject matter and, if so, whether they conflict. The court is obligated to regard two federal statutes as capable of co-existence when possible, absent a clearly-expressed congressional intention to the contrary. See Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros, 515 U.S. at 533 (citing Morton, 417 U.S. at 551); Rogers v. Baxter Intern., Inc., 521 F.3d 702, 705 (7th Cir. 2008); Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R.R. Co. v. Railway Labor Executives’ Ass’n, 491 U.S. 490, 510 (1989); J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Intern., Inc., 534 U.S. 124, 142 (2001); Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Epstein, 516 U.S. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 21 367, 380-81 (1996) (“The rarity with which we have discovered implied repeals is due to the relatively stringent standard for such findings, namely, that there be an ‘irreconcilable conflict’ between the two federal statutes at issue”) (citing Kremer v. Chemical Constr. Corp., 456 U.S. 461, 468 (1982)); Securities Indus. Ass’n v. Board of Governors of Federal Reserve Sys., 468 U.S. 137, 176 (1984) (O’Connor, J., dissenting) (construing one portion of federal law to implicitly override another “is a last resort...and must be avoided where an interpretation of the statutory language is available that is consistent with legislative intent and that shows the conflict to be merely apparent and not real”). Here, the Court can and must give effect to both the NLRA and FAA by upholding the lower court’s refusal to send claims to arbitration without the possibility of class arbitration for two reasons. First, under Supreme Court precedent, the FAA does not mandate enforcement of an arbitration agreement “according to its terms” if it operates to waive employees’ federal substantive rights. Italian Colors, 133 S. Ct. at 2310. The Class Waiver in Epic’s Agreement does precisely that by forcing employees as a condition of employment to waive their Section 7 right to bring collective claims addressing the conditions of their work. Second, the FAA’s saving clause affirms that arbitration contracts are subject to generally applicable contract defenses, such as illegality. See 9 U.S.C. § 2. It is a long-established tenet of contracts law that an illegal contract will not be enforced, and illegality may be a contract defense. See Kaiser, 455 U.S. at 78-79 (“our cases leave no doubt that illegal promises will not be enforced in cases controlled by the Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 22 federal law”); III S. Williston, Williston on Contracts § 1630, at 2865-66 (1920). Epic’s Class Waiver illegally interferes with employees’ rights under the NLRA. As such, it falls squarely within the FAA’s saving clause, because illegality is a generally applicable contract defense. These independent reasons compel the conclusion that the NLRA and FAA do not conflict, and that the district court’s decision correctly interpreted the two statutes in harmony. A. The Federal Arbitration Act Puts Agreements to Arbitrate on Equal Footing with Other Contracts. As a preliminary matter, Epic’s attempt to put the FAA on a pedestal above all other laws (and correspondingly its Class Waiver above the substantive rights of its employees) cannot be squared with the FAA’s stated purpose. The FAA was enacted in 1925 in response to judicial resistance to arbitration, intending to “place arbitration agreements on equal footing with all other contracts.” Hall Street, 552 U.S. at 581. The FAA states that agreements to arbitrate “shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” 9 U.S.C. § 2 (emphasis added). The FAA requires that courts enforce arbitration clauses “the same way they would enforce any other contractual clause.” Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros, 515 U.S. at 554 (1995) (Stevens, J., dissenting) (citing Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. 468, 478 (1989)). In other words, courts interpret an arbitration agreement like any other contract. Lewis does not dispute that statutory claims may be the subject of an arbitration agreement. See Gilmer, 500 U.S. at 26 (citing cases); CompuCredit Corp. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 23 v. Greenwood, 132 S. Ct. 665, 670-71 (2012). However, while claims arising under federal statutes may be enforced through arbitration, arbitration agreements cannot be used to circumvent federal statutory rights. See Mitsubishi Motors, 473 U.S. at 628 (1985) (noting that even where parties agree to arbitrate a statutory claim, “a party does not forgo the substantive rights afforded by the statute; it only submits to their resolution in an arbitral, rather than a judicial, forum.”). The Board, in its proper role as the agency tasked with interpreting the NLRA, has determined that the right to act collectively is a substantive right. See supra Part I. Nothing in the history of the FAA, or its clear terms, allows Epic or any employer to thwart an individual’s substantive rights under the NLRA simply by applying the magic words “arbitration agreement” to an illegal contract. B. The FAA Does Not Require Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements that Waive Substantive Federal Rights. Section 7 rights under the NLRA are fundamental, substantive federal rights—and include the right to bring collective legal action. See supra Section I.A; Herrington, 993 F. Supp. 2d at 944 (citing In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274, at 12 (internal citations omitted)); see also Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 1-3. Epic’s Agreement forces employees to waive this right as a condition of employment. As such, it is unenforceable regardless of any purported pro-arbitration policy. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the federal policy favoring arbitration contracts must yield where such contracts deprive parties’ of substantive statutory rights. See Gilmer, 500 U.S. at 26 (quoting Mitsubishi Motors, 473 U.S at 628 for the proposition that “‘[b]y agreeing to arbitrate a statutory claim, a party Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 24 does not forgo the substantive rights afforded by the [federal] statute....’”). The question of whether a right is substantive depends not on the FAA, but on the statute creating the right. See Gilmer, 500 U.S. at 29 (enforcing arbitration agreement because, although ADEA contained judicial-forum and optional collective-litigation procedure provisions, it was not intended to afford “substantive protection...against waiver of the right to a judicial forum....” (quoting Mitsubishi, 473 U.S. at 628)); see also 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 556 U.S. 247, 267 n.9, 275 (2009) (“the [Gilmer] Court’s fidelity to the ADEA’s text” led to its decision that the ADEA permitted waiver of a judicial forum.). Courts will invalidate agreements to arbitrate that interfere with the substantive rights of the parties. See, e.g., Hadnot v. Bay, Ltd., 344 F.3d 474, 478 (5th Cir. 2003) (severing a clause in an arbitration agreement proscribing an award of exemplary and punitive damages, which are available under Title VII); Booker v. Robert Half Intern., Inc., 413 F.3d 77, 83 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (same); Kristian v. Comcast Corp., 446 F.3d 25, 48 (1st Cir. 2006) (striking a clause that waived the award of treble damages under federal antitrust statutes). The NLRA guarantees employees a substantive federal right to collective legal action. See, e.g., Eastex, Inc., 437 U.S. at 565-67; Brady, 644 F.3d at 673; In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 12. As such, Epic’s assertion that the Supreme Court has “considered arbitration of a wide spectrum of claims arising under federal statutes” and enforced the “arbitration agreements according to their terms” (Appellant’s Br. 33) is impertinent. In those cases, enforcement of the arbitration Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 25 contracts did not restrain the ability to seek relief for infringement of statutory substantive rights. Here, in contrast, enforcement of Epic’s Agreement directly infringes on its employees’ substantive Section 7 right to collective action. Moreover, that Lewis clicked an “I agree” button is irrelevant, because the Supreme Court has also consistently concluded that employees cannot (even knowingly) waive fundamental federal statutory rights. For example, in National Licorice Co. v. NLRB, an employment contract required employees to relinquish the right to strike or join a union, in clear violation of Sections 7 and 8 of the NLRA. 309 U.S. at 355. The Supreme Court held that the violation of the NLRA furnished grounds for declaring the contract unenforceable, given that “the contracts were the fruits of unfair labor practices, stipulated for the renunciation by the employees of rights guaranteed by the [NLRA], and were a continuing means of thwarting the policy of the [NLRA.]” Id. at 361; See also J.I. Case Co., 321 U.S. at 337-38 (holding that individual employment contracts could not be used as grounds to waive rights protected by the NLRA; concluding that “[w]herever private contracts conflict with [the NLRA’s] functions, they obviously must yield or the [NLRA] would be reduced to a futility.”). This Court has also recognized that a lack of coercion in entering a contract is irrelevant to the question of whether it violates the NLRA. In NLRB v. Stone, 125 F.2d 752, 756 (7th Cir. 1942), the Seventh Circuit held that the provision in individual employee contracts requiring employees to adjust their grievances with their employer individually “constitutes a violation of the [NLRA] per se.” The Stone Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 26 court articulated that the provision at issue could not “be legalized by showing the contract was entered into without coercion....” Id. The provision at issue waived employees’ Section 7 rights and was thus a restraint upon collective action that could not be enforced. Id. Recently, the Supreme Court affirmed that prospective waivers of federal substantive rights are not enforceable even in the FAA context. In Italian Colors, the Court held that class action prohibitions in arbitration contracts cannot be invalidated simply because they make effective vindication of statutory rights difficult; but where arbitration contracts make the exercise of statutory rights impossible by outright prohibiting the assertion of such rights, they are invalid as “‘prospective waiver[s] of a party’s right to pursue statutory remedies.’” 133 S. Ct. at 2310-11 (quoting Mitsubishi Motors, 473 U.S. at 637 n.19 (emphasis in original)). Stated differently, the Supreme Court made a crucial distinction between waivers that are enforceable under the FAA (those that render vindication of statutory rights difficult) and waivers that the FAA does not sanction (those that prohibit the assertion of statutory rights). Epic’s Agreement falls into the latter category, because it explicitly waives its employees’ right to pursue collective legal action guaranteed by the NLRA. See Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 1. As such, under a long line of Supreme Court precedent from Mitsubishi Motors to Italian Colors, Epic’s Agreement is unenforceable because it operates to waive employees’ substantive federal right under the NLRA. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 27 In sum, invalidation of the Class Waiver does not run afoul of the FAA; rather, this interpretation correctly gives full force to two federal statutes, the NLRA and the FAA. Because the Class Waiver forces employees, as a condition of their employment, to give up a substantive federal right to concerted activity, and prospective waivers of substantive rights are unenforceable under the FAA, there is no conflict between the FAA and the NLRA. Both statutes can and must be harmonized, and the court is not “at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments....” Morton, 417 U.S. at 551. C. The Saving Clause of the FAA Specifically Precludes Enforcement of a Contract That Waives Substantive Federal Rights. Not only does Supreme Court precedent interpreting the FAA prohibit an arbitration contract’s waiver of substantive federal rights, the FAA itself maintains that such a contract would be unenforceable. The FAA’s saving clause explicitly provides that an arbitration contract is unenforceable if legal grounds exist for its revocation. 9 U.S.C. § 2. 2 Under the saving clause, the invalidation of an illegal arbitration agreement does not conflict with the FAA where that invalidation is based on legal grounds that would mandate the nullification of any contract. Illegality of contract is one such “legal ground.” As established above, Epic’s Agreement depriving employees of their Section 7 right to collective legal action violates Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA. Because Epic’s illegal contract falls squarely 2 When Epic cites to the FAA in its brief, it truncates the saving clause, suggesting that the FAA merely says that agreements to arbitrate “shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable,” neither mentioning that this comes with an important exception – “save upon such grounds as exist in law or in equity for the revocation of any contract” – nor noting with an ellipses that there is another clause in this statute. (Appellant’s Br. 15.) See 9 U.S.C. § 2. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 28 under the FAA’s saving clause, there is no conflict between the NLRA and the FAA in the instant case. While Epic would have the Court believe that arbitration contracts have a special status entitling them to enforcement regardless of their contents, the clear text of the FAA refutes this self-serving claim. The Supreme Court has in fact unwaveringly recognized that courts cannot enforce contracts that violate the NLRA because they are illegal. See Kaiser, 455 U.S. at 86. Supreme Court precedent recognizes this uncontroversial reasoning: [T]he purpose of Congress [in enacting the FAA] was to make arbitration agreements as enforceable as other contracts, but not more so. To immunize an arbitration agreement from judicial challenge [on grounds applicable to other contracts] would be to elevate it over other forms of contract—a situation inconsistent with the ‘saving clause.’ Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395, 404 n.12 (1967). The FAA’s saving clause explicitly sanctions the invalidation of arbitration contracts that would be void as a matter of law, just as any other contract limiting an individual’s statutory rights would be invalidated. Epic fails to address the import of the FAA’s saving clause (or even acknowledge its existence), instead arguing without support that legal grounds do not exist for the revocation of its Agreement. It is “well established, however, that a federal court has a duty to determine whether a contract violates federal law before enforcing it.” Kaiser, 455 U.S. at 83. Epic’s discussion of the FAA without even a passing mention of the saving clause violates the canon of statutory construction Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 29 against surplusage. See Marx v. General Revenue Corp., 133 S. Ct. 1166, 1178 (2013). Courts are hesitant to adopt an interpretation of a statute which “renders superfluous another portion of that same law.” Id. (quoting Mackey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc., 486 U.S. 825, 837 (1988)). Epic’s argument that courts must blindly enforce all agreements to arbitrate “according to their terms” without considering whether standard contract defenses apply renders the entire saving clause of the FAA superfluous. If Congress truly meant that any agreement to arbitrate, regardless of its contents, was iron-clad and enforceable, then it would not have written the express saving clause preserving generally applicable contract defenses into the statute. The Court must consider whether contract defenses exist that may invalidate an agreement to arbitrate. Kaiser, 455 U.S. at 83. Contrary to Epic’s wish, courts cannot simply rubber-stamp any agreement just because it involves arbitration. Indeed, courts routinely invalidate contracts that unlawfully abrogate employees’ Section 7 rights. See supra Section I.A; Nat’l Licorice Co., 309 U.S. at 361; Stone, 125 F.2d at 756. Arbitration contracts, which are on equal footing with all other contracts, are not immune from invalidation where they violate federal law. Far from compelling a contrary result, the FAA’s saving clause reaffirms that illegality, as a common contract defense, applies with equal force to arbitration contracts. Given this precedent, the Fifth Circuit’s discussion of the FAA’s saving clause in D.R. Horton is unpersuasive. There, the court held that “[t]he saving clause is Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 30 “not a basis for invalidating the waiver of class procedures in the arbitration agreement.” D.R. Horton, 737 F.3d at 360. The court did not reach this conclusion upon finding that such waivers do not, in fact, violate the NLRA. Nor did the court grapple with Supreme Court precedent declaring contracts that strip employees of Section 7 rights illegal. Instead, the Fifth Circuit relied exclusively on Concepcion, which has nothing to do with the NLRA (or any federal substantive rights, for that matter) and which does not support the Court’s rejection of the saving clause in the NLRA context. Concepcion held that “the saving clause permits agreements to arbitrate to be invalidated by ‘generally applicable contract defenses,’ but not by defenses that apply only to arbitration or that derive their meaning from the fact that an agreement to arbitrate is at issue.” 536 U.S. at 333 (citing Doctor’s Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, 517 U.S. 681, 687 (1996)). The violation of a federal law such as the NLRA is a generally applicable contract defense. Kaiser, 455 U.S. at 78-79; III S. Williston, Williston on Contracts § 1630, at 2865-66 (1920). As such, Concepcion simply does not support the Fifth Circuit’s untenable assertion that the saving clause is inapplicable in the NLRA context. The FAA’s saving clause compels the conclusion that the FAA and the NLRA can co-exist. One common contractual defense, that the contract is illegal, applies here, where the Class Waiver impermissibly restricts Epic’s employees’ substantive rights under the NLRA. The FAA’s saving clause explicitly provides that the Class Waiver may be declared unenforceable. By invalidating the Class Waiver under the FAA’s saving clause, the district court satisfied its obligation to give effect to both Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 31 federal statutes, and this Court should do the same. III. THE NLRA DOES POSSESS THE CONTRARY CONGRESSIONAL COMMAND TO OVERRIDE THE FAA As Lewis demonstrates above, the NLRA and the FAA can be read in harmony, because Epic’s Agreement is an illegal contract under the NLRA and therefore falls squarely under the FAA’s saving clause. No Supreme Court decision interpreting the FAA has permitted an arbitration contract to force the waiver of a substantive federal right. See Italian Colors, 133 S. Ct. at 2310. This Court need not inquire whether the NLRA “overrides” the FAA; but if this inquiry is reached, the NLRA clearly contains a “contrary congressional command” overruling the FAA. Under Supreme Court precedent, an arbitration contract is unenforceable where, the FAA’s “mandate has been ‘overridden by a contrary congressional command,’” which may be deduced from a statute’s text or legislative history, or from an “inherent conflict between arbitration and the statute’s underlying purposes.” CompuCredit, 132 S. Ct. at 675 (citing Shearson/Am. Express, Inc. v. McMahon, 482 U.S. 220, 226 (1987)). Epic misleadingly frames the question of contrary congressional command as whether the NLRA outlaws arbitration, period. However, the proper question is whether the NLRA overrides “the FAA’s mandate.” CompuCredit, 132 S. Ct. at 669. Epic continually reminds the Court that the FAA’s mandate is that “arbitration agreements must be enforced ‘according to their terms.’” (Appellant’s Br. 34.) As demonstrated below, the text, legislative history, and fundamental purpose of the NLRA express a congressional command that overrides the FAA’s mandate to enforce an agreement to arbitrate which precludes Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 32 collective action. If there is a conflict between the NLRA and the FAA, the NLRA governs and requires invalidation of the Class Waiver. First, the text of the NLRA protects employees’ right to engage in collective action. Section 7 provides that employees “shall have the right ... to engage in ... concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.” 29 U.S.C. § 157. Section 8(a)(1) declares that “it shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in [Section 7] of this title ....” 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1). Congress’s use of the word “shall” indicates that it intended employees’ right to collective action to be free from judicial discretion. See Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26, 35 (1998). The text is unambiguous: concerted action is a right with which employers may not interfere—and with which courts may not tinker. Further, the “right to engage in concerted legal activity is plainly authorized by the broad language of Section 7, as it has been authoritatively construed by the Supreme Court in Eastex...as part of the protected ‘resort to administrative and judicial forums.’” Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 12. Indeed, Epic even disregards the Supreme Court’s admonition in City Disposal Systems that “concerted activity” under Section 7 “clearly ... embraces the activities of employees who have joined together in order to achieve common goals.” 465 U.S. at 830. Epic does not address why the NLRA’s explicit protection of employees’ right to concerted activity does not prevent Epic from depriving its employees of the right Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 33 to act in concert for their mutual aid and protection. Instead, Epic focuses on the lack of a definition of “concerted activity” in the text of the NLRA. (Appellant’s Br. 37-39.) Congress and the Supreme Court have empowered the Board to define this term, and the Board has defined it to encompass a single employee pursuing collective legal action on behalf of others. See supra Section I.A. Lewis does not dispute that Section 7 “is silent on whether employees have a collective right to bring class claims.” (Appellant’s Br. 37.) But the NLRA need not contain magic words to evince a contrary congressional command. The lack of specific language referring to “arbitration” is hardly surprising given that when the NLRA was enacted (and reenacted), courts had never applied the FAA to employment contracts, and Congress had not intended the FAA to apply to employment contracts. See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105, 125 (2001) (Stevens, J., dissenting). That development did not come until 2001—76 years after the enactment of the FAA and 66 years after the enactment of the NLRA. See id. 3 In contrast, the Board and courts have unwaveringly invalidated restrictions on Section 7 rights based on the NLRA’s text, which covers collective legal action, since its adoption. See Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454, at 10. The NLRA’s text 3 To limit the scope of a law based on only situations that were anticipated when that law was passed would invalidate much of modern jurisprudence, as courts are constantly required to apply old laws to modern situations. For example, though video games did not exist when the First Amendment was enacted, the Supreme Court has still found that video games fall within this centuries-old protection. See Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 131 S. Ct. 2729, 2733 (2011). Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 34 plainly orders protection of employees’ right to concerted activity and prohibits employers from interfering with that right.4 Second, the legislative history of the NLRA establishes a contrary congressional command that overrides the FAA’s mandated enforcement of contracts prohibiting employees’ concerted action. The debate over the NLRA shows that the legislature’s fundamental concern was rampant inequality of power between employees and employers. To Create a National Labor Board: Hearings Before the Comm. on Education and Labor on S. 2926, 73rd Cong., 2nd Sess. 47 (1934) (statement of Hon. Robert F. Wagner) (“It is simply absur[d] to say that an individual, one of 10,000 workers, is on an equality with his employer in bargaining for wages. The worker, if he does not submit to the employer’s terms, faces ruin for his family. The so-called freedom of contract does not exist under such circumstances.”). Congress recognized that government protection of employees’ right to engage in “concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection” was essential to addressing this concern. National Labor Relations Board: Hearings Before the Comm. on Education and Labor on S. 1958, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. 1414 (1935) (statement of Hon. Robert F. Wagner). The NLRA’s legislative history reveals that Congress sought to place no “limitations 4 Epic’s insinuation that because Section 7 does not require employees to pursue collective action, “an employer who reaches a voluntary agreement to resolve issues on an individual basis has not committed an unfair labor practice” demonstrates Epic’s purposeful disregard for the NLRA and thus the protection of its employees’ rights. (Appellant’s Br. 37.) Of course, “the [NLRA] does not compel agreements between employers and employees,” but the option whether to join an agreement in no way diminishes that the Section 7 right to engage in collective legal action is “a fundamental right” with which employers may not interfere. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. at 45. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 35 upon the broadest reasonable interpretation of its omnibus guaranty of freedom.” Id. Third, the NLRA’s underlying purpose—safeguarding employees’ right to act concertedly—is in “inherent conflict” with the FAA’s enforcement of arbitration contracts stripping employees of that right.5 Epic proffers that arbitration is compatible with collective bargaining and so no inherent conflict could exist. Again, Epic disregards the NLRA’s fundamental purpose: protecting employees’ substantive right to concerted activity, which the Supreme Court and the Board have equated with the right to pursue collective legal action. See supra Section I.A. Epic’s attempt to frame the right to collective legal action as a mere “procedural device” thus fails. This case is not about Rule 23 or the FLSA. The purpose and construction of those statutes is irrelevant to the unequivocal purpose of the NLRA, which is in inherent conflict with mandatory individual arbitration, and which Epic fails to address.6 Regardless, the Board has declared that employees’ right to collective action is a substantive, not merely procedural, right: 5 Indeed, while the NLRA’s purpose of protecting employee’s right to concerted activity is unequivocal, the FAA’s “pro-arbitration policy” is implicit and qualified. The NLRA has expressly protected the fundamental right to engage in concerted activity for over 80 years. See Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454, at 18; see also Barrentine v. Ark.-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728, 735 (1981). The FAA, in contrast, does not expressly call for individual arbitration. Indeed, the stated purpose of the FAA was to put arbitration contracts “on equal footing” with any other contracts. Concepcion, 563 U.S. at 339 (internal citation omitted). 6 Epic’s argument that the FAA prevails over the NLRA because the FAA was re-enacted one month after the NLRA, making the FAA the later-enacted statute, is unavailing. The 1947 reenactment of the FAA preserved the language of its saving clause, providing that arbitration contracts are unenforceable “save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” 9 U.S.C. § 2. As such, the reenactment of the FAA had no bearing on the extant NLRA’s invalidation of contracts interfering with employees’ right to pursue collective legal action. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 36 Any contention that the Section 7 right to bring a class or collective action is merely “procedural” must fail. The right to engage in collective action—including collective legal action—is the core substantive right protected by the NLRA and is the foundation on which the Act and Federal labor policy rest. In re D.R. Horton, 2012 WL 36274 at 12. This interpretation must receive “the greatest deference,” because Congress has expressly authorized the Board to make policy determinations concerning the NLRA. ABF Freight System, 510 U.S. at 324. In sum, the text, legislative history, and underlying purpose of the NLRA embody a contrary congressional command that overrides the FAA’s statutory directive to enforce arbitration contracts depriving employees of their Section 7 rights. Epic attempts to distract from this conclusion by crowding its argument with discussions of unionized labor and the Portal to Portal Act, which have absolutely no bearing on this case. This case is about the NLRA’s unambiguous command: employees have a substantive right to collective legal action with which employers may not interfere. The NLRA thus governs this case and requires revocation of Epic’s illegal Class Waiver. IV. THE CASES CITED BY EPIC ARE INAPPOSITE AND UNPERSUASIVE Epic’s argument rests on imploring this court to fall in line with district courts that have followed the Fifth Circuit’s decision in D.R. Horton, despite that decision’s major flaws of statutory interpretation. In addition to ignoring the problems of the Fifth Circuit’s D.R. Horton decision, Epic’s attempt to cast the question of whether employees can be forced to waive their right to litigate collectively as a settled question is disingenuous. Many of the cases to which Epic Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 37 cites as supporting its decision either do not address the substantive rights granted by the NLRA at all, or fail to harmonize the NLRA with the FAA as required. As detailed below, these cases are inapposite and provide no grounds to persuade this Circuit to jump on the D.R. Horton bandwagon. A. The Fifth Circuit’s Decision in D.R. Horton v. NLRB Failed To Harmonize the NLRA and FAA as Required. Epic relies heavily on the Fifth Circuit’s D.R. Horton decision, but fails to provide any reason why that decision was correct. In fact, the Fifth Circuit’s decision was poorly reasoned because it failed to interpret the FAA and the NLRA in harmony as required. See supra Section II; see also Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454, at 9 (noting, in direct response to the Fifth Circuit’s D.R. Horton decision, that the court gave “too little weight” to national labor policy in its decision). As such, this Court should reject its reasoning.7 The Fifth Circuit reversed the Board’s decision in D.R. Horton holding that mandatory individual arbitration violated employees’ Section 7 rights under the NLRA. D.R. Horton, 737 F.3d at 364. The Fifth Circuit acknowledged that courts must defer to the Board’s interpretation of Section 7 rights under the NLRA and that both the Board and the courts have held that filing “collective and class claims” is a protected Section 7 right. Id. at 356-57. But the Court defied these principles and instead surmised that because collective actions in other contexts, such as under the FLSA or Rule 23, have been treated as merely procedural, the NLRA does 7 The Fifth Circuit recently issued a decision reversing the Board’s decision in In re Murphy Oil. See Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. NLRB, No. 14-60800, 2015 WL 6457613 (5th Cir. Oct. 26, 2015). These decisions cover the same ground as D.R. Horton, and Lewis maintains that the Fifth Circuit’s reasoning in Murphy Oil is flawed for the same reasons. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 38 not protect a substantive right. Id. at 357-58; compare with Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at 10 (demonstrating Section 7 rights are substantive, not procedural). The Fifth Circuit failed to explain why courts should discard decades of jurisprudence protecting the substantive rights under the NLRA in favor of the FAA. The Fifth Circuit, extrapolating broadly from the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Concepcion, essentially determined that the FAA’s saving clause can be disregarded to promote arbitration. Id. at 359 (“Concepcion leads to the conclusion that the Board's rule does not fit within the FAA's saving clause” because “like the statute in Concepcion, the Board’s interpretation prohibits class-action waivers.”); compare with Murphy Oil, 2014 WL 5465454 at *11-12. Blind application of Concepcion to both D.R. Horton and the present case shows the flaws in the Fifth Circuit’s perfunctory analysis. First, Concepcion concerned the interaction of federal law with state law, where the supremacy of federal law clearly governs. See Concepcion, 563 U.S. at 341. The Fifth Circuit’s cursory determination that the FAA and NLRA conflict ignores the different, higher standard that courts must apply in determining whether two federal statutes are in conflict. See supra Section II. Second, the NLRA explicitly protects the right of employees to act collectively. Concepcion, in contrast, concerned consumers with no such longstanding substantive federal rights at issue. Id. at 333. Third, unlike the state law at issue in Concepcion, the NLRA does not discriminate against arbitration Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 39 contracts that violate its terms; any form of employer interference with Section 7 rights is illegal. Illegality of contract falls squarely under the FAA’s saving clause, which provides that an agreement to arbitrate – like any other contract – is unenforceable if it deprives a party of statutory rights. 9 U.S.C. § 2. In contrast, the California rule abrogated by Concepcion applied specifically to arbitration, and specifically disfavored it. Concepcion, 563 U.S. at 341. The NLRA’s protection of substantive rights does not apply only to arbitration contracts, but to any contract which would illegally restrain them. Rather than grapple with this analysis, the Fifth Circuit perfunctorily concluded that class arbitration presents “an actual impediment to arbitration and violates the FAA.” D.R. Horton, 737 F.3d at 360. However, courts must at least try to interpret statutes to give effect to both the FAA and NLRA—an accommodation made possible by the FAA’s saving clause and an obligation shirked by the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit did not even attempt to interpret these statutes in concert, rather jumping to the conclusion that the NLRA does not override the FAA. Id. at 360-61. Absent an actual, irreconcilable conflict between the two statutes, this “contrary congressional command” analysis is misplaced and unnecessary. The Fifth Circuit’s decision is erroneous and unfounded, and should not be followed by this Court.8 8 Epic’s lengthy string cite contained numerous courts that Epic states support its position. The following cases follow the Fifth Circuit’s decision in D.R. Horton, and Lewis maintains were wrongly decided for the same reasons. See Green v. Zachry Indus., Inc., 36 F. Supp. 3d 669 (W.D. Va. 2014); Knight v. Rent-A-Ctr. E., Inc., No. CIV.A. 4:13-1734-MGL, 2013 WL 6826963 (D.S.C. Dec. 23, 2013); Sylvester v. Wintrust Fin. Corp., No. 12 C 01899, 2014 WL 10416989 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 26, 2014); Delock v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc., 883 F. Supp. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 40 B. Epic Overstates Holdings of Other Courts on the Question of Whether NoClass Arbitration Provisions Violate Substantive Rights Under the NLRA Over seven pages of Epic’s brief is dedicated to a string cite to other cases that have in some way mentioned the Fifth Circuit’s decision in D.R. Horton. Epic suggests that this Court should simply follow those courts but fails to provide any legal analysis of why those courts ruled correctly. As outlined below, the decisions to which Epic cites do not even address the question at issue here, and therefore provide no support for Epic’s position. Further, as noted in the footnotes, many of the cases cited by Epic do not in fact support its position at all, but seem to have been included simply because they mention D.R. Horton. Epic claims that the “Eighth Circuit took the same position as the Fifth Circuit” in Owen v. Bristol Care, Inc. 702 F.3d 1050 (8th Cir. 2013). In fact, Owen focused on whether the FLSA (as opposed to the NLRA) created any substantive right to act collectively, and held that the FLSA did not contain a “contrary congressional command” to “override” the FAA. Id. at 1052-53. In other words, 2d 784 (E.D. Ark. 2012); Ortiz v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 3d 1070 (E.D. Cal. 2014); Longnecker v. American Exp. Co., 23 F. Supp. 3d 1099 (D. Ariz. 2014); Chico v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc., No. CV 14-5750-JFW (SSx), 2014 WL 5088240 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2014); Appelbaum v. AutoNation Inc., No. SACV 13-01927 JVS, 2014 WL 1396585 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2014); Zabelny v. CashCall, Inc., No. 2:13-CV-00853-PAL, 2014 WL 67638 (D. Nev. Jan. 8, 2014); Siy v. CashCall, Inc., No. 2:13-CV-00953-PAL, 2014 WL 37879 (D. Nev. Jan. 6, 2014); Fardig v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., No. SACV 14-561 JVS ANX, 2014 WL 2810025 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2014); Fimby-Christensen v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., No. 5:13-CV-01007-EJD, 2013 WL 6158040 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2013); Cunningham v. Leslie's Poolmart, Inc., No. CV 13-2122 CAS CWX, 2013 WL 3233211 (C.D. Cal. June 25, 2013); Birdsong v. AT&T Corp., No. C12-6175 TEH, 2013 WL 1120783 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2013); Jasso v. Money Mart Express, et. al., 879 F. Supp. 2d 1038 (C.D. Cal. 2012); Morvant v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc., 870 F. Supp. 2d 831 (N.D. Cal. May 7, 2012); Cilluffo v. Cent. Refrigerated Servs., No. EDCV 12-00886 VAP (OPx), 2012 WL 8523507 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2012); Hickey v. Brinker Int'l Payroll Co., L.P., No. 1:13-CV-00951-REB-BNB, 2014 WL 622883 (D. Colo. Feb. 18, 2014). Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 41 Owen decided a wholly different question than that before this Court. Owen is inapposite because it considers not the substantive right to act collectively protected under the NLRA, but the collective action mechanism provided in the FLSA. As such, it has no bearing on this case.9 Epic is correct that the Second Circuit agreed with the Eighth—representing another Circuit which has not, in fact, decided the question before this Court. In Sutherland, 726 F.3d at 297, the court held that “[n]o contrary congressional command requires us to reject the waiver of class arbitration” in the FLSA context. The court’s discussion of the NLRA was limited to one footnote, in which the court incorrectly stated that it owed no deference to the Board’s reasoning. Id. at 297 n.8. The Court never gave proper consideration to whether the NLRA protects a substantive right to bring claims collectively. Epic also disingenuously suggests that the Ninth Circuit has rejected the Board’s reasoning, pointing first to Richards v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 744 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2013) cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 355 (2014). In fact, the Richards decision explicitly declined to decide the NLRA issue, given that it was not raised in the 9 The Eleventh Circuit in Walthour v. Chipio Windshield Repair, LLC, similarly, focused on the collective action provision in the FLSA, not the substantive right to collective action found in the NLRA. 745 F.3d 1326, 1330-36 (11th Cir. 2014). The Eleventh Circuit did not address Section 7 of the NLRA or the interaction between the NLRA and the FAA. The following district court cases, all cited by Epic, similarly concern whether the FLSA grants substantive rights, not the NLRA- in fact, some do not mention the NLRA at all: Dixon v. NBCUniversal Media, LLC, 947 F. Supp. 2d 390 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (this case does not mention the NLRA); Torres v. United Healthcare Servs., Inc., 920 F. Supp. 2d 368 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) (this case does not mention the NLRA); Lloyd v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., No. 11 CIV. 9305 LTS, 2013 WL 4828588 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2013); LaVoice v. UBS Fin. Servs., Inc., No. 11 CIV. 2308 BSJ JLC, 2012 WL 124590 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2012); Adams v. Citicorp Credit Servs., Inc., 93 F. Supp. 3d 441 (M.D.N.C. 2015) (does not discuss NLRA). Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 42 district court. The court’s discussion of the NLRA was relegated to a footnote in which, “[w]ithout deciding the issue,” it passively noted that the majority of courts have “determined that they should not defer to the NLRB's decision in D.R. Horton.”10 Id. at 1075 n.3. Nevertheless, Epic incorrectly posits that the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale’s, Inc., 755 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2014) rendered its Richards determination “crystal clear.” In fact, the court in Johnmohammadi did not even mention deference to the Board. Nor did Johnmohammadi reject the Board’s reasoning. The court held that Bloomingdales did not interfere with its employees’ Section 7 right to collective legal action because it offered a choice between resolving future employment-related disputes in court (including on a collective basis) or pursuing individual arbitration. Id. at 1075-76. As such, the court found no violation of the NLRA. Id. at 1076. Far from endorsing the Fifth Circuit, the Johnmohammadi court explicitly distinguished it, noting that “Bloomingdale's did not require [its employee] to accept a class-action waiver as a condition of employment, as was true in In re D.R. Horton, Inc.” Id. at 1075. Epic has offered its employees no choice to pursue collective claims in any forum whatsoever. As such, Lewis’s case lacks the very fact in Johnmohammadi on which the court relied in finding no violation of the NLRA. The question before this Court is whether Epic has violated the NLRA by depriving Lewis of his substantive federal right to collective legal action under 10 The Ninth Circuit is, however, poised to decide this issue. See Morris v. Ernst & Young, No. 13-16599 (9th Cir. argued Nov. 17, 2015). Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 43 Section 7, and whether, as Epic argues, the FAA sanctions such a violation. For the reasons discussed above, the FAA does not mandate enforcement of an illegal contract but in fact provides for its invalidation. Regardless, Lewis’s position is not that the FLSA furnishes a substantive right to a collective action in court, but that Epic cannot contract away, as a condition of employment, the right guaranteed by Section 7 of the NLRA that employees may act concertedly for their mutual aid and protection by filing collective claims in either a judicial or arbitral forum. Neither the Second, Eighth, nor Ninth Circuits have addressed this question; thus, this Court is not fated to their conclusions. Epic’s suggestion otherwise is a self-serving and baseless plea for an imprimatur on its illegal contract. V. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, THIS CASE MUST BE REMANDED TO CONSIDER UNCONSCIONABILITY AND CONTRACT ARGUMENTS In the district court, Lewis argued that the arbitration agreement at issue was invalid not only because of the class waiver provision, but because the agreement was both unconscionable and lacking consideration. (S.A. 1.) The district court considered only Lewis’s argument that the class waiver provision of the agreement violated the NLRA; because of the Agreement’s saving clause, under which invalidation of the Class Waiver means that any collective wage claims must be brought in court, this finding was dispositive. Should this Court reverse the district court’s decision, it should remand with the directive that the district court must consider Lewis’s other arguments. Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 44 CONCLUSION Epic’s Class Waiver unlawfully strips employees of a substantive federal right to take collective legal action for their mutual aid and protection. This illegal contract can be invalidated under the saving clause of the FAA, giving effect to both federal statutes. “Arbitration” is not a magic word that can be used to defy the substantive federal rights granted by statute, or the Court’s duty to interpret federal statutes in harmony. Epic seeks to use an arbitration agreement as a shield and prevent its employees from working together to exercise their rights. This Court should affirm the district court’s ruling that Epic’s Class Waiver violates the substantive rights of Epic’s employees under the NLRA. Dated : December 9th, 2015. /s/ Caitlin M. Madden HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. William E. Parsons wparsons@hq-law.com David C. Zoeller dzoeller@hq-law.com Caitlin M. Madden cmadden@hq-law.com Katelynn M. Williams kwilliams@hq-law.com 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 Telephone: 608-257-0040 Facsimile: 608-256-0236 HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. Daniel A. Rottier rottier@habush.com Jason J. Knutson jknutson@habush.com Breanne L. Snapp bsnapp@habush.com 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Telephone: 608-255-6663 Facsimile: 608-255-0745 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 45 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH FRAP 32(a)(7)(B) The undersigned, counsel of record for Plaintiff-Appellee Jacob Lewis, furnishes the following in compliance with FRAP 32(a)(7)(B): I hereby certify that this Brief conforms to the rules contained in FRAP 32(a)(7)(B). This brief was prepared in Century font, using 12 point type in the body and 11 point type in the footnotes, prepared using Microsoft Word. The number of words included in this brief (exclusive of disclosure statement, table of contents, table of authorities, and certificates) is 11,845 as calculated by the Microsoft wordcount function. Dated: December 9th, 2015. /s/ Caitlin M. Madden HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. William E. Parsons wparsons@hq-law.com David C. Zoeller dzoeller@hq-law.com Caitlin M. Madden cmadden@hq-law.com Katelynn M. Williams kwilliams@hq-law.com 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 Telephone: 608-257-0040 Facsimile: 608-256-0236 HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. Daniel A. Rottier rottier@habush.com Jason J. Knutson jknutson@habush.com Breanne L. Snapp bsnapp@habush.com 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Telephone: 608-255-6663 Facsimile: 608-255-0745 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57 46 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned, counsel for Plaintiff-Appellee, hereby certifies that on December 9, 2015, the Brief of Appellee Jacob Lewis was filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit using the CM/ECF system. The following participants in the case are registered as CM/ECF users and will be served by the CM/ECF system: Noah A. Finkel Andrew L. Scroggins SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 131 S. Dearborn Street, Suite 2400 Chicago, Illinois 60603 I further certify that fifteen copies of the foregoing Brief of Plaintiff-Appellee, were sent to the Clerk’s Office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit this 9th day of December, 2015. Dated: December 9th, 2015. /s/ Caitlin M. Madden HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. William E. Parsons wparsons@hq-law.com David C. Zoeller dzoeller@hq-law.com Caitlin M. Madden cmadden@hq-law.com Katelynn M. Williams kwilliams@hq-law.com 222 West Washington Ave., Suite 450 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155 Telephone: 608-257-0040 Facsimile: 608-256-0236 HABUSH HABUSH & ROTTIER S.C. Daniel A. Rottier rottier@habush.com Jason J. Knutson jknutson@habush.com Breanne L. Snapp bsnapp@habush.com 150 East Gilman St., Suite 2000 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Telephone: 608-255-6663 Facsimile: 608-255-0745 Case: 15-2997 Document: 15 Filed: 12/09/2015 Pages: 57
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/npfc/Claims/2016/915069-0001 RC Denied_Redacted.pdf.json	3 CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM Claim Number : 915069-0001 Claimant : BP Exploration & Production, Inc. Type of Claimant : Corporate Type of Claim : Removal Costs Claim Manager : Amount Requested : $130,081.66 FACTS: A. Oil Spill Incident: On June 20, 2014, the Coast Guard’s (CG) National Response Center (NRC) received notification of a large tar mat in Pensacola Beach, FL, located on the Gulf of Mexico, a navigable waterway of the United States. 1 The CG Gulf Coast Incident Management Team (CG GCIMT) was notified and responded to the report and found the tar mat with associated surface residual tar balls (SRBs) both in the water and on the beach in Segment FLES2-005 of Fort Pickens Beach, FL. As the tar mat and SRBs were in a quantity that exceeded the CG’s capacity to mitigate, an email directive was issued to BP Exploration & Production (BP) to activate two oil spill response organization (OSRO) teams to conduct removal actions at Fort Pickens Beach, FL, as directed.2 B. Description of removal actions performed: On June 20, 2014, two teams of Danos & Curole Marine Contractors (BP’s OSRO), Mr. of Swift Technical Services, LLC, and Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Team (SCAT) operations liaison, Polaris Applied Sciences, Inc. (mapping and data support) and an archaeologist from HDR Environmental Operations responded to the CG’s directive of response and met with 2 CG active duty personnel onscene. The reported tar mat was approximately 20’ long x 4’ wide and was located approximately 10 feet off the beach.3 Because Fort Pickens is a National Park, the use of heavy equipment, such as excavators or dump trucks would have damaged the ecosystem so a decision was made for the contractors to use shovels to dig up the tar mat and remove it in pieces from the water. According to CG personnel onscene, established BP safety protocol didn’t allow BP contractors to enter the water past their knees in order to conduct removal actions so BP amended their protocol to allow their contractors to enter the water, up to their waist, in an effort to collect the tar mat and associated SRBs. The tar mat and associated SRBs were determined to be visually consistent with MC252 oil.4 Removal of the tar mat proved to be difficult as sand washed over the tar mat during tidal changes and workers had to dig through 12” to 18” of sand in order to uncover the tar mat from the previous days’ response efforts.5 The entire cleanup involved 13 site visits over 41 calendar days and approximately 1,824.5 lbs of tar mat and associated SRBs were recovered and properly disposed of at Magnolia Landfill, Summerdale, AL.6 1 See, NRC Report # 1086493 dated June 20, 2014. 2 See, Email directive to BP dated June 20, 2014. 3 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015. 4 See, Email between Mr. NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated March 31, 2015. 5 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 1, 2015. 6 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015. 4 The location of the tar mat which was 10 feet off the beach prevented CG personnel from collecting samples directly from the tar mat. Instead, CG personnel were forced to sample pieces of the tar mat or associated SRBs recovered by the OSRO and brought back to the beach by shovel for disposal.7 A total of three samples were collected by CG personnel,8 two of which BP either took a similar sample or split the sample with CG personnel.9 Coast Guard personnel forwarded two of the samples to the Coast Guard Marine Safety Laboratory (MSL) on July 14, 2014 (MSL Case Number 14-187). It’s unclear to the NPFC why the third sample collected by CG personnel was never split with BP personnel or submitted to the CG MSL for analysis. THE CLAIMANT AND THE CLAIM: On March 12, 2015, BP submitted a removal cost claim associated with the cleanup of the tar mat and associated SRBs to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF or the Fund), asserting that the oil collected was not Deepwater Horizon oil. Claimant sought reimbursement of its uncompensated removal costs in the amount of $130,081.6610 for services provided from June 20, 2014 through July 31, 2014, which included OSRO personnel and vehicle use, Swift Technical Services personnel cost, Polaris Applied Sciences personnel cost, and HDR Environmental Operations personnel cost. The claimed removal costs are based on the rate schedules in place at the time services were provided.11 APPLICABLE LAW: Under OPA 90, 33 USC § 2702(a), each responsible party for a vessel or facility from which oil is discharged, or which poses the substantial threat of a discharge of oil, into or upon the navigable waters or adjoining shorelines is liable for the removal costs and damages described in 33 USC § 2702(b) that result from the incident. The responsible party’s liability includes the “removal costs incurred by any person for acts taken by the person which are consistent with the National Contingency Plan”. 33 USC § 2702(b)(1)(B). "Oil" is defined in relevant part, at 33 USC § 2701(23), to mean “oil of any kind or in any form, including petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil”. The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF), which is administered by the NPFC, is available, pursuant to 33 USC §§ 2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the OSLTF claims adjudication regulations at 33 CFR Part 136, to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan and uncompensated damages. Removal costs are defined, at 33 USC § 2701(31), as “the costs of removal that are incurred after a discharge of oil has occurred or, in any case in which there is a substantial threat of a discharge of oil, the costs to prevent, minimize, or mitigate oil pollution from such an incident”. Under 33 USC §2713(b)(2) and 33 CFR 136.103(d) no claim against the OSLTF may be approved or certified for payment during the pendency of an action by the claimant in court to recover the same costs 7 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 15, 2015. 8 The first sample was obtained on June 20, 2014. The second sample was obtained on June 21, 2014. The third sample was obtained on July 8, 2014. See NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015, Attachment C. 9 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015, Attachment F1. 10 See, Email from Mr. , BP to , NPFC, dated April 1, 2015 requesting their sum certain be changed from $130,081.66 to $130,027.16 due to a duplicate charge. 11 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015, Attachment G. 5 that are the subject of the claim. See also, 33 USC §2713(c) and 33 CFR 136.103(c)(2) [claimant election]. Under 33 USC §2713(a), all claims for removal costs or damages must (with certain exceptions not applicable here) be presented first to the responsible party or guarantor of the designated source of the incident. Then, as provided in 33 U.S.C. §2713(d), “If a claim is presented in accordance with this section, including a claim for interim, short-term damages representing less than the full amount of damages to which the claimant ultimately may be entitled, and full and adequate compensation is unavailable, a claim for the uncompensated damages and removal costs may be presented to the Fund.” Under 33 CFR 136.105(a) and 136.105(e)(6), the claimant bears the burden of providing to the NPFC, all evidence, information, and documentation deemed necessary by the Director, NPFC, to support the claim. Under 33 CFR 136.105(b) each claim must be in writing, for a sum certain for each category of uncompensated damages or removal costs resulting from an incident. In addition, under 33 CFR 136, the claimant bears the burden to prove the removal actions were reasonable in response to the scope of the oil spill incident, and the Director, NPFC has the authority and responsibility to perform a reasonableness determination. Specifically, under 33 CFR 136.203: “a claimant must establish – (a) That the actions taken were necessary to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the effects of the incident; (b) That the removal costs were incurred as a result of these actions; (c) That the actions taken were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan or were directed by the FOSC.” In addition, under 33 CFR 136.205 “the amount of compensation allowable is the total of uncompensated reasonable removal costs of actions taken that were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan or were directed by the FOSC. Except in exceptional circumstances, removal activities for which costs are being claimed must have been coordinated with the FOSC.” [Emphasis added]. DETERMINATION OF LOSS: A. Findings of Fact: 1. CG GCIMT, MST1 as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator Representative (FOSCR) for this incident, oversaw the removal actions and determined that the actions undertaken by BP’s contracted OSRO were consistent with the NCP as reported in NRC Report # 1086493; 33 U.S.C. §§ 2702(b)(1)(B) and 2712(a)(4);12 2. The incident involved the discharge of “oil” as defined in OPA 90, 33 U.S.C. §2701 to “navigable waters;” 3. In accordance with 33 CFR § 136.105(e)(12), the claimant has certified no suit has been filed in court for the claimed costs; 4. The claim was submitted within the six year period of limitations for claims. 33 U.S.C.§2712(h)(1); B. Sample Analysis and other Tar Mats: 12 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015. 6 MSL Oil Sample Analysis Report 14-187 concludes that the comparison of samples 14-187-1 and 14- 187-2 (representative of spill samples obtained from Fort Pickens Beach) to samples 10-095-QC and 10-220-2 (representative as source samples of MC 252 oil) results in a non match conclusion. However, it’s important to note it is not possible based exclusively on MSL analysis to determine if the differences noted between the samples are the result of petroleum mixing in the environment or if they are real differences indicating the samples are unrelated.13 Regardless, BP seeks reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs based upon the results of this sample analysis. The Claimant states that all costs claimed are for uncompensated removal costs incurred for the incident from June 20 – July 31, 2014. BP represents that all costs paid by it are compensable removal costs, payable by the OSLTF as presented by the Claimant.14 The MSL Oil Sample Analysis Report 14-187 states that samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 contain heavy petroleum oil with characteristics somewhat similar to those of Deepwater Horizon oil. There are differences between the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that are not attributable to known weathering or non-petroleum contamination. As such, the conclusion was a non-match. This does not mean, however, that samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 do not come from the same source samples as the Deepwater Horizon oil. In fact, the biomarker profiles are the same. Mixing of petroleum oil results in a new fingerprint that cannot be correlated to a single source based on chemical analysis alone. The biomarker profiles very strongly suggest a relationship between samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 and the Deepwater Horizon oil.15 The NPFC has previously paid BP removal claims that were based solely on MSL sample analysis of SRBs that had a result of a non-match with similar biomarkers but different PAHs when compared to Deepwater Horizon oil. The rationale behind the NPFC’s decision to approve those claims was based upon communications between the NPFC and the CG MSL in which the CG MSL stated that they could not say with greater than a 50% certainty that the SRB samples with similar biomarkers but different PAHs were of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil.16 The NPFC determined that the preponderance of credible evidence (CG MSL Lab Results) supplied by BP established that the samples were not Deepwater Horizon oil and subsequently paid the claim(s) accordingly. However, when reviewing the information associated with this claim and talking with CG personnel who were members of the CG GCIMT and responsible for responding to the reports of SRBs along the Gulf Coast, the NPFC became aware of other tar mats, both on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, and in other areas on the Gulf of Mexico, where sampling conducted by CG personnel revealed similar tar mats to be derived from Deepwater Horizon oil. Specifically, a large tar mat was discovered on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, in February 2014 approximately 500 yards west17 of the tar mat discovered on the same beach on June 20, 2014. The February 2014, tar mat was approximately 20’ long x 4’ wide18 and was removed by BP contractors under the supervision of CG personnel. A sample of that tar mat was submitted to the CG MSL on March 3, 2014, (MSL Case Number 14-097) and the results revealed that sample obtained from the tar mat was in fact derived from Deepwater Horizon oil.19 13 See, CG MSL Oil Sample Analysis Report 14-187 dated 3 Nov 2014. 14 See, NPFC Optional OSLTF Form submitted by BP dated March 12, 2015. 15 See, CG MSL Oil Sample Analysis Report 14-187 dated 3 Nov 2014. 16 See, Email between Ms. , CG MSL and Mr. , NPFC dated February 10, 2015. 17 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated March 31, 2015. 18 See Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 1, 2015. 19 See, MSL Results Case Number 14-097 dated March 4, 2014. 7 Additionally, a tar mat was discovered at Grand Isle State Park, Wild Beach, LA, in October 2014. That tar mat was described as being 1” – 3” thick and consisting of residual oil material intermixed with an “eroding marsh platform.” To date, CG personnel have attended this site on numerous occasions and recovered approximately 719 lbs of tar mat.20 CG personnel collected a total of ten samples for analysis from the Wild Beach tar mat or associated SRBs over the period of multiple responses and submitted them to the CG MSL for analysis. Of the ten samples collected by CG personnel and submitted for analysis, four of the samples were determined by the CG MSL to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil.21 The remaining six samples were determined to be either a non-match to Deepwater Horizon oil22 or to have no similarities to Deepwater Horizon oil.23 MST1 , who was on-scene during this response and responsible for the collection of samples for submission to the CG MSL was questioned about the differences in sample results (match to Deepwater Horizon oil vs. non match to Deepwater Horizon oil). He stated that three of the samples obtained directly from the main tar mat on Wild Beach were tested and proven to have similarities to Deepwater Horizon oil.24 However, samples not obtained from the main tar mat but instead collected from associated SRBs in the vicinity of the main tar mat came back as either a nonmatch or having no similarities to Deepwater Horizon oil.25 26 A tar mat was also discovered on Grand Terre II Island, LA, on December 14, 2014. BP contractors, under the supervision of CG personnel, responded and recovered approximately 254 lbs of tar mat.27 Three samples of the tar mat and associated SRBs were submitted to the CG MSL on February 19, 2015, (MSL Case Number 15-076). The first sample collected during this response was from an SRB located approximately 10-15 feet away from the main tar mat and was determined to have no similarities to Deepwater Horizon oil. The remaining two samples collected during the response were 20 See, CGIMT NRC1110800 16 Mar 2015 Ops Summary provided by MST1 on April 1, 2015. 21 Sample 15-022-1 (MSL Case Number 15-022) collected on October 15, 2014; sample 15-024-1 (MSL Case Number 15-024) collected on October 29, 2014; sample 15-023-1 (MSL Case Number 15-023) collected on November 12, 2014 and sample 15-080-1 (MSL Case Number 15-080) collected on December 18, 2014, were all tested by the CG MSL and were determined to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil. See also See MSL Case Number 15-022 dated November 25, 2014; MSL Case Number 15-024 dated November 26, 2014; MSL Case Number 15-023 dated November 26, 2014 and MSL Case Number 15-080 dated February 25, 2015. 22 Sample 15-023-2 (MSL Case Number 15-023) collected on November 12, 2014; samples 15-075-1 and 15-075-2 (MSL Case Number 15-075) collected on January 21, 2015 and samples 15-078-1 and 15-078-2 (MSL Case Number 15-078) collected on February 3-4, 2015 were tested by the CG MSL and were determined to be a nonmatch to Deepwater Horizon oil. See also MSL Case Number 15-023 dated November 26, 2014; MSL Case Number 15-075 dated February 25, 2015 and MSL Case Number 15-078 dated February 25, 2015. 23 See, MSL Case Number 15-023 dated November 26, 2014. 24 Sample 15-022-1 (MSL Case Number 15-022) collected on October 15, 2014; sample 15-024-1 (MSL Case Number 15-024) collected on October 29, 2014 and sample 15-023-1 (MSL Case Number 15-023) collected on November 12, 2014 were all tested by the CG MSL and were determined to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil. See also See MSL Case Number 15-022 dated November 25, 2014; MSL Case Number 15-024 dated November 26, 2014; and MSL Case Number 15-023 dated November 26, 2014. 25 Sample 15-023-2 (MSL Case Number 15-023) collected on November 12, 2014; samples 15-075-1 and 15-075-2 (MSL Case Number 15-075) collected on January 21, 2015 and samples 15-078-1 and 15-078-2 (MSL Case Number 15-078) collected on February 3-4, 2015 were tested by the CG MSL and were determined to be a nonmatch to Deepwater Horizon oil. See also MSL Case Number 15-023 dated November 26, 2014; MSL Case Number 15-075 dated February 25, 2015 and MSL Case Number 15-078 dated February 25, 2015. 26 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 6, 2015. 27 See, MISLE Activity #4806924. 8 obtained directly from the tar mat and determined to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil.28 Lastly, there was a 2nd tar mat reported to the CG on Grand Terre II Island, LA on March 13, 2015. That tar mat was approximately 1.5 to 2 miles east of the tar mat discovered on Grand Terre II Island in December, 2014.29 This response extended over 16 site visits and to date includes the recovery of approximately 29,000 lbs of tar mat.30 Three samples of the tar mat and associated SRBs were submitted to the CG MSL on March 23, 2015, (MSL Case Number 15-107). According to the MSL report, sample one was obtained from SRBs in the zone within 10 feet of the tar mat and was a nonmatch to Deepwater Horizon oil. Sample two was obtained from the inshore tar mat and was determined to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil. Sample three was obtained to the offshore tar mat and was determined to be of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil.31 C. NPFC Conclusion BP presented this removal cost claim associated with their response to a tar mat and associated SRBs discovered on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, in June 2014. That response represents one of five large tar mat responses undertaken by BP under the supervision of the CG since February, 2014. As discussed previously, BP originally responded to a tar mat on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, in February, 2014 which is especially relevant to this claim as that tar mat was located approximately 500 yards west of the tar mat recovered on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, by BP in June 2014, which is subject of this claim and was identical in both size and appearance to the June 2014 tar mat.32 The sample submitted by CG personnel for the February 2014 tar mat (14-097-1) was determined to be a match and common source to Deepwater Horizon oil, therefore a reasonable person would investigate the validity of the non match results from the June 2014 tar mat (14-187-1 and 14-187-2). Based upon the credible evidence available to the NPFC, the June 2014 tar mat samples were obtained second hand from a contractor’s shovel as the tar mat was physically located 10 feet off the beach and CG personnel were unable to sample the tar mat directly.33 And as documented by the CG response to tar mats on Fort Pickens Beach, FL, in Feb 2014, Grand Isle State Park, Wild Beach, LA, in October 2014, and Grande Terre Island in both December 2014 and March 2015, samples obtained from the actual tar mats were a better representation of Deepwater Horizon oil while the associated SRBs obtained from the perimeter of the tar mat tended to be non match or questionable. As such, the NPFC is unable to ascertain whether samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 collected by CG personnel off the end of a contractor’s shovels were obtained from the tar mat or associated SRBs surrounding the perimeter of the tar mat and calls into question the reliability of the testing results. The CG MSL was asked to comment on the similarities between the sample taken from the Feb 2014 tar mat (14-097-1) and the 2 samples obtained from the June 2014 tar mat (samples 14-187-1 and 14- 187-2). The MSL responded by stating that sample 14-097-1 is the same as MC252 oil in all parameters evaluated (with the exception of weathering and non-petroleum contamination) and samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 are the same as MC252 oil in all parameters except C1- and C2- 28 See, MSL Case Number 15-076 dated February 25, 2015. See also email from MST1 , CG GCIMT to Mr. , NPFC dated 7 Apr 2015 with attached CG GCIMT Concurrence/Field Input forms. 29 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 7, 2015. 30 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CG Sector New Orleans dated March 31, 2015. 31 See, MSL Case Number 15-107 dated March 25, 2015 32 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 15, 2015. 33 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and MST1 , CGIMT dated April 15, 2015. 9 phenanthrenes. As such, one can deduce that samples 14-097-1, 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 are the same as each other in all parameters evaluated except C1- and C2-phenanthrenes.34 The tar mats removed by BP from Fort Pickens Beach, FL (Feb 2014 response), Grand Isle State Park, LA and Grand Terre II, LA, all shared numerous similarities. Specifically, they were all large in size, visually consistent with Deepwater Horizon oil and the associated CG MSL sample analysis concluded that samples obtained from the tar mats were of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil. Based on the foregoing, one can conclude that a large release of oil was the source of the five tar mats removed by BP throughout the Gulf of Mexico from February 2014 through the present and currents within the Gulf of Mexico transported that large release of oil following the catastrophic release of oil from the Deepwater Horizon event, re-depositing the oil on the Louisiana and Florida coasts, only to be covered and uncovered by sand during certain tidal fluctuations. Based upon the claim submission and available data, the NPFC has determined that the preponderance of the credible evidence establishes that samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 obtained from Fort Pickens beach in June 2014 were Deepwater Horizon oil. In making this determination, the NPFC finds the MSL Oil Sample Analysis Report (14-187) and the MSL’s opinion that they cannot say with more than 50% certainty that those samples were or were not of a common source to Deepwater Horizon oil combined with the CG MSL’s re-evaluation and identification of similarities between samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 to 14-097-1 (with the exception C1- and C2- phenanthrenes) all to be very credible evidence. The fact that four of the tar mats tested in part were a match to Deepwater Horizon oil further strengthens the NPFC’s opinion that if the CG responders had been able to obtain samples directly from the June 2014 Fort Pickens Beach, FL, tar mat, CG MSL report 14-187 results would have been a match to Deepwater Horizon oil. Finally, the five tar mats themselves, all displaying physical characteristics of Deepwater Horizon oil, believed to have been deposited by a large oil spill event and then carried and deposited by currents within the Gulf of Mexico onto the coast lines of Louisiana and Florida, to remain hidden and subject to discovery by the tides, is found to be strong circumstantial evidence that samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 were Deepwater Horizon oil. The Claimant provided no credible evidence aside from the results of CG MSL report 14-187 to support its argument that samples 14-187-1 and 14-187-2 were not Deepwater Horizon oil. Based on a preponderance of the credible evidence, the tar mat removed and for which costs are being claimed, is more likely than not from the Deepwater Horizon oil. Because Claimant is the responsible party liable for Deepwater Horizon oil, it may not recover these removal costs. Should the Claimant seek reconsideration of this claim, it must provide supplemental documented evidence that the tar mat removed was not Deepwater Horizon oil. D. Determined Amount: $0.00 The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will offer to pay $0.00 as full compensation for the claimed removal costs incurred by the Claimant and submitted to the NPFC under claim 915069- 0001. For these reasons, this claim is denied in its entirety. 34 See, Email between Mr. , NPFC and Ms. , CG MSL dated April 1, 2015. 10 Claim Supervisor: Date of Supervisor’s Review: April 20, 2016 Supervisor Action: Denial approved Supervisor’s Comments:
text/markdown	1.644961	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/uspto/07491335.json	# Patent ## Title Removal of arsenic from water with oxidized metal coated pumice ## Abstract The current invention is concerned with methods and compositions for the removal of arsenic contamination from water. A method for binding As to oxidized metal coated pumice and method for making the same are disclosed. Water filters comprising oxidized metal coated pumice, such as oxidized iron coated pumice, are also provided. ## Background This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent application Ser. No. 60/680,920 filed May 13, 2005, which is incorporated by reference in its entirety. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The invention relates generally to the field of chemistry. In particular the invention involves compositions and methods that may be used in water purification. 2. Description of Related Art Arsenic is a naturally-occurring element in the surface and subsurface environment that ranks 20th in abundance in the earth's crust. Arsenic is present at very low concentrations in rocks and soils, which are the prime sources of arsenic in ground water. However, some arsenic in ground water is likely leached from sulfide minerals within bedrock and transported to aquifers. Sulfide minerals, in particular, are known to contain high concentrations of arsenic. Arsenic in water occurs in two valance states, arsenite (As III) and arsenate (As V). Natural ground water contains As(III) since the reducing conditions prevail. On the other hand, As(V) is the dominant species in surface water. The exposure of humans to such arsenic contaminated water is a major concern world wide. For example, arsenic exposure has been associated with the development of skin and internal cancers. In addition to its oncogenic effects, other conditions such as diabetes, peripheral neuropathy, and cardiovascular disease have also been linked to arsenic exposure (Abernathy et al., 1999). In developed, countries a variety of technologies are currently in use for removal of As from water sources. These technologies include ion exchange, reverse osmosis, adsorption, and electro-dialysis reversal. Though these methods are effective for As removal their complexity and cost precludes their implementation in rural areas and developing countries. Alternative methods used for arsenic removal in developing countries rely primarily of coagulation/filtration. For example, ferric chloride coagulation and filtration is currently in use in some Bangladeshi villages (Adeel and Ali, 2002). Other techniques include batch-mixed treatment with zero-valence iron to reduce arsenic from water (Anuradha et al., 2001). Granular ferric hydroxide has also been tested for the removal of arsenic from drinking water (Driehaus et al., 1998; Thirunavukkarasu et al., 2003). Studies have also been performed to test removal of arsenic from ground water by iron hydroxide-coated sand (Joshi and Chaudhuri, 1996). However, these methods are inadequate to reduce arsenic contamination levels to meet safety levels recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (Adeel and Ali, 2002). The dire health effects of arsenic and the implementation of more stringent controls on arsenic levels in drinking water have created a need for an efficient and cost effective means for removal of arsenic from water supplies. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The current invention overcomes a major deficiency in the art and provides compositions and methods that enable the inexpensive and efficient removal of arsenic from water. In one embodiment, the current invention provides a composition comprising oxidized metal coated pumice. “Pumice,” as used herein refers to vesicular igneous rock that is composed primarily by SiO2. As used herein, the term “oxidized metal” means any metallic element that has been combined with oxygen, for example metal oxides and metal hydroxides. For instance, the oxidized metal coated pumice may comprise a coating of iron oxide or iron hydroxide or a mixture thereof. The pumice may have an average diameter of about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 mm or more. In certain embodiments, the oxidized metal coated pumice may comprise about or at least about 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 or more g/kg of metal (i.e. grams of metal per kilogram of coated pumice). In certain aspects of the invention, the oxidized metal coated pumice may be comprised in a filter matrix. The pumice may be used to fill any type of filter support or enclosure and the filter may comprise one or more portals to allow media to flow through the coated pumice. In certain embodiments, the coated pumice may be immobilized within an enclosure. For example, portal(s) in the enclosure may be fitted with a permeable or porous cover(s) wherein the pore size is sufficiently small to effectively immobilize the coated pumice. In another embodiment, the filter comprises an enclosure with two portals wherein the coated pumice is positioned between the two portals. In yet further embodiments, the enclosure may be a column. In some embodiments, the invention provides a method for coating pumice with metal hydroxide comprising the steps of: (a) contacting the pumice with a metal salt solution to make a slurry; (b) adjusting the pH of the slurry to an alkaline pH, thereby depositing metal hydroxide onto the pumice. In additional embodiments, a method for coating pumice may further comprise washing the pumice with water prior to contacting it with a metal salt solution. In certain further embodiments, the slurry may be incubated for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 240 minutes or longer at the alkaline pH. The slurry may also be agitated during the incubation in order to ensure that the entire surface of the pumice is contacted with the solution. In further embodiments, the metal hydroxide coated pumice may be washed after being coated with metal hydroxide so as to remove any unbound material. For example, the coated pumice may be washed with water. In certain cases, the concentration of the metal salt solution may be about or greater than about 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, or 2.0 molar or even a saturated solution. It is also contemplated that the slurry may be adjusted to a pH of about 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 8.9, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 10.9, 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, or higher, in order to deposit the metal hydroxide on the pumice. In some cases, the pH of the slurry may be raised by the addition of a base, for example, sodium or potassium hydroxide. In still further embodiments of the invention the coated pumice is dried. For example, in certain cases, an alkaline slurry comprising pumice may be dried-down, for example by baking in an oven. In certain cases, the drying step may be followed by additional washing and drying steps. In some embodiments the drying of the coated pumice may be by exposure to heat. Thus, in certain instances, the drying step may comprise calcination of the coated pumice wherein a potion of the metal hydroxide coating is converted to a metal oxide. In certain embodiments, exposure to heat is performed in an oven or kiln. For example, the heat exposure may be preformed in rotary kiln. In some cases, the exposure to heat may reach a maximum temperature of over 100° C. For example, the exposure temperature may reach about or at least about, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600 or more ° C. In certain embodiments, heat exposure may be for a period of hours. For example, the coated pumice may be exposed to heat for 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24 or more hours. In some instances, drying the coated pumice may additionally comprise flowing air through the pumice. In further embodiments of the invention, a method for coating pumice with a metal hydroxide may comprise coating the pumice with iron hydroxide. Thus, in certain embodiments, a method comprises contacting the pumice with an iron salt solution, for example ferric nitrate, and adjusting the slurry to an alkaline pH, thereby depositing iron hydroxide onto the pumice. The invention also provides a method for removal of arsenic from water comprising the step of contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice. The method comprises removal or As(III) and As(V), however in some embodiments the As(III) may be converted into As(V) by oxidation. Therefore, a method of removing arsenic from water may further comprise: (a) exposing the water to an oxidizing agent; (b) contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice thereby reducing the level of arsenic in the water. In still further embodiments of the invention, a method purifying water may further comprise adjusting the pH of the water prior to contacting the water with the oxidized metal coated pumice. For example, the pH of the water may be adjusted to about or at most about 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7.3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 5.0, 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, or 7.0. Adjusting the pH of the water can be accomplished, for example, by adding a concentrated acid to the water. Acids that may be used include but are not limited to hydrochloric acid, acetic acid, nitric acid, sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid. Therefore, the method of removing arsenic from water may further comprise: (a) exposing the water to an oxidizing agent; (b) adjusting the pH of the water and; (c) contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice, thereby reducing the level of arsenic in the water. In some embodiments, the method of purifying water may be used to purify drinking water. In certain cases, this water may be for animal consumption, such as for human consumption. Thus, in certain embodiments, a method of the invention may be used to reduce the incidence or arsenic related diseases in a population. In other embodiments, the method could be used to purify arsenic contaminated waste water. This may be important in reducing arsenic contamination of surface water sources, and also to reduce leaching into subterranean water reservoirs. In certain embodiments of the invention, a method for water purification may involve a batch purification. For example, the water may be mixed with the oxidized metal coated pumice then the pumice allowed to settle out of the water. However, in certain embodiments, a method of purifying water may comprise passing the water through a filter comprising coated pumice. In further embodiments, the filter may comprise one or more columns comprising oxidized metal coated pumice. It is contemplated that water may flow through said columns in either an up-flow or a down flow direction. Therefore, in some embodiments, the water is passed though the filter in an up flow direction such that contact with the coated pumice is maximized. Water may be passed through the filter for example, by gravity flow, by a siphon, or by a mechanical pump. In certain embodiments, a filtration method according to the invention may be undertaken on a large scale for filtration of public use water sources. However, in other embodiments, the invention provides a method for small scale removal of arsenic. For instance, coated pumice could be provided in removable filter cassettes for household use. These cassettes could be replaced on a regular basis in order to prevent saturation of the oxidized metal coated pumice with As. In still further embodiments, a water purification method according to the invention may comprise contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice for about or at least about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 or more minutes. Thus, in certain instances, the contact time of water with the oxidized metal coated pumice may be increased, for instance, by recirculating water through a coated pumice filter or by adjusting the flow-rate of water through a filter comprising the coated pumice. In additional embodiments, the invention provides a method for disposal of arsenic from water purification comprising the steps of; (a) contacting water with oxidized metal coated pumice thereby reducing the level of arsenic in the water and, (b) disposing of the spent oxidized metal coated pumice. It is envisioned that disposal of the spent oxidized metal coated pumice could comprise burying it in a landfill. Since the As remains tightly bound to the oxidized metal coated pumice, As captured by the method of the invention may be disposed of inexpensively and without environmental risk. Embodiments discussed in the context of a methods and/or composition of the invention may be employed with respect to any other method or composition described herein. Thus, an embodiment pertaining to one method or composition may be applied to other methods and compositions of the invention as well. As used herein the specification, “a” or “an” may mean one or more. As used herein in the claim(s), when used in conjunction with the word “comprising”, the words “a” or “an” may mean one or more than one. As used herein “another” may mean at least a second or more. Other objects, features and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the following detailed description. It should be understood, however, that the detailed description and the specific examples, while indicating preferred embodiments of the invention, are given by way of illustration only, since various changes and modifications within the spirit and scope of the invention will become apparent to those skilled in the art from this detailed description. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS The following drawings form part of the present specification and are included to further demonstrate certain aspects of the present invention. The invention may be better understood by reference to one or more of these drawings in combination with the detailed description of specific embodiments presented herein. FIG. 1: A flow chart that exemplifies arsenic removal procedure of the invention. FIG. 2: An example of a filtration apparatus according to the invention. The embodiment depicted is a up-flow three column purification scheme. FIG. 3: Graphical depiction of the data from Table 2. The graph demonstrates the As(V) absorbent capacity of various candidate materials. Data are plotted as concentration of absorbent (X axis) versus remaining As(V) in the media following incubation (Y axis). FIG. 4: Graphical depiction of the data from Table 3. The absorbent capacity of three substrates coated with oxidized iron are compared. The Y-axis indicates the remaining As(V) after incubation with absorbent materials, as a function of the concentration of each material (X axis). FIG. 5: Demonstrates the efficiency of As(III) and As(V) removal from water by pumice coated with oxidized iron (data from Table 4). The Y axis indicates the remaining concentration of As versus the concentration of the coated pumice (X axis). FIG. 6: The graph demonstrates the arsenic adsorbent capacity of pumice coated with oxidized iron (from Table 5). X-axis represents the number of bed volumes (BV) flowed through the column, and the Y-axis indicates that concentration of arsenic in the effluent. DESCRIPTION OF ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS The current invention provides methods and compositions that may be used to reduce arsenic contamination in water. One exemplary method for removal of arsenic from water is depicted in the flow chart of FIG. 1. In certain embodiments of the invention, arsenic contaminated water is passed through an oxidized metal coated pumice matrix and may comprise passing the water through one or more columns packed with the coated pumice. An example of a column purification apparatus is depicted in FIG. 2. In this example, water is passed through three columns packed pumice coated with oxidized iron, in an up-flow direction, driven by gravity feed. Studies herein, demonstrate that oxidized metal coated pumice is superior to other possible arsenic binding materials. In one example, the ability of various materials to absorb arsenic from a solution is demonstrated (Table 2). Data indicated that pumice coated with oxidized iron was by far the most effective absorbent material. Further studies using sand, zeolite, and pumice coated with oxidized iron confirmed that the coated pumice was able to remove up to 98% of As(V) compared to 78% and 82% for coated zeolite and sand respectively. For example, at equilibrium, water treated with oxidized iron coated pumice had 16 times less arsenic than water treated with a similar amount of coated sand. These data indicate that of all adsorbents tested only the coated pumice was able to reduce As contamination in water to levels below those deemed safe by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, 10 μg/L. Studies herein also show that oxidized metal coated pumice has a high binding capacity for arsenic, which would be of great value in industrial applications. When contaminated water was filtered through a column comprising pumice coated with oxidized iron the effluent water demonstrated levels of As contamination below 10 μg/L (10 ppb) until 4000 bed volumes of water contaminated with 100 μg/L had been passed though the column (Table 4). Thus, the coated pumice is both effective in reducing As levels water and efficient in binding large quantities of As from contaminated water. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that spent oxidized metal coated pumice can be safely disposed of in landfills, since the As remains tightly bound. This is highly advantageous since disposal of toxic materials is both expensive and hazardous to the environment. I. Oxidation of Aqueous Solutions In some applications of the current invention, it may be preferable to oxidize water prior to contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice. As(V) is bound to coated pumice more efficiently than As(III) since As(III) is predominantly uncharged at a pH 9.2 or less. Thus, oxidative conversion of As(III) into As(V) may increase the efficiency of arsenic removal. In some cases, oxidation also has the added beneficial effect of sterilizing water. For this reason, oxidative steps are included in many water purification strategies. Direct oxidation of As(III) can be carried out with chemicals including but not limited to, ozone, chlorine gas, hypochlorite, permanganate, hydrogen peroxide, Fenton's reagent (H2O2/Fe2+), or manganese oxides (Johnston and Heijnen, 2001). An exemplary method for oxidizing water with ozone comprises; contacting the water with about 2 mg/L of ozone for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 30, 60 minutes or longer (Nieminski and Evans, 1995). Other methods for As(III) oxidation comprise exposure to ultraviolet radiation however this process is inefficient unless catalyzed, for instance by the addition of sulfite (Ghurye and Clifford, 2000), ferric iron (Emett and Khoe, 2001), or citrate (EAWAG, 1999). Another method for oxidation of As(III) involves treatment of water with CeO2 as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,863,825. II. Coating Pumice with Metal Hydroxide In certain aspects of the current invention, metal hydroxides are deposited onto pumice. Metal hydroxides are known for the ability to bind As ions in solution, their insolubility in water makes them ideal for coating onto the pumice matrix (U.S. Pat. No. 6,383,395; Joshi and Chaudhuri, 1996). Methods for deposition of metal hydroxides are known to those of skill in the art. One method, for example, is precipitation of the hydroxide from a metal salt solution by addition of a base. Briefly, a metal salt that is soluble in water, such as those listed in Table 1, is put in solution and the solution contacted with pumice. The pH of the solution is then increased by the addition of a base. For example, Li, Na, K, Rb or Cs hydroxide salts or solutions thereof are added to the metal salt solution, thereby depositing insoluble metal hydroxide onto the pumice. Thus, metal hydroxide coatings may comprise, Mg, Al, Sc, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ru, Rh, Ag, Cd, In, Sn, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Th, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Hf, Ta, W, Re, Os, Ir, Pb, Bi, or Po hydroxides or any mixture thereof. TABLE 1 Metal salt water solubility Soluble Salts Exceptions Metal nitrates (NO3−), nitrites (NO2−), Silver nitrates and potassium chlorates (ClO3−) and perchlorates perchlorate are considered (ClO4−). slightly soluble. Metal halogen salts (Cl−, Br−, I−) Ag, Hg, Cu and Tl halogen salts are insoluble. HgBr2 and Pb halogen salts are slightly soluble. Metal acetate salts (C2H3O2−) Silver acetate and mercuric acetate are insoluble. Metal sulfate (SO42−) salts Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Pb, Ag, and Hg sulfate salts are insoluble to slightly soluble. Salts for use in coating pumice stone include, for example, metal nitrate salts. An example reaction is given in (a), wherein the variable “X” is any metal that is soluble as a nitrate salt, and “Y” may equal 1, 2, or 3. X(NO3)y(aq)+NaOH(aq)→X(OH)y(s)+NaNO3(aq) (a) Thus, a method for coating pumice may, in some instances, comprise the steps of; (a) contacting the pumice with a solution comprising X(NO3)y to make a slurry, (b) adjusting the slurry to an alkaline pH thereby depositing X(OH)y onto the pumice. In certain aspects of this method, the slurry may be adjusted to an alkaline pH by the addition of sodium hydroxide. The sodium hydroxide may be added as solid pellet or as solution. The pH of the solution may be adjusted slowly over a time period of seconds, minutes or hours to modulate the deposition rate of X(OH)y. In some embodiments, the pH of the solution may adjusted by the addition of urea, followed by heating of the solution, for example to 60-100° C. In this embodiment as the temperature of the solution rises the urea decomposes generating ammonium hydroxide and thus increasing the pH of the solution. In certain instances, acetamide, hexamethylenetetramine, propionamide or other precipitation agents may be substituted for the urea in the procedure. In some embodiments of the invention, the metal hydroxide deposited on the pumice is titanium hydroxide. Some exemplary titanium salt solutions include titanium oxysulfate, titanium sulfate, titanium nitrate and titanium potassium oxalate. In yet further embodiments, a slurry according to the invention may comprise pumice, one or more metal salts (X(NO3)y), and other components that modulate the deposition of metal hydroxides (X(OH)y) onto the pumice. In certain aspects of the invention, compounds that modulate the deposition of metal hydroxide may be added to metal salt solutions prior to or during precipitation. Such modulators may comprise metal chelators such as EDTA, other salt solutions, or organic polymers. In other aspects of the invention, the pH of the metal salt solution may be adjusted slowly and/or the solution may be agitated in order to modulate the deposition of metal hydroxides onto the pumice. The deposition of metal hydroxide may also be modulated by adjusting the temperature of the slurry during the deposition reaction. III. Determination of As Concentration The level of arsenic contamination in water may be determined by any of the methods that are well known in the art. For example, arsenic levels in a sample may be determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). ICP-MS instruments use an inductively coupled plasma torch to atomize samples in a 7,000 to 10,000° K. argon plasma. The plume of the argon plasma is sampled directly into the aperture of a quadruple mass spectrometer. Analyte ions produced by the plasma are accelerated, magnetically separated and counted using an electron multiplier. Test kits that measure Arsenic levels by first converting inorganic arsenic into arsine gas are also well know to those in the art, and kits for such assays may be purchased from HachTM. IV. Other Contaminants Bound by Pumice Coated with Oxidized Metal In certain embodiments, the methods and compositions of the current invention can be used to remove other contaminants from water. For example, the invention may be used to remove selenate, chromate, borate, perchlorate, or fluoride. In other embodiments, it is envisioned that the current invention could be used in the removal of heavy metals from water including but not limited to mercury, lead and cadmium. V. Factors that Modulate the Binding of As Factors such as arsenic oxidation state, pH of source water, and competing ions have significant effects on the arsenic removal by the oxidized metal coated pumice stone. Studies herein demonstrate that increasing pH from 4.0 to 10.0 decreased the adsorption of Arsenic by 100%. At pH 4.0, 7.0, and 10.0, the absorption of Arsenic(V) was 98%, 39, and 0% respectively. Several studies have also shown, that the optimum pH for arsenic removal by absorption process to be in the range of 5.5 to 6.0. Therefore in certain aspects of the invention, water is acidified prior to contacting it with coated pumice. Competing ions in water may also modulate the efficacy of As adsorption by oxidized metal coated pumice. In a laboratory batch test 1.8 grams of pumice coated with oxidized iron removed 96% arsenic from the water containing no competing species. Increasing concentration of sulfate, nitrate, nitrite, chloride, and phosphate, decreased the arsenic removal capacity. However, the presence of calcium (CaCO3) and magnesium (MgO), did not appear to effect arsenic(V) removal from the water by the coated pumice. Therefore, in certain instances it may be preferable that the coated pumice be used in the removal of arsenic from water sources with low levels of sulfates, nitrates, nitrites, chlorides and phosphates. In other embodiments, competing ions may be removed from the water by methods know to those of skill in the art prior to contacting the water the coated pumice. For example, the water maybe filtered, distilled or subjected to a membrane process, such as reverse osmosis. VI. Water Filters Comprising Oxidized Metal Coated Pumice The current invention also provides an apparatus for the removal of arsenic from water. In certain embodiments, such an apparatus may comprise filters packed with iron oxide coated pumice. In some cases, filters may be removable cassettes that could be easily replaced when arsenic binding capacity of the filter matrix is exhausted. Oxidized metal coated pumice could be used as the filter matrix in a variety filter types such as those described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,843,912, 6,841,066, 6,779,411, 6,328,777, D501,912, or D451,602, all incorporated herein by reference. In certain further embodiments of the current invention, water may be passed through other types of filters either before or after arsenic removal to reduce other contaminates in the water, for example organic contaminates such as viruses, bacteria and fungus. Some examples of these types of filters are found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,872,303 and 6,852,224, incorporated herein by reference. EXAMPLES The following examples are included to further illustrate various aspects of the invention. It should be appreciated by those of skill in the art that the techniques disclosed in the examples that follow represent techniques and/or compositions discovered by the inventor to function well in the practice of the invention, and thus can be considered to constitute preferred modes for its practice. However, those of skill in the art should, in light of the present disclosure, appreciate that many changes can be made in the specific embodiments which are disclosed and still obtain a like or similar result without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Example 1 Coating Pumice with Iron Hydroxide Natural pumice stones were broken into aggregate size US Sieve Size No. 18×20 and coated with iron hydroxide by the procedure similar to that of Joshi and Chaudhuri (1996). The procedure comprised pre-washing of pumice stone by immersing in deionized (DI) water for 24 hours, drying them in an oven at 105° C. for 14 hours. After drying, pumice stones were saturated with 2M ferric nitrate (2M Fe(NO3)3.9H2O), prepared by dissolving 808 g Fe(NO3)3.9H2O in DI water and diluting to 1000 ml. The pH of the mixture was adjusted to 11 with ION sodium hydroxide solution. The mixture was mixed for two minutes and dried in an oven at 110° C. for 14 hours. The coated Pumice Stone was washed with distilled water and the runoff was removed, the material was dried in an oven at 105° C. for 14 hours, and stored in a plastic bottle. Example 2 Screening Material for As Removal Several materials have been examined for arsenic removal by adsorption. The materials selected for screening test were natural pumice stone, pumice stone coated with oxidized iron, natural zeolite, zeolite coated with oxidized iron, black sand, red sand, red soil, iron slag, red shale, hematite, copper slag, and natural garnet. Initially, indicated concentrations of adsorbent materials were placed in individual batch reactors (plastic bottles) containing arsenic(V) (Na2HAsO4.7H2O) spiked water. The concentration of the As(V) in the water was 100 μg/L. The pH of the water was about 6 and the temperature was 250° C. The slurry was agitated with a mechanical shaker for 12 hours to give adequate contact between the adsorbent and dissolved arsenic(V). After sufficient contact time, water samples from each reactor were drawn and analyzed for total arsenic. The laboratory results and other relevant data for screening test are presented in Table 2. The laboratory results for initial screening tests are shown in the Table 2 and presented in FIG. 3. The arsenic adsorbed by the red soil, red sand, black sand, iron slag, and garnet were negligible. The natural zeolite and natural pumice stone did not adsorb any arsenic from water. The red shale, hematite, and copper slag leached arsenic into the water. The zeolite coated with oxidized iron and pumice stone coated with oxidized iron adsorbed about 90% and 99% arsenic(V) from the water respectively. Based on these data, the coated pumice stone, coated zeolite, and coated black sand were selected for batch adsorption test. TABLE 2 Adsorbent (g/L) C0 (μg/L) Ce (μg/L) Natural Zeolite 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 97.7 10.0 100 94.5 Zeolite coated with oxidized iron 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 8.15 10.0 100 7.81 Red Shale 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 111 10.0 100 89.6 Red Soil 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 80.9 10.0 100 57.2 Red Sand 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 90.8 10.0 100 78.8 Black Sand 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 95.1 10.0 100 85.4 Hematite 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 200 10.0 100 301 Iron Slag 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 72.1 10.0 100 59.2 Copper Slag 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 103 10.0 100 115 Natural Pumice Stone 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 105 10.0 100 92.6 Pumice coated with oxidized iron 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 0.826 10.0 100 0.46 Garnet 0.0 100 100 5.0 100 102 10.0 100 97.1 Example 3 Screening Candidate Material for As Removal Pumice stone, zeolite, and sand each coated with oxidized iron were selected for further testing. The black sand was coated with ferric nitrate by the procedure similar to that of Joshi and Chaudhuri (1996). The absorption of each material was evaluated in batch reactions. Initially 0.2, 1.0, 2.0, and in some cases 2.8 grams of adsorbent material was weighed and transferred into individual batch reactors (plastic bottles) containing 1000 ml arsenic spiked water (100 (μg/L)). The slurry was agitated with a mechanical shaker for 14 hours to obtain adequate contact between the arsenic in water and the adsorbents. After sufficient contact time, samples were drawn, filtered, preserved with nitric acid, and delivered to the laboratory for analysis for arsenic. The results for batch tests are shown in Table 3 and FIG. 4. As presented in the Table 3, 2.0 g/L of coated pumice stone adsorbed 98% detectable arsenic(V) (Na2HAsO4.7H2O) from water. However, only about 80% of the arsenic was removed by either coated zeolite or coated black sand, even when 2.8 g/L of material was used. Therefore, it was concluded that the pumice stone coated with oxidized iron was by far the most viable material to adsorb arsenic from water and thus it was selected for laboratory column tests. TABLE 3 As (V), As(V) Adsorbent (g) C0 (μg/L) Ce (μg/L) Removed (%) Pumice coated with oxidized iron 0.0 100 100 0 0.20 100 29 71 1.00 100 8 92 2.00 100 2 98 Zeolite coated with oxidized iron 0.0 100 100 0 0.20 100 66 34 1.00 100 28 72 2.00 100 22 78 2.80 100 22 78 Sand coated with oxidized iron 0.0 100 100 0 0.20 100 81 19 1.00 100 54 46 2.00 100 32 68 2.80 100 18 82 Example 4 Removal of As(III) by Coated Pumice A batch test was conducted by using Arsenic(III) {As2O3} spiked water and oxidized iron coated pumice stone as adsorbent media. The initial concentration of As(III) {AS2O3} in the water was 100 μg/L. Coated pumice stones were weighed (0.2, 1.0, 2.0 grams as indicated) and transferred into individual batch reactors (plastic bottles) containing 1000 ml Arsenic(III) {As2O3} spiked water. The slurry was agitated with a mechanical shaker for 14 hours to obtain adequate contact between arsenic in the water and the adsorbents. After sufficient contact time, water samples from each reactor were drawn, filtered, preserved with nitric acid, and delivered to the laboratory for analysis for total arsenic. The laboratory results and other relevant data for the batch test are presented in Table 4. TABLE 4 Adsorbent (g/L) Ce As(V) (μg/L) Ce As(III) (μg/L) 0.0 100 100 0.20 29 62 1.00 8 38 2.00 2 28 Example 5 Removal of As(III) by Oxidized Iron Coated Pumice The concentration of arsenic(V) {Na2HAsO4.7H2O} in the feed water was 100 μg/L, and the effluent concentration was below detection limit (<2 μg/L). Once the adsorbent areas in the columns were filled with arsenic, the arsenic concentration in the effluent was detected, and breakthrough began. As the sorption zone in the column disappeared, the arsenic in the effluent increased to 100 μg/L, which equaled the influent arsenic concentration, fed to the laboratory column resulting in a breakthrough curve. The results of the laboratory column test are presented in Table 5 and the adsorption breakthrough curve is presented in the FIG. 6. The breakthrough volume for the test column is equal to the breakthrough time multiplied by the flow rate to the test column. At complete exhaustion, the arsenic concentration of the effluent was 100 μg/L. Low arsenic concentrations were achieved for approximately 1100 hours of laboratory column operation. The breakthrough did not start until at least 600 liters of water passed through the Iron Oxide Coated Pumice Stone (IOCPS) media. The volume of coated pumice stone in the laboratory test column was 150 cm3. Therefore, the breakthrough volume (VB) of effluent water, which met USEPA's MCL of 10 μg/L was 4000 Bed Volumes as calculated below. BV=((600liters1000ml/liter)/(150cm3per BV))(1cm3/ml)=4000 Bed Volumes(BV) TABLE 5 As (V) (μg/L) Quantity of Water Influent Effluent Treated (L) Bed Volumes 100 <5 13 87 100 <5 76 507 100 <5 145 967 100 <5 221 1472 100 <5 322 2147 100 <5 437 2913 100 <5 527 3513 100 <5 535 3567 100 7 603 4020 100 17 643 4287 100 32 877 5848 100 35 1254 8363 100 50 1310 8733 100 65 1379 9193 100 70 1495 9967 100 83 1727 11513 100 87 2021 13473 Example 6 Determination of Optimal Contact Time To determine the optimal contact time for efficient removal of As from contaminated water the pumice coated with oxidized iron was incubated with the contaminated water for a range of time intervals. The results from these studies are presented in the Table 6. Data indicated that the optimum contact time required to remove arsenic(V) by the coated pumice stone was 8 to 10 minutes. TABLE 6 Residence Final concentration EPA maximal Time (Min) of As (μg/L) content level 0 100 10 2 30 10 3 21 10 4 19 10 5 16 10 6 15 10 7 11 10 8 9 10 9 7 10 10 4 10 Example 7 Removal of As(V) is pH Dependent Studies were undertaken to determine the efficiency of As(V) removal over a range water pH values. As(V) solutions were prepared by diluting 10.0 ml As(V) contaminated water (10 mg/L) into 1000 ml with DI water and adjusting its pH to about 4, 7, or 10 with HNO3, HNO3 and NaOH, or NaOH solutions respectively. These solutions were subjected to batch reaction with coated pumice as previous described and As removal was ascertained. Increasing pH from 4.0 to 10.0 decreased the adsorption of arsenic by 100%. At pH 4.0, 7.0, and 10.0, the absorption of Arsenic(V) was 98%, 39%, and 0% respectively. Several studies have also shown, that the optimum pH for arsenic removal by absorption process to be in the range of 5.5 to 6.0. Example 8 Analysis of Spent Coated Pumice The spent oxidized iron coated pumice stone was analyzed for total iron, total arsenic, and Toxicity Characteristics Leachate Procedure (TCLP). TCLP was developed by the USEPA to characterize the leachability of an industrial waste when disposed into the sanitary landfill). Results for this study indicted that spent media had a total iron content of 26,800 mg/kg, a total arsenic was 1,860 mg/kg, and the TCLP-Arsenic was 0.1 mg/L. The regulatory limit for TCLP-Arsenic for landfill disposal is 5.0 mg/L; therefore, the spent pumice stone is non-hazardous waste and may be disposed in a sanitary landfill. All of the compositions and methods disclosed and claimed herein can be made and executed without undue experimentation in light of the present disclosure. While the compositions and methods of this invention have been described in terms of preferred embodiments, it will be apparent to those of skill in the art that variations may be applied to the compositions and methods and in the steps or in the sequence of steps of the method described herein without departing from the concept, spirit and scope of the invention. More specifically, it will be apparent that certain agents which are both chemically related may be substituted for the agents described herein while the same or similar results would be achieved. All such similar substitutes and modifications apparent to those skilled in the art are deemed to be within the spirit, scope and concept of the invention as defined by the appended claims. REFERENCES The following references, to the extent that they provide exemplary procedural or other details supplementary to those set forth herein, are specifically incorporated herein by reference. U.S. Pat. No. 6,328,777 U.S. Pat. No. 6,383,395 U.S. Pat. No. 6,779,411 U.S. Pat. No. 6,841,066 U.S. Pat. No. 6,843,912 U.S. Pat. No. 6,852,224 U.S. Pat. No. 6,863,825 U.S. Pat. No. 6,872,303 U.S. Pat. No. D 451,602 U.S. Pat. No. D 501,912 Abernathy et al., Environ. Health Perspect., 107(7):593-597, 1999. Adeel and Ali, In: A Comparative Evaluation and Field Implementation of Treatment Technologies for Arsenic Removal from Groundwater, Proc. Intl. Workshop Arsenic Mitigation in Bangladesh, Rural Dev. Coop., Bangladesh, 1-11, 2002. Anuradha et al., Water Research, 35(18):4474-4479, 2001. Driehaus et al., J. of Water Services Res. Tech., 47(1):30-35, 1998. EAWAG, http:///www.sodis.ch/, 1999. Elizalde-Gonzalez et al., Chem. Engineering J., 81:187-195, 2000. Emett and Khoe, Water Res., 35(3):649-656, 2001. Ghurye and Clifford, Proc., AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference, 2000. Ghurye and Clifford, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency publication no. EPA/600/R-01/021, 2001. Joshi and Chaudhuri, J. Environ. Eng., 769-771, 1996. Johnston and Heijnen, International Workshop on Technologies for Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water, 2001. Nieminski and Evans, Ozone Sci. Eng., 17(3):297-309, 1995. Thirunavukkarasu et al., Water research Commission Rep. of South Africa. 29(2):161-170, 2003. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic from Drinking Water (EPA 815-R-00-028), www.epa.gov/safewater, 2000. ## Claims 1. A method of removing arsenic from water comprising the step of contacting the water with oxidized metal coated pumice, thereby reducing the level of arsenic in the water. 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising, prior to the step of contacting the water with the oxidized metal coated pumice, the additional step of exposing the water to an oxidizing agent. 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising, prior to the step of contacting the water with the oxidized metal coated pumice, the additional step of adjusting the pH of the water. 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the oxidized metal coated pumice is oxidized iron coated pumice. 5. The method of claim 1, wherein arsenic levels are reduced to less than 10 μg/L. 6. The method of claim 2, wherein the oxidizing agent converts As(III) to As(V). 7. The method of claim 3, wherein the water is adjusted to a pH of less than about 7.0. 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the water is drinking water. 9. The method of claim 8, wherein the drinking water is suitable for animal consumption. 10. The method in claim 9, wherein the drinking water is suitable for human consumption. 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the oxidized metal coated pumice is comprised in a column. 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the water is brought in contact with the iron coated pumice by passing the water through the column. 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the water is passed through the column(s) in an up flow direction. 14. The method of claim 12, wherein the water is passed through the column by gravity or by siphon. 15. The method of claim 12, wherein the water is passed through the column by a mechanical pump. 16. The method of claim 2, further comprising, prior to the step of contacting the water with the oxidized metal coated pumice, the step of adjusting the pH of the water. 17. The method of claim 2, wherein the water is adjusted to a pH of less than about 7.0. 18. The method of claim 5, wherein arsenic levels are reduced to 9 μg/L. 19. The method of claim 5, wherein arsenic levels are reduced to 4 μg/L. 20. The method of claim 1, wherein arsenic levels are reduced up to 92%. 21. The method of claim 1, wherein arsenic levels are reduced up to 98%. 22. The method of claim 7, wherein the water is adjusted to a pH of about 5.5 to 6.0. 23. The method of claim 7, wherein the water is adjusted to a pH of about 5.0. 24. The method of claim 7, wherein the water is adjusted to a pH of about 4.0.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.arb.727332/gov.uscourts.arb.727332.30.0.pdf.json	Adam B. Nach- 013622 1 LANE & NACH, P.C. 2001 E. Campbell Ave., Suite 103 2 Phoenix, AZ 85016 Telephone No.: (602) 258-6000 3 Facsimile No.: (602) 258-6003 Email: adam.nach@lane-nach.com 4 5 6 7 8 Attorneys for Jill H. Ford, Case Trustee Inre: IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Chapter 7 Case) MARTHA J ALLEY aka MARTHA J 9 JORDAN-ALLEY, No. 2:18-bk-03972-EPB 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Debtor. CASE TRUSTEE'S APPLICATION TO EMPLOY ATTORNEY/ DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY Jill H. Ford, ("Case Trustee"), for her Application to Employ Attorney, respectfully alleges as follows: 1. This case was commenced by voluntary petition filed by the Debtor on April16, 2018. 2. Case Trustee is the duly qualified and acting trustee in this case. 3. To perform the duties of a Case Trustee, Case Trustee requires the services of an attorney 18 for the following purpose: 19 20 21 22 23 24 a. To advise and consult with Case Trustee concerning questions arising in the conduct of the administration of the estate and concerning Case Trustee's rights and remedies with regard to the estate's assets and the claims of secured, preferred and unsecured creditors and other parties in interest. b. To appear for, prosecute, defend and represent Case Trustee's interest in suits 25 arising in or related to this case. 26 c. To investigate and prosecute preference and other actions arising under the Case 27 Trustee's avoiding powers. 28 Case 2:17-bk-07545-DPC Doc 30 Filed 05/10/18 Entered 05/10/18 16:07:11 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 d. To assist in the preparation of such pleadings, motions, notices and orders as are required for the orderly administration of this estate; and to consult with and advise Case Trustee in connection with the operation of or the termination of the operation of the business of the Debtor. 4. For the foregoing reasons and all other necessary and proper purposes, Case Trustee desires to retain generally the law firm of Lane & Nach, P.C. ("Attorney") as counsel for the trustee. 5. Because Attorney practices in bankruptcy corporate reorganization, trustee and debtor/creditor matters, and because of its experience in those fields, Case Trustee feels that said law firm is well qualified to render the foregoing services. 6. Based upon the Declaration attached hereto, Case Trustee believes that said law firm and its members and associates, do not hold or represent any interest adverse to that of your Case Trustee or the Debtor or the estate and that said law firm is a disinterested entity within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. §101(14). 7. follows: 8. Case Trustee is informed that the normal billing rates of said law firm at this time are as Attorneys: Paralegals: $350 - $225 per hour $150-$ 50 per hour It is contemplated that Attorney will seek compensation based upon normal and usual hourly billing rates. It is further contemplated that attorneys will seek interim compensation during the case as permitted by 11 U.S.C. §331. 9. The Case Trustee brought this case to Attorney on the date indicated below. As a result and in order to expeditiously handle the issues, Attorney immediately commenced work on the file. Attorney routinely copies the file and has an application to employ prepared for filing in due course. Therefore, Case Trustee seeks approval from the Court to employ the firm from the date of such initial consultation. 2 Case 2:17-bk-07545-DPC Doc 30 Filed 05/10/18 Entered 05/10/18 16:07:11 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREFORE, Case Trustee prays as follows: a. For authority to employ Attorney, as of the date of this Application as attorneys to render services in the areas described above with compensation to be paid as an administrative expense in such amounts as this Court may hereinafter determine; and, b. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. DATED: May 2, 2018. /s/ Jill H. Ford, Trustee Case Trustee COPY of the foregoing delivered via electronic notification to: Stuart D. Gavzy Office of Stuart D. Gavzy 8171 E Del Barquero Drive Scottsdale Scottsdale, AZ 85258 Email: stuart@gavzylaw.com Attorney for Debtor Office of U.S. Trustee 230 North First Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85003 Email: Larry.Watson@usdoj.gov By /s/ Maria Alcala 3 Case 2:17-bk-07545-DPC Doc 30 Filed 05/10/18 Entered 05/10/18 16:07:11 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF ADAM B. NACH I, Adam B. Nach, declare: A. I am an attorney duly admitted to practice before all courts of the State of Arizona, as well as this Court and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. B. I am a member of Lane & Nach, P.C., the law firm that the Case Trustee is seeking to employ generally by the Application to which this Declaration is attached. I am a certified specialist in the practice of Bankruptcy Law. All of the members and associates of this law firm are admitted to practice in this state and before this Court. C. The attorneys employed by the law firm of Lane & Nach, P.C. have extensive experience in bankruptcy, insolvency, corporate reorganization and debtor/creditor law. The firm is well qualified to represent the Case Trustee generally herein, and is willing to accept employment on the basis set forth in the annexed Application. D. The law firm of Lane & Nach, P.C. and its associates do not hold any interest or connections to this estate, adverse or otherwise, or with the Debtor, creditors, or any other party-in-interest, their respective attorneys and accountants, the Case Trustee, or any person employed in the Office of the United States Trustee; and, said law firm is a disinterested entity as defined in 11 U.S.C. §101(14). E. Neither the undersigned nor the law firm have shared or agreed to share compensation in this case with anyone except as professional fees are normally divided among members of Lane & Nach, P.C. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: May 1, 2018. ----~ffl~/A~dam~=B~.N~a=c~h ______________ ~~ Adam B. Nach /J.,. 4 Case 2:17-bk-07545-DPC Doc 30 Filed 05/10/18 Entered 05/10/18 16:07:11 Desc Main Document Page 4 of 4
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap_docs/2022/07/26/in_re_e.s._ca23.pdf.json	Filed 7 / 26 / 2 2 In re E.S. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS Cal ifornia Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ord ered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a). IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE In re E.S. et al. , Person s Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. B 315846 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES , Plaintiff and Respondent , v. J.F., Defendant and Appellant. Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20LJJP00331 A – C APPEAL from order s of the Superior Court of L os Angeles County, Michael C. Kelley , Judge. Affirmed . Megan Turkat - Schirn , under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Daw y n R. Harrison , Acting County Counsel, Kim Nemoy , Assistant County Counsel, and Stephen Watson , Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.2 INTRODUCTION Appel lant J.F. (mother) appeals determinations made under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.21, subdivision (f) 1 by the j uvenile c ourt that it would be detrimental to return two of her daughters to her custody and that she had been afforded reasonable reunification services . W e conclude substantial evidence supports the findings of the court that it would have been detrimental to return the girls to their mother’s home at that time. We also conclude, as the court did, that t he Los Angeles County Department of Children and Famil y Services (Department) provided reasonable reunification services. Accordingly, we affirm. FACT S AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Initial Proceedings At the outset of these proceedings, m other ha d sole legal and physical custody of her three children : Emma (age 14), Lucy (age 8), and Donna (age 6). 2 The Department filed a petition under section 300, subdivisions (a) and (b) , regarding the children in May 2020 . The Department’s involvement with the family was triggered by a domestic violence incident between moth er and her boyfriend, James V., in which mother kicked James out of the house. He attempted to reenter the house and mother used a pocketknife to cut him. James sustained a “big gash” on his right forearm. In June 2020, the court issued a stay - away order 1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 2 The minors’ fathers are not involved in this appeal.3 p rohibiting James from having any contact with mother’s three children. In July 2020, the court sustained the following jurisdictional allegations as to mother : Count a - 2 : “The children[’s] mother ... and [R.M., father of Lucy and Donna], have a history of engaging in violent altercations, in the children’s presence. On a prior occasion, the father shoved the mother and pushed her face. Such violent conduct on the part of the father against the mother e ndangers the children’s physical health and safety and places the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm, damage, and danger.” Count a - 3: “On prior occasions, [R.M.] physically abused [Emma] by stri king [her] face, causing the child’s nose to bleed. On prior occasions, the father spanked [Lucy and Donna]. Such physical abuse was excessive and caused the children unreasonable pain and suffering. The child’s mother knew or reasonably should have known of the physical abuse of the children on t he part of the father and failed to protect the children. Such physical abuse of the children on the part of the father and the mother’s failure to protect the children endangers the children’s physical health and safety and place the children at substanti al risk of serious physical harm, damage, danger, physical abuse and failure to protect. ” Count b - 1: “[Mother] and the mother’s male companion, James [V.], have a history of engaging in violent altercations, while the children are in the home. In May of 20 20, the mother caused a laceration on the mother’s male companion’s arm. The children have reported prior incident s where the mother and the father [ sic ] struck each other. The child Emma is a prior4 Dependent of the Juvenile Court due to the mother’s condu ct. The mother’s conduct places the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm.” Count b - 3: “ [Mother] has an unresolved history of substance abuse and is a regular user of marijuana and alcohol which negatively impacts the mother’s ability to pr ovide regular care of the children. On 05/13/2020, the mother was under the influence of alcohol when the children were in the mother’s care and supervision. On 05/19/2020, the mother was under the influence of marijuana while the children were in the moth er’s care and supervision. On 05/19/2020 , the mother had a positive toxicology screen for marijuana. Additionally, the mother allowed her male companion, James [V.], to be under the influence of marijuana and alcohol while the children were home and while no other sober adult was present. The child, D o nna is of such a young age as to require constant care and supervision and the mother’s actions interfere [ ] with providing regular care and supervision of the child. The child, Emma is a prior Dependent of th e Juvenile Court due to the mother’s substance abuse . Such substance abuse on the p art of the mother and failure to insure [ sic ] sober supervision of the children place the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm.” Count b - 5: “The children[’s] mother ... and [R.M. ] have a history of engaging in violent altercations, in the children’s presence. On a prior occasion, the father shoved the mother and pushed her face. Such violent conduct on the part of the father against the mother endang ers the children’s physical health and safety and places the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm, damage, and danger.”5 Count b - 6: “On prior occasions, [R.M.] physically abused [Emma] by striking [her] face, causing the child’s nose to ble ed. On prior occasions, the father spanked [Lucy and Donna]. Such physical abuse was excessive and caused the children unreasonable pain and suffering. The child’s mother knew or reasonably should have known of the physical abuse of the children on the par t of the father and failed to protect the children. Such physical abuse of the children on the part of the father and the mother’s failure to protect the children endangers the children’s physical health and safety and place [s] the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm, damage, danger, physical abuse and failure to protect.” The minors were removed from mother and initially placed with a family member. The court ordered monitored v isitation for mother with Donna and Lucy three times a week. Mother’s case plan included a full drug and alcohol treatment program with a minimum six - month aftercare, weekly drug and alcohol testing, a 12 - step program, parenting classes, individual counseling, and conjoint counseling with James if mother chose to co ntinue their relationship. Mother was also required to abide by the court’s stay - away order prohibiting contact between James and the minors. It appears the court also ordered individual counseling for each of the minors to address case issues as well as c onjoint therapy for the two older girls with mother “if recommended by the children’s therapist . ” 2. Permanency Hearing 2.1. The Department’s Report s In preparation for the 12 - month permanency hearing, t he Department submitted a status review report in late July 2 021 .6 At that time , Lucy and Donna were residing together in a foster home and were doing well. Both minors were participating in therapy . Mother was participating in supervised visitation with the girls twice a week and visits were going well. Lucy told a Department social worker that she did not like James and was afraid of him because he hits mother. Donna had said she did not want to live with James . Emma was residing in a different foster placement and was receiving therapy twice a week. The social worker reported that Emma received therapy to address trauma she experienced at home, hearing voices, self - cutting, and suicidal ideation. Among other th ings, Emma had witnessed domestic violence between mother and James in the home and had once attempted to intervene. She had also had several psychiatric hospitalizations. Emma’s therapist indicated that conjoint counseling with mother could begin in July 2021. Mother had been having monitored phone calls with Emma three times a week and was in the process of transitioning to in - person visitation. Emma reported that she wanted to see mother more often. Mother was fully participating in her case plan. She wa s attending classes regarding parenting, anger management, and domestic violence , participating in family counseling and individual counseling, and had completed a 12 - step outpatient treatment program . Mother remained fr ee from drugs as well. By all accoun ts, mother was in compliance with her case plan and showing excellent progress in drug treatment and recovery. Nevertheless, the Department noted that the children did not feel safe living under mother’s care so long as mother was living with James.7 Mother and James continued their relationship and i n January 2021, mother gave birth to James’s child , Margaret . James , who has a history of abuse of methamphetamine, voluntarily enrolled in services relating to domestic violence, anger management, parenting, and substance abuse. The Department represented that as of July 2021, mother was still living with James and was attending conjoint therapy with him . The Department indicated that mother had not made the adjustments needed to reunify with her children, i.e., she continued in her relationship with James, and recommended continuing family reunification services. In a last minute information for the court submitted on September 22, 2021, the Department reported that mother continued to comply fully with her case plan with the exception of the 12 - step program . Mother had been attending online meetings but was not yet attending in - person meetings. Mother’s sponsor stated she had not yet met moth er or begun working with her on the 12 steps. The Department also reported that Emma did not want to visit with mother and wanted to live with her father and the paternal grandmother. Mother and Emma had had one conjoint therapy session in which Emma was e xtremely emotional and confrontational with mother and the therapist . The therapist recommended discontinuing conjoint sessions so that she could rebuild rapport with Emma. The Department expressed concern for Emma’s mental health and suggested that return ing her to mother’s care at that time “will cause more harm to this youth.” Visits between mother and the two younger girls were excellent and the monitor reported that mother was one of the best parents she had monitored. Mother visited consistently,8 appe ared on time, and was very patient with the girls. Both girls had been participating in therapy sessions focusing on “irate and concerning behaviors that were reported in the initial Mental Health referral” and were now demonstrating “age - appropriate and sibling behaviors.” The therapy facilitator reported that the girls would be transitioning to a “lower leve l of Mental Health services.” Both girls h ad reported being fearful of James and although they missed mother , they did not want to return home if James was present because “he was mean and they were scared” and th ey were “scared that their mother was going to die.” One of the girls acted out domes tic violence during a play therapy session. Regarding James, the Department provided several updates. First, mother had reported to the Department that James moved out of her apartment in May 2021. Both James and mother refused to provide his new address t o the Department , however, and the Department expressed concern that mother was not being truthful . On September 10, 2021, James told the Department he was currently homeless and provided mother’s address for purposes of mail correspondence. Second, a repr esentative from mother’s support groups (parenting, domestic violence, anger management) reported that mother and James had been attending virtual classes together since September 2020 but, two weeks earlier , began attending from different locations. Third , mother and James agreed to participate in a voluntary family maintenance case with the Department regarding Margaret . Finally, the Department expressed concern that “ mother and boyfriend [James] were still living with each other for over a year since the case opene d” because the Department9 “would not be able to return children to her care, while the s t ay away order wa s still in place.” In a further last minute information submitted on September 27, 2021, the Department reported that Emma continu ed to refuse to speak with mother and planned to write a letter to the court to convey her views on placement. The Department also advised the court that a social worker informed mother that the Department would not be recommending that the children be ret urned to her care. The Department ha d an ongoing concern about James’s residence because both mother and James ha d refused to provide an address for him. Mother replied that if the children were not returned to her at the permanency hearing, James would be moving back in with her. 2.2. Contested Hearing The court conducted a contested hearing in September 2021 and October 2021 . In addition to admitting t he Department’s reports and last minute informations, the court heard testimony from the Department ’s caseworker and mother. The caseworker stated that the Department’s sole concern about the family relat ed to James and the stay - away order preventing him f rom being near the minors . Specifically, the caseworker testified that although mother said James had moved out of her home in May 2021 , James’s hats and clothing were still there when she assessed mother’s home in July 2021 . Further, neither mother nor James would provide a current address for James after the move - out. 3 And at a meeting in July 2021, James 3 During her testimony, mother stated she did not have James’s addr ess but that he was staying with “a family member.”10 introduced himself to Department staff as mother’s “fiancé.” Mother also told the caseworker that if the children were n ot returned to her, James would be moving back into her home. Taken together, these facts led the Department to harbor concerns that mother would not abide by the stay - away order. And the fact that James and mother had a history of domestic violence was th e underlying cause for concern. Regarding conjoint therapy between mother and the children, the court confirmed that conjoint therapy had been ordered for Emma and Lucy. The caseworker explained that she had been communicating with the girls’ therapist s ab out conjoint therapy. The therapists had explained that the initial mental health referral was to address “irate behaviors” that the children were displaying earlier in the case . But because those behaviors had abated, the girls would now be transitioning to a different type of mental health care and would be working with new therapists. In the existing therapists’ view, it would be better to have the girls address their fear of James and begin conjoint therapy with mother with the new therapists. 3. Trial Cou rt Order s ; Appeal The court issued written ruling s on October 15, 2021 . The court found that mother had made substantial progress on her case plan but determined that the children would be at substantial risk of harm if returned to her custody. Specifically, the court noted that the minors had been traumatized by witnessing domestic violence between mother and James and were still fearful of James. The c ourt also agreed with the Department and minors’ counsel and found that the Department had provided reasonable services .11 The court ordered the Department to continue providing family reunification services for an additional six months . The court kept the s tay - away order in effect, with the exception that James could participate in conjoint therapy with the minors if and when the minors’ therapists deem it appropriate. The court also reiterated that the Department had discretion to liberalize mother’s visita tion. Finally, the court set a further hearing for April 15, 2022. 4 Mother timely appeals. DISCUSSION Mother contends the court ’s finding that returning Lucy and Donna to her custody would create a substantial risk of detriment to the ir safety, protection , or physical or emotional well - being is not supported by substantial evidence. Further, mother argues the Department failed to p rovide reasonable services during the most recent period of supervision . We address these arguments in turn. 1. The Detriment Finding Mother contends insufficient evidence supports the court’s finding at the 12 - month review hearing that returning Donna and Lucy to her custody would be detrimental to their safety or physical or emotional well - being. We disagree. Californ ia ’ s dependency system is designed “to protect children from harm and to preserve families when safe for the child.” ( Tracy J. v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1415, 4 The parties have not updated this court regarding any further proceedings in the juvenile court.12 142 4 ( Tracy J .); see also § 300.2.) During the reunification period of a dependenc y case, the primary focus is on preserving the family by addressing the issues that led to dependency jurisdiction. ( Rita L. v. Superior Court (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 495, 507.) That means until reunification services have been terminated, “family reunifica tion is the goal and the parent is entitled to every presumption in favor of returning the child to parental custody.” ( Tracy J ., at p. 142 4 ; see also §§ 366.21, 366.22.) At each review hearing following disposition, “there is a statutory presumption that the child will be returned to parental custody.” ( In re Marilyn H . (1993) 5 Cal.4th 295, 308.) A court must return the child to her parent ’ s custody unless it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that doing so would “create a substantial risk of detrim ent to the safety, protection, or physical or emotional well - being of the child.” (See § 366.21, subd. ( f )(1) .) The burden is on the Department to prove that the child would face some actual, non - speculative risk if she were returned to her parent ’ s custod y. ( In re Yvonne W . (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1394, 1400 ( Yvonne W .).) “In evaluating detriment, the juvenile court must consider the extent to which the parent participated in reunification services. [Citations.] The court must also consider the efforts or p rogress the parent has made toward eliminating the conditions that led to the child ’ s out - of - home placement.” ( Ibid .) We review a juvenile court’s detriment finding for substantial evidence. ( Tracy J., supra , 202 Cal.App.4th at p. 1424.) Of course, we cons ider the evidence favorably to the prevailing party and resolve all conflicts in support of the trial court’s order. ( Yvonne W. , supra , 165 Cal.App.4th at p. 1401 .)13 “ ‘ “Substantial evidence” is evidence of ponderable legal significance, evidence that is reasonable, credible and of solid value. [Citation.]’ [Citation.] ‘Inferences may constitute substantial evidence, but they must be the product of logic and reason. Speculation or conjecture alone is not substantial evidence. [Citations.]’ ” ( Tracy J . , at p. 1424.) We have no difficulty concluding that substantial evidence supports the court’s detriment finding. As noted, t he court removed Donna and Lucy from mother’s custody following a domestic violence incident between mother and James. That incident was not isolated. And a s a result of domestic violence in the home , Donna and Lucy developed a fear of James and did not want to return to mother’s home if James was living there. The court, for its part, issued a stay - away order prohibiting James from having any contact with the girls. Yet, mother continued to live with James for the first full year of these proceedings. And although mother said that James had moved out of her home in May 2021, James’s clothing and other possessions remained in her home month s later. Mother and James attended online classes from the same location. James introduced himself to Department staff as mother’s “fiancé.” And mother told the Department that if Donna and Lucy were not returned to her, James would be moving back into the home. These circumstances caused the Department to be concerned that if the girls were returned to mother’s custody, mother might allow James to have contact with them, which would likely be detrimental to their emotional well - being. As mother notes , both the court and the Department agreed that the only issue of concern relate s to James. Mother had fully complied with her case plan and was observed to be a good14 parent. Mother also asserts that the domestic violence issues arose in the context of substance abuse, which both she and James had addressed in classes and as demonstrated by their ongoing sobriety. We agree it appears, on this record, that mother has made excellent progress in addressing some of the issues that led to the removal of Donna and Lucy. Nevertheless, the re is substantial evidence supporting the court’s finding that placing the girls with mother poses a substantial risk of detriment to their emotional well - being when they have said they are afraid James ( w ith whom mother now has anot her child and a committed relationship ) and their fear has not yet been addressed in therapy . (See In re Alvin R . (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 962, 974 – 975 ( Alvin R .) [“Insufficient counseling to address Alvin’s emotional trauma, his expression of fear and desir e not to return to father’s custody, and the opinion of the social worker that returning Alvin would have an adverse effect on his emotional well - being, provide substantial evidence of substantial risk of detriment to Alvin’s emotional well - being.”].) Mot her analogizes this case to Blanca P. v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1738 ( Blanca P. ), and claims the juvenile court inappropriately based its finding here on the vague notion that Donna and Lucy “had been ‘exposed to trauma’ ” which she suggests was “an emotional response” by the court. In Blanca P., supra, 45 Cal.App.4th 1738, unsubstantiated sexual abuse allegations were made against the father. The mother participated in parenting classes as part of her reunification plan, but she “refus[ed] to believe her husband [was] a child molester.” ( Id. at p. 1751.) The social worker and a therapist opined that the mother had “not ‘internalized’ what she ha[d] learned in parenting classes,” and recommended against15 reunification. ( Ibid. ) The Court of App eal held “[t]he idea that, despite enduring countless hours of therapy and counseling (much of it predicated on the possibly erroneous assumption that her husband is a child molester), a parent who has faithfully attended required counseling and therapy se ssions must still relinquish her child because she has not quite ‘internalized’ what she has been exposed to has an offensive, Orwellian odor. The failure to ‘internalize’ general parenting skills is simply too vague to constitute substantial, credible evi dence of detriment.” ( Ibid. , fn. omitted.) The circumstances in this case have no relation to those in Blanca P. The juvenile court here did not rely on some vague notion of failure to internalize parenting education. Rather, it was the actions mother took during these proceedings that formed the basis of the court’s detriment finding. The court specifically noted that the children had expressed fear of James “and taken together with the ambiguity of mother’s relationship with [James] and the reasonable dou bt that if the children were released to mother that the stay - away order would be complied with and the children’s unresolved issues of fear of him and alienation of mother all combine to persuade me that there would be detriment if the children were retur ned.” In sum, substantial evidence support s the court’s finding that it would have been detrimental to the children’s well - being to return them to mother’s custody at the time of the permanency hearing. 2. Reasonable Services Finding Mother next contends insufficient evidence supports the court ’ s finding that the Department provided reasonable reunification services. We disagree.16 When the juvenile court orders reunification services, the Department must provide the family with a plan that is tailo red to the family ’ s needs and designed to eliminate the circumstances that gave rise to the children becoming dependents of the court. ( In re Taylor J. (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1446, 1451.) The Department “must make a good faith effort to develop and impleme nt a family reunification plan. [Citation.] ‘[T]he record should show that the supervising agency identified the problems leading to the loss of custody, offered services designed to remedy those problems, maintained reasonable contact with the parents dur ing the course of the service plan, and made reasonable efforts to assist the parents in areas where compliance proved difficult ... . ’ [Citation.]” ( Amanda H. v. Superior Court (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1340, 1345 ( Amanda H. ) .) The Department must also find an d maintain contact with service providers and keep the parent informed of whether his or her progress is consistent and compliant with the court - ordered case plan. ( Taylor J ., at p. 1452.) The Department’s efforts to provide reunification services do not have to be perfect, but they must be reasonable given the circumstances of the case. ( In re T.G. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 687, 697.) Services are reasonable if the agency identifies the family ’ s issues, offer s a case plan designed to address and eliminate those issues, maintains reasonable contact with the parents, and makes reasonable efforts to assist the parents when compliance with the case plan is difficult. ( Amanda H., supra , 166 Cal.App.4th at p. 1345. ) We review a finding that the agency provided reasonable reunification services for substantial evidence. ( I d . at p. 1346.)17 Mother complains that the Department’s services were inad equate because she was not receiving conjoint therapy with Lucy and Donna a nd because their therapy was not addressing all case issues. As to the first issue — conjoint therapy — the case plan indicated that such therapy would be provided “if recommended by the children’s therapist.” And according to the Department’s caseworker, the girls’ current therapists had not instituted c onjoint therapy because the girls were about to transition to different providers. Notably, the Department was ensuring that therapeutic services were provided to both Donna and Lucy and the caseworker had repe atedly discussed the issue of conjoint therapy with the therapists. These efforts were plainly reasonable and, as the caseworker noted, it was for the therapists to determine the appropriateness of conjoint therapy . As to the second issue — that the girls’ t herapy was not addressing case issues — we disagree. At the outset of the case, the girls demonstrated “irate and concerning behaviors that were reported in the initial Mental Health referral . ” Understandably, their initial therapeutic work was focused on th ose behaviors . Once those behaviors had abated, the therapeutic work was transitioning to a different level of care that could focus on the other issues in the case, such as the girls’ fear of James and expressed desire not to live in a home with him. Agai n, the Department’s caseworker was diligent in her efforts to contact and discuss the issue with the participating therapists. That mother was dissatisfied with the pace of these efforts does not equate to a failure to provide reasonable services. This case is distinguishable from Alvin R ., supra, 108 Cal.App.4th 962, on which mother relies. There, the minor refused to visit with the father, substantially obstructing all18 father’s efforts to reunify. Conjoint therapy was deemed essential for any prog ress to occur, but the minor’s caregiver had scheduling difficulties and insisted upon seeing a therapist near her home . The court recognized that the caregiver’s demands were “ a major obstacle to any reunification efforts ” but held the Department responsi ble because “ the Department ’ s only effort to overcome this obstacle was apparently to make a referral to a therapist who had no time available to see Alvin. There was no evidence that the Department made an effort to find other therapists in the area, or t hat the Department attempted to find transportation for Alvin to see an available therapist further away. Some effort must be made to overcome obstacles to the provision of reunification services. ” ( Id. at p. 97 3 .) Here, as already explained, the Departmen t’s caseworker had already ensured the girls were receiving therapy and they were in the process of transitioning to a different level of care . Following the transition, which the caseworker was overseeing, additional case issues could be addressed, and co njoint therapy could be considered . The Department’s efforts here, unlike in Alvin R ., were designed to address the case issues and had been successful in abating the girls’ behavioral issues, which had been prioritized. In any event, even if the Departmen t’s services were inadequate, the available remedy — additional reunification services — was provided at the 12 - month hearing when the court ordered the department to provide services for an additional six months. (See Amanda H., supra, 166 Cal.App.4th at p. 1345 [“ If, at the 12 - month hearing, DCFS does not prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that it has provided reasonable services to the parent, family reunification services must be extended to the19 end of the 18 - month period. (§§ 3 61.5, subd. (a) , 366.21, subd. (g)(1); Robin V. v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1158, 1164 [ ‘ [c]ourts may not initiate proceedings to terminate parental rights unless they find adequate reunification services were provided to the parents ’ ] .)”]. ) In short, substantial evidence supports the court ’ s finding that the Department provided mother with reasonable reunification services. DISPOSITION The October 1 5 , 202 1 order s are affirmed . NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS LAVIN, J. WE CONCUR: EDMON, P. J. ADAMS, J. * * Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/ARP-Higher-Ed-Montana.pdf.json	## Montana received over $121 million for 27 colleges and universitie s including $31 mill ion for community colleges due to the American Rescue Plan Today, the Department of Education announced that colleges and universities in Montana have received over $121 million in American Rescue Plan funds – one of the largest one - time infusions of funding ever provided to the state’s colleges and universities . These funds were provided through the Higher Education Emergency Rel ief Fund (HEERF) over the past year. The American Rescue Plan requires half of these funds to be used to provide direct financial relief to students; the Department of Education expects far more will ultimately be used for that purpose. I n addition to $ 112 million provided under previous coronavirus relief legislation , t hese funds are already being used by colleges and universities in Montana to serve students and ensure learning continues during the COVID - 19 pandemic. These funds are already having a significant impact on institutions and students : • A recent survey of college presidents by the American Council on Education found HEERF enabled : o 93 % of colleges to provide direct financial support to students at risk of dropping out o 81 % of college s to keep student net prices similar to pre - pandemic levels o 70 % of colleges to cont inue to employ faculty, staff, and other employees otherwise at risk of unemployment o 63% of colleges to keep students and faculty safe by purchas ing COVID - 19 tests, health screenings, and health care • Thousands of colleges and universities all across the country are using HEERF to keep students enrolled and on track to graduate, as well as make college more affordable , by providing emergency grants , discharging outstanding student debt or unpaid balances, and eliminating transcript withholding practices. As part of a state - by - state breakdown of funding, the Administration reported that these American Rescue Plan funds included significant investments in key institutions in Montana , including: • Approximately $31 million for community colleges • Over $34 million for 7 Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) • Over $3 million for 1 Minority - Serving Instituton (MSI) – which includes Hispanic Serving Institutions, Predominantly Black Institutions, Ala ska Native and Native Hawaiian - Serving Institutions, Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, and Native American - Serving Nontribal Institutions.Community colleges in Montana receiving American Rescue Plan funds include: • Great Falls College Montana State University : $2,846,452 • Helena College University of Montana : $2,576,380 • Miles Community College : $891,625 • Dawson Community College : $641,317 TCCUs in Montana receiving American Rescue Plan funds include: • Salish Kootenai College : $8,932,836 • Little Big Horn College : $5,266,825 • Blackfeet Community College : $5,196,454 • Stone Child College: $4,312,617 • Fort Peck Com munity College: $4,080,367 • Chief Dull Knife College: $3,220,279 • Aaniiih Nakoda College: $3,064,527 MSIs in Montana receiving A merican Rescue Plan funds include: • Montana State University ‐ Northern : $3,007,257 Examples of o ther colleges and universities in Montana receiving American Rescue Plan fu nds include: • Montana State University Bozeman : $29,110,295 • University of Montana (The) : $22,746,407 • Montana State University - Billings : $7,536,849APPENDIX ARP HEERF Provided by Co ngressional District Montana Total: $121,679,440 • MT, At - Large District: $121,679,440
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nps.gov/arho/learn/historyculture/selina-gray-s-quarters.htm.json	- Skip to global NPS navigation - Skip to this park navigation - Skip to the main content - Skip to this park information section - Skip to the footer section National Park ServiceSearch # OpenMenu**CloseMenu ## Explore This Park ## Explore the National Park Service ## Exiting nps.gov Arlington House, The Robert E. Lee Memorial Virginia
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.state.gov/wp-json/wp/v2/pages/413399.json	{"id":413399,"date":"2023-01-25T15:44:55","date_gmt":"2023-01-25T20:44:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/?page_id=413399"},"modified":"2023-01-25T15:44:55","modified_gmt":"2023-01-25T20:44:55","slug":"drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/","title":{"rendered":"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><b>United States Department of State\u00a0<\/b><br \/>\n<b>Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL)<\/b><br \/>\n<b>Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):\u00a0 <\/b>DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">This is the announcement of funding opportunity number <b>SFOP0009355<\/b><\/p>\n<p><b>Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:<\/b>\u00a0 19.345<\/p>\n<p><b>Type of Solicitation:<\/b>\u00a0 Open Competition<\/p>\n<p><b>Application Deadline:\u00a0<\/b> 11:59 PM EST on 27 March, 2023<\/p>\n<p><b>Total Funding Floor:\u00a0 <\/b>$600,000<\/p>\n<p><b>Total Funding Ceiling:\u00a0 <\/b>$600,000<\/p>\n<p><b>Anticipated Number of Awards: <\/b>1<\/p>\n<p><b>Type of Award:<\/b> Grant<\/p>\n<p><b>Period of Performance:<\/b>\u00a0 18-24 months<\/p>\n<p><b>Anticipated Time to Award, Pending Availability of Funds:<\/b>\u00a0 5 months<\/p>\n<h2>A. Project Description<\/h2>\n<p>The U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for projects that support announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for a project that expands women\u2019s ability to freely and safely participate in public life in Nepal.<\/p>\n<p>Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in Nepal has reached alarming rates. Forty-eight percent of Nepali women say that they have experienced some form of violence at some point in their lives, with 15 percent experiencing sexual violence. Discrimination, harassment, and violence against women manifest in a variety of forms (e.g., physical, emotional, symbolic, digital), at all levels of society (from domestic violence and acid attacks to violence against women in politics), and in most environments (e.g., online, offline, in the workplace, in the home, in the media). While there are multiple laws within the Nepal Penal Code to combat and criminalize SGBV in Nepal, in practice these laws are insufficient, inconsistent, and unenforced due to deep-seated issues including distrust in law enforcement, corruption in the justice sector, and an overwhelming culture of impunity for perpetrators.<\/p>\n<p>DRL\u2019s goal is to improve civil society-led efforts to reduce SGBV in Nepal so that women from all backgrounds may more fully, equitably, and safely participate in all aspects of public life. To this end, DRL seeks proposals for a program to advance three key objectives: (1) Civil society advocates to the government to address the gaps in the current legislation on SGBV responses\u00a0 and improving access to justice through engagement with government and law enforcement authorities; (2) Local civil society organizations, women\u2019s rights defenders and other activists build networks and take action to prevent and respond to SGBV in Nepal, especially those working directly with marginalized or socially excluded communities; and (3) Community-led initiatives contribute to the prevention of and response to SGBV at the provincial and district levels and communities are more aware of the challenges related to SGBV in Nepal.<\/p>\n<p>To advance these objectives, competitive proposals will substantiate a Theory of Change and the ensuing program logic with findings from applied research, academia, evaluations, or other learning resources to ensure the proposed project is undertaking an evidence-based approach beyond a single organization\u2019s experience in the field.<\/p>\n<p>Competitive programs will be implemented by, or in close partnership with, local civil society organizations. Proposals should clearly outline the division of labor between the prime grantee and partner organizations. Competitive proposals will assess the needs of Nepali civil society organizations and other collectives working in this space and demonstrate an ability to create linkages and collaborative relationships among them. Competitive proposals will also provide micro-grants in year two of the program. The program should take an intersectional approach by accounting for the ways in which indigenous women, women from socially excluded communities, LBT+ women, women with disabilities, low-income women, women in public-facing positions, and other intersections impact the dynamic of violence against women.<\/p>\n<p>Illustrative desired outcomes for this program include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Existing protection against SGBV are strengthened and better implemented, with civil society able to ensure accountability and play a watchdog role;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Increased public awareness on the various forms of SGBV in Nepal;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Legislative and societal changes, such as those addressing acid attacks, rape, other forms of discrimination occur, addressing the disempowerment of women;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Civil society participates in opportunities to provide input into and oversee the strengthening of frameworks to prevent and protect women and vulnerable populations from experiencing all forms of violence;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Victims of SGBV have increased access to medical, legal, and psychological support;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Civil society organizations working in this space increase their organizational capacity, expand their networks and are more engaged in collective action; and<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Calibri\" data-listid=\"33\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Calibri","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"-","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Men and male allies are more engaged and better integrated into efforts to reduce SGBV.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>All programs should aim to have <b>impact that leads to reforms<\/b> and have the <b>potential for sustainability<\/b> beyond DRL resources.\u202f DRL\u2019s preference is to avoid duplicating past efforts by supporting new and creative approaches.\u202f This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.<\/p>\n<p>DRL is committed to <b>advancing equity and support for underserved and underrepresented communities<\/b>.\u00a0 In accordance with the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Underserved Communities, programs should implement strategies for integration and inclusion of individuals\/organizations\/beneficiaries that can bring perspectives based on their religion, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, national origin, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, pregnancy, political affiliation, or veteran\u2019s status.\u202f Programs should be demand-driven and locally led to the extent possible.<\/p>\n<p>DRL <b>requires all programs to be non-discriminatory<\/b> and expects implementers to include strategies for nondiscrimination of individuals\/organizations\/beneficiaries based on race, color, religion, sex,\u202fgender identity,\u202fgender expression, sex characteristics,\u202fsexual orientation,\u202fpregnancy, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran\u2019s status.<\/p>\n<p>Competitive proposals may also include a summary budget and budget narrative for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance, indicated above.\u00a0 This information should indicate what objective(s) and\/or activities could be accomplished with additional time and\/or funds beyond the proposed period of performance.<br \/>\nWhere appropriate, competitive proposals may include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Opportunities for beneficiaries to apply their new knowledge and skills in practical efforts;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Solicitation of feedback and suggestions from beneficiaries when developing activities in order to strengthen the sustainability of programs and participant ownership of project outcomes;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Input from participants on sustainability plans and systematic review of the plans throughout the life of the project, with adjustments made as necessary;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Inclusion of vulnerable populations;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Joint identification and definition of key concepts with relevant stakeholders and stakeholder input into project activities;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"26\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Systematic follow up with beneficiaries at specific intervals after the completion of activities to track how beneficiaries are retaining new knowledge as well as applying their new skills.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Activities that are <b>not<\/b> typically allowed include, but are not limited to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">The provision of humanitarian assistance;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">English language instruction;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Development of high-tech computer or communications software and\/or hardware;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Purely academic exchanges or fellowships;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">External exchanges or fellowships lasting longer than six months;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Off-shore activities that are not clearly linked to in-country initiatives and impact or are not necessary per security concerns;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Theoretical explorations of human rights or democracy issues, including projects aimed primarily at research and evaluation that do not incorporate training or capacity-building for local civil society;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Micro-loans or similar small business development initiatives;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559731":1080,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"5\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Initiatives directed towards a diaspora community rather than current residents of targeted countries.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>This notice is subject to availability of funding.<\/b><\/p>\n<h2>B. Federal Award Information<\/h2>\n<p>Primary organizations can submit 1 application in response to the NOFO.<\/p>\n<p>The U.S. government may:\u00a0 (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept other than the lowest cost application, (c) accept more than one application, and (d) waive irregularities in applications received.<\/p>\n<p>The U.S. government may make award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions or negotiations.\u00a0 Therefore, each initial application should contain the applicant’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.\u00a0 The U.S. government reserves the right (though it is under no obligation to do so), however, to enter into discussions with one or more applicants in order to obtain clarifications, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the project description, budget, or other aspects of an application.<\/p>\n<p>DRL anticipates awarding either a grant or cooperative agreement depending on the needs and risk factors of the program.\u00a0 The final determination on award mechanism will be made by the Grants Officer.\u00a0 The distinction between grants and cooperative agreements revolves around the existence of \u201csubstantial involvement.\u201d\u00a0 Cooperative agreements require greater Federal government participation in the project.\u00a0 If a cooperative agreement is awarded, DRL will undertake reasonable and programmatically necessary substantial involvement.\u00a0 Examples of substantial involvement can include, but are not limited to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"29\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Active participation or collaboration with the recipient in the implementation of the award;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"29\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Review and approval of one stage of work before another can begin;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"29\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Review and approval of substantive provisions of proposed sub-awards or contracts beyond existing Federal policy;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"29\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Approval of the recipient\u2019s budget or plan of work prior to the award.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The authority for this funding opportunity is found in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA).<\/p>\n<p>To maximize the impact and sustainability of the award(s) that result from this NOFO, DRL retains the right to execute non-competitive continuation amendment(s).\u00a0 The total duration of any award, including potential non-competitive continuation amendments, shall not exceed 54 months, or four and a half years.\u00a0 Any non-competitive continuation is contingent on performance and <b>pending availability of funds.\u00a0 <\/b>A non-competitive continuation is not guaranteed, and the Department of State reserves the right to exercise or not to exercise this option.<\/p>\n<h2>C. Eligibility Information<\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>For application information, please see the proposal submission instructions (PSI), updated December 2022 on our website.<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><i>C.1 Eligible Applicants<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>DRL welcomes applications from U.S.-based and foreign-based non-profit organizations\/nongovernmental organizations (NGO) and public international organizations; private, public, or state institutions of higher education; and for-profit organizations or businesses.\u00a0 DRL\u2019s preference is to work with <b>non-profit entities<\/b>; however, there may be some occasions when a for-profit entity is best suited.<\/p>\n<p>Applications submitted by for-profit entities may be subject to additional review following the panel selection process.\u00a0 Additionally, the Department of State prohibits profit to for-profit or commercial organizations under its assistance awards.\u00a0 Profit is defined as any amount in excess of allowable direct and indirect costs.\u00a0 The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 30, Cost Accounting Standards Administration, and 48 CFR 31 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.<\/p>\n<p>Please see 2 CFR 200.307 for regulations regarding program income.<\/p>\n<h2><i>C.2 Cost Sharing or Matching<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Providing cost sharing, matching, or cost participation is not an eligibility factor or requirement for this NOFO and providing cost share will not result in a more favorable competitive ranking.<\/p>\n<h2><i>C.3 Other<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Applicants should have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with thematic or in-country partners, entities, and relevant stakeholders, including private sector partners and NGOs, and have <b>demonstrable experience<\/b> in administering successful and preferably similar projects.\u00a0 DRL encourages applications from foreign-based NGOs headquartered in the geographic regions\/countries relevant to this NOFO.\u00a0 Applicants may <b>form consortia<\/b> in order to bring together organizations with varied expertise to propose a comprehensive program in one proposal.\u00a0 However, one organization should be designated in the proposal as the lead applicant, with the other members designated as sub-award partners.\u00a0 DRL reserves the right to request additional background information on applicants that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards, and these applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis.<\/p>\n<p>DRL is committed to an <b>anti-discrimination<\/b> policy in all of its programs and activities.\u00a0 DRL welcomes applications irrespective of race, ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or other status.\u00a0 DRL\u202fseeks applications that demonstrate\u202fthat the recipient does not discriminate against any beneficiaries in implementation of a potential award, such as, but not limited to, by withholding, adversely impacting, or denying equitable access to the benefits provided through this award\u202fon the basis of\u202fany factor not expressly stated in the award.\u202f This includes, for example, race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity,\u202fgender expression, sex characteristics,\u202fsexual orientation, and pregnancy),\u202fnational origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran\u2019s status.\u202f The recipient\u202fshould\u202finsert this provision, including this paragraph, in all sub-grants and contracts under a potential award.<\/p>\n<p>Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/sam.gov\/content\/home\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">System for Award Management (SAM.gov)<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>(www.sam.gov) and\/or has a current debt to the U.S. government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR,1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR,1989 Comp., p. 235), \u201cDebarment and Suspension.\u201d\u00a0 Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award.\u00a0 All applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their application.<\/p>\n<h2>D. Application and Submission Information<\/h2>\n<h2><i>D.1 <\/i><i>Address to Request Application Package<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Applicants can find application forms, kits, or other materials needed to apply on <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"http:\/\/www.grants.gov\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">www.grants.gov<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> and SAMS Domestic (<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>) under the announcement title \u201cDRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal,\u201d funding opportunity number \u201cSFOP0009355.\u201d\u00a0 Please contact the DRL point of contact listed in Section G if requesting reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities or for security reasons.\u00a0 Please note that reasonable accommodations do not include deadline extensions.<\/p>\n<h2><i>D.2<\/i> <i>Content and Form of Application Submission<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>For all application documents, please ensure:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"31\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">All documents are in English and all costs are in U.S. Dollars.\u00a0 If an original document within the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided (please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires that English is the official language of all award documents).\u00a0 If any document is provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is the controlling version;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"31\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"31\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">All documents are formatted to 8 \u00bd x 11 paper; and,<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"31\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">All documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins.\u00a0 Captions and footnotes may be 10-point Times New Roman font.\u00a0 Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit within one page width.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><i>D.2.1 Application Requirements<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Complete applications must include the following:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Completed and signed <b>SF-424<\/b>,<b> SF-424A<\/b>, and <b>SF-424B<\/b> forms.\u00a0 Please see SF-424 instructions in Section 2B of the PSI.<\/li>\n<li>Organizations that engage in lobbying the U.S. government, including Congress, or pay for another entity to lobby on their behalf, are also required to complete the <b>SF-LLL<\/b> \u201cDisclosure of Lobbying Activities\u201d form (<b>only if applicable<\/b>).\u00a0 Please see SF-LLL guidance in Section 2B of the PSI.<\/li>\n<li><b>Cover Page<\/b> (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that includes a table with the organization name, project title, target country\/countries, project synopsis, and name and contact information for the application\u2019s main point of contact.\u00a0 Please see <i>Cover Page<\/i> Section 2C of the PSI for a template and more details.<\/li>\n<li><b>Executive Summary<\/b> (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that outlines project goals, objectives, activities, etc.\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li><b style=\"letter-spacing: -0.25px;\">The Executive Summary should include a brief section that explicitly states:\u00a0 (1) the problem statement addressed by the project, (2) research-based evidence justifying the unique project approach, and (3) quantifiable project outcomes and impacts.<\/b><span style=\"letter-spacing: -0.25px;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Table of Contents<\/b> (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) listing all documents and attachments with page numbers.<\/li>\n<li><b>Proposal Narrative<\/b> (not to exceed ten (10) pages, preferably as a Word Document).\u00a0 Please note the ten-page limit <b>does not include<\/b> the Cover Page, Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative, Audit, or NICRA.\u00a0 Applicants are encouraged to combine multiple documents into a single Word Document or PDF (i.e. Cover Page, Table of Contents, Executive Summary, and Proposal Narrative in one file).\u00a0 Please see <i>Proposal Narrative Guidelines <\/i>in Section 2F of the PSI for more details.\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li>The Proposal Narrative should demonstrate the applicant\u2019s commitment to ensuring the participation of all people as a strategy for implementation.\u00a0 Please integrate inclusion strategies in all sections of the Proposal Narrative to enhance programmatic impact.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Budget<\/b> (preferably as an Excel workbook) that includes three (3) columns containing the request to DRL, any cost sharing contribution, and the total budget.\u00a0 A summary budget should also be included using the OMB-approved budget categories (see SF-424A as a sample) in a separate tab.\u00a0 Costs must be in U.S. Dollars.\u00a0 Detailed line-item budgets for sub-grantees should be included as additional tabs within the Excel workbook (if available at the time of submission).Please see <i>Budget Guidelines<\/i> Section 2G of the PSI for more information.\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li>The programming approach should be dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.\u202f Please include costs associated with this commitment in the Budget and Budget Narrative.<\/li>\n<li>Competitive proposals may include a summary budget for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Budget Narrative<\/b> (preferably as a Word Document) that includes substantive explanations and justifications for each line item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and a description of all cost-share offered.\u00a0 Please see <i>Budget Guidelines<\/i> Section 2G of the PSI for more information.\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li>Competitive proposals may include a summary budget narrative for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>The organization\u2019s most recent <b>audit<\/b>, if applicable.\u00a0 This should be a single audit, program-specific audit, or other audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS).\u00a0 Please see <i>Audit<\/i> Section 2H of the PSI for more information.<\/li>\n<li><b>Logic Model<\/b> (preferably as a Word Document).\u00a0 Please see <i>Logic Model<\/i> Section 2I of the PSI for more information.<\/li>\n<li><b>Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative<\/b> (not to exceed four (4) pages, preferably as a Word Document).\u00a0 Please see <i>Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative<\/i> Section 2J of the PSI for more information.\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li>As stated within the DRL Guide to Program Monitoring and Evaluation (p. 6): DRL strongly encourages applicants to consider whether their monitoring and evaluation systems are utilizing human rights-based approaches, applying a gender and equity lens, and\/or include the participation of sub-grantees and project participants.\u00a0 Within the Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative, applicants should demonstrate their commitment to inclusive strategies and consider whether evaluation design, data collection, analysis, reporting and learning are conducted in an ethical and responsible way with all project participants (e.g. direct beneficiaries, sub-grantees).\u00a0 Applicants should still make adequate provisions to protect the privacy of human subjects when collecting data from individuals.\u00a0 For instance, when collecting data from project participants, consider whether your organization will have the necessary informed consent forms, confidentiality agreements, and data security protocols.\u00a0 Applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Risk Analysis<\/b> (preferably as a Word Document).\u00a0 Please see <i>Risk Analysis<\/i> Section 2K of the PSI for more information on this requirement, including Do No Harm principles and Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) policies\/plans.<\/li>\n<li><b>Key Personnel<\/b> (not to exceed two (2) pages, preferably as a Word Document).\u00a0 Please include short bios that highlight relevant professional experience.\u00a0 Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission.<\/li>\n<li><b>Timeline<\/b> (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet).\u00a0 The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout.<\/li>\n<li><b>Gender and Inclusion Analysis<\/b> (not to exceed three (3) pages, preferably as a Word Document) that provides a concise analysis of relevant gender norms, equity and equality for underserved communities and marginalized populations, power relations, and conflict dynamics in target countries.\u00a0 Potential domains of analysis include institutional practices and barriers, cultural norms, gender roles, access to and control over assets and resources, and patterns of power and decision-making.\u00a0 Applicants should briefly explain how they have integrated findings from their analysis into project design and\/or other proposal documents, including a plan for regularly reviewing and updating the gender and inclusion analysis with local partners\/beneficiaries, and making any necessary adjustments to project implementation.\u00a0 A set of guiding questions can be found in Section 2L of the PSI.<\/li>\n<li><b>Security Plan <\/b>addressing any issues involving in-person events and recruitment for said events, and safety for any online programs or communications, including independent IT security audits (to include a vulnerability assessment) of any proposed web application or platform.\u00a0 Organization\u2019s Security Plan should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment.\u00a0 Costs may also be identified within the budget and budget narrative.\u00a0 Applicants are also encouraged to include contingency plans for in-person or online activities.<\/li>\n<li><b>Contingency Plan<\/b> for proposed activities should the originally planned activities not be able to be implemented.\u00a0 The Contingency Plan should be submitted as an additional annex.\u00a0 Applicants should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment and include specific alternative activities or locations as part of the Contingency Plan.\u00a0 Any proposed \u201cplan\u201d must comply with 2CFR200.433 \u2013 Contingency provisions.\u00a0 Plans must not include unallocable or unallowable expenses and must not result in a larger Total Award Value than the identified as the \u201ccompetition ceiling.\u201d\u00a0 DRL requires prior approval by the Grants Officer of the \u201cplan\u201d before any activities can take place, or costs can be incurred against the \u201cplan.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><b>Lessons Learned <\/b>(not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) from past programs (insert country or theme) that demonstrate how the implementer has safely operated and responded to programmatic challenges, learning from both successes and failures, in the operating environment.\u202f To be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for \u201cProposal Narrative.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><b>Psychosocial Assistance <\/b>(to be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for \u201cProposal Narrative,\u201d and into\u202f\u201cBudget\u201d and \u201cBudget Narrative\u201d).<b>\u00a0<\/b> A section in the proposal, budget, and budget narrative to reflect appropriate resources and support for the psychosocial health of staff (i.e., activities can range from access to educational materials and training opportunities to counseling services to other contextually relevant support).\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li>References:\u00a0 For reference to international guidance, please see the following: Core Humanitarian Standard Commitment 8.9 (<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"http:\/\/www.who.int\/mental_health\/emergencies\/guidelines_iasc_mental_health_psychosocial_june_2007.pdf\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/corehumanitarianstandard.org\/files\/files\/CHS-Guidance-Notes-and-Indicators.pdf<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>; and IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings Action Sheet 4.4 (<a class=\"external-link__pdf\" href=\"http:\/\/www.who.int\/mental_health\/emergencies\/guidelines_iasc_mental_health_psychosocial_june_2007.pdf\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">http:\/\/www.who.int\/mental_health\/emergencies\/guidelines_iasc_mental_health_psychosocial_june_2007.pdf<\/span><span class=\"filesize icon-pdf\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Applications that do not include the elements listed above will be deemed technically ineligible.\u00a0\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n<h2><i>D.2.2 Additional Application Documents<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Strong applications will also contain the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"13\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Individual Letters of Support and\/or Memorandum of Understanding.\u00a0 Letters of support and MOUs must be specific to the project implementation (e.g. from proposed partners or sub-award recipients) and will not count towards the page limit.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b><i>Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), updated December 2022, on DRL\u2019s website for detailed guidance on the documents above:\u00a0 <\/i><\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/.\"><b><i>https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/<\/i><\/b><\/a><b><i>.<\/i><\/b><b><i>\u00a0 <\/i><\/b><b><i>For an application checklist and sample templates please see the Resources page on DRL\u2019s website:\u00a0 <\/i><\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/resources-for-programs-and-grants\/\"><b><i>https:\/\/www.state.gov\/resources-for-programs-and-grants\/<\/i><\/b><\/a><b><i>.\u00a0 <\/i><\/b><b><i>The sample templates provided on the DRL website are suggested, but not mandatory.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p>DRL reserves the right to request additional documents not included in this NOFO.\u00a0 Additionally, to ensure that all applications receive a balanced evaluation, the DRL review panel will review from the first page of each section up to the page limit and no further.<\/p>\n<p>Note:\u00a0 If ultimately provided with a notification of non-binding intent to make a federal award, applicants typically have two to three weeks to provide additional information and documents requested in the notification of intent.\u00a0 The deadlines may vary in each notification of intent and applicants must adhere to the stated deadline in the notification of intent.<\/p>\n<h2><i>D.2.3 Additional Information Requested For Those Receiving Notification of Intent<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Successful applicants must submit, after notification of intent to make a federal award, but prior to issuance of a federal award:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Written responses and revised application documents addressing conditions and recommendations from the DRL review panel;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">A copy of the applicant\u2019s latest NICRA as a PDF file, if the applicant has a NICRA and includes NICRA charges in the budget;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">A completed copy of the Department\u2019s Financial Management Survey, if receiving DRL funding for the first time;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Submission of required documents to register in the Payment Management System managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, if receiving DRL funding for the first time (unless an exemption is provided);<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Other requested information or documents included in the notification of intent to make a federal award or subsequent communications prior to issuance of a federal award;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"5\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Applicants who submit their applications through Grants.gov will be required to create a SAMS Domestic account in order to accept the final award.\u00a0 Accounts must be logged into to every 60 days in order to maintain an active account.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><i>D.3 Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>All prime organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and an active registration with the SAM.gov <b>before submitting an application<\/b>.\u00a0 DRL may <b>not<\/b> review applications from or make awards to applicants that have not completed all applicable UEI and SAM.gov requirements.\u00a0 A UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards.<\/p>\n<p><b><i>Note:\u00a0 As of April 2022, a DUNS number is no longer required for federal assistance applications.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p>The 2 CFR 200 requires that sub-grantees obtain a UEI number.\u00a0 Please note the UEI for sub-grantees is not required at the time of application but will be required before the award is processed and\/or directed to a sub-grantee.<\/p>\n<p><b><i>Note:\u00a0 The process of obtaining or renewing a SAM.gov registration may take anywhere from 4-8 weeks.\u00a0 <\/i><\/b><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b><i>Please begin your registration as early as possible<\/i><\/b><b><i>.<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"6\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Organizations <b>based in the United States<\/b> or that pay employees within the United States will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, and a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"6\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Organizations <b>based outside of the United States<\/b> and that do not pay employees within the United States do not need an EIN from the IRS, but do need a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov.\u00a0 <b>Please note that as of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.\u00a0 <\/b>If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.fsd.gov\/gsafsd_sp?id=gsafsd_kb_articles&sys_id=c81018e71b1601d0937fa64ce54bcb57\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">submit a help desk ticket (\u201cincident\u201d)<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"http:\/\/www.fsd.gov\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">www.fsd.gov<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> to seek guidance on how to do so.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO NOT plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:<\/b><b>\u202f<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Step 1:\u00a0 Proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process.\u00a0 SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Step 1:\u00a0 Apply for an NCAGE code\u202fby following the instructions on the NSPA NATO website linked below:<\/p>\n<p>NCAGE Homepage:<br \/>\n<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/eportal.nspa.nato.int\/AC135Public\/sc\/CageList.aspx\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/eportal.nspa.nato.int\/AC135Public\/sc\/CageList.aspx<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p>NCAGE Code Request Tool (NCRT):<br \/>\n<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/eportal.nspa.nato.int\/Codification\/CageTool\/home\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/eportal.nspa.nato.int\/Codification\/CageTool\/home<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p>For NCAGE help from within the United States, call +1 (888) 227-2423.<br \/>\nFor NCAGE help from outside the United States, call +1 (269) 961-7766.<br \/>\nOr, email <a href=\"mailto:NCAGE@dlis.dla.mil\">NCAGE@dlis.dla.mil<\/a> for any problems in applying for an NCAGE code.<\/p>\n<p>Step 2:\u00a0 After receiving an NCAGE code, proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process.\u00a0 SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.<\/p>\n<p><b>All prime organizations<\/b> must also continue to maintain active SAM.gov registration with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or application under consideration by a federal award agency.\u00a0 SAM.gov requires all entities to renew their registration once a year in order to maintain an active registration status in SAM.gov.\u00a0 It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure it has an active registration in SAM.gov and to maintain that active registration.\u00a0 If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements at the time of application, the applicant may be deemed technically ineligible to receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.<\/p>\n<p>Please refer to 2 CFR 25.200 for additional information.<\/p>\n<p><b>Note:\u00a0 SAM.gov is not the same as SAMS Domestic.\u00a0 It is free of charge to register in both systems, but the registration processes are different<\/b>.<\/p>\n<p><b><i>Information is included on the SAM.gov website to help international registrations, including \u201cQuick Start Guide for International Registrations\u201d and \u201cHelpful Hints.\u201d\u00a0 Navigate to www.SAM.gov, click \u201cHELP\u201d in the top navigation bar, then click \u201cExplore\u201d and \u201cNew to SAM.gov?\u201d for general information.\u00a0 Please note, guidance on SAM.gov and the guidance on GSA\u2019s website about requirement for registering in SAM.gov is subject to change and is currently being updated.\u00a0 Applicants should review the website for the most up-to-date guidance.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p>The attached \u201cAQM Guidance for NCAGE-SAM.gov for Grant Applicants as of Dec. 2022\u201d is a compilation of resources gathered by the Department\u2019s Office of Acquisitions Management (AQM).\u00a0 Any content shown from SAM.gov is not owned by the Department of State.\u00a0 This guidance and instruction are to the best of our knowledge based at the time of posting this solicitation.\u00a0 <b>Where guidance in these attachments differs from the SAM.gov website, SAM.gov prevails and the applicant is encouraged to seek and document responses provided by the SAM.gov help desk.<\/b><\/p>\n<h2><i>D.3.1 Exemptions<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>An exemption from these requirements may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"7\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">An applicant\u2019s identity must be protected due to potential endangerment of their mission, their organization\u2019s status, their employees, or individuals being served by the applicant.<b>\u00a0<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Times New Roman\" data-listid=\"7\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">For an applicant, if the federal awarding agency makes a determination that there are exigent circumstances that prohibit the applicant from receiving a UEI and completing SAM.gov registration prior to receiving a federal award.\u00a0 In these instances, federal awarding agencies must require the recipient to obtain a UEI and complete SAM.gov registration within 30 days of the federal award date.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least <b>two weeks prior to the\u202fdeadline in the NOFO\u202fproviding a justification of their request<\/b>.\u00a0 Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted Grants Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review.<\/p>\n<p><i>Note:\u00a0 As of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.<\/i><\/p>\n<h2><i>D.4 Submission Dates and Times\u00a0\u00a0<\/i><\/h2>\n<p><b>Applications are due no later than <\/b><b>11:59 PM<\/b><b> Eastern Standard Time (EST), on 27 March, 2023 on <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.grants.gov\/\"><b>https:\/\/www.grants.gov\/<\/b><\/a><b> or <\/b><b>SAM<\/b><b>S <\/b><b>Domestic <\/b>(<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>) <b>under the announcement title \u201cDRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal,\u201d funding opportunity number \u201cSFOP0009355.\u201d\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Grants.gov and SAMS Domestic automatically log the date and time an application submission is made, and the Department of State will use this information to determine whether an application has been submitted on time.\u00a0 Late applications are neither reviewed nor considered.\u00a0 Known system errors caused by Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.service-now.com)\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.service-now.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> that are outside of the applicant\u2019s control will be reviewed on a case by case basis.<b>\u00a0 <\/b>Applicants should not expect a notification upon DRL receiving their application.<\/p>\n<h2><i>D.5 Funding Restrictions<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Prior to issuing a federal award with a total amount of federal share greater than $250,000, the Department of State is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is found in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov (41 USC \u00a72313).\u00a0 An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM.gov and comment on any information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov.\u00a0 The Department of State will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.206.<\/p>\n<p>DRL will not consider applications that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization.\u00a0 Please refer the link for Foreign Terrorist Organizations:\u00a0 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/foreign-terrorist-organizations\/\">https:\/\/www.state.gov\/foreign-terrorist-organizations\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Project activities whose direct beneficiaries are foreign militaries or paramilitary groups or individuals will not be considered for DRL funding given purpose limitations on funding.<\/p>\n<p>In accordance with Department of State policy for terrorism, applicants are advised that successful passing of vetting to evaluate the risk that funds may benefit terrorists or their supporters is a condition of award.\u00a0 If chosen for an award, applicants will be asked to submit information required by DS Form 4184, Risk Analysis Information (attached to this solicitation) about their company and its principal personnel.\u00a0 Vetting information is also required for all sub-award performance on assistance awards identified by the Department of State as presenting a risk of terrorist financing.\u00a0 Vetting information may also be requested for project beneficiaries and participants.\u00a0 Failure to submit information when requested, or failure to pass vetting, may be grounds for rejecting your proposal prior to award.<\/p>\n<p>The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.\u00a0 Per <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/USCODE-2017-title22\/html\/USCODE-2017-title22-chap32-subchapIII-partI-sec2378d.htm\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">22 USC \u00a72378d(a) (2017)<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>, \u201cNo assistance shall be furnished under this chapter [FOREIGN ASSISTANCE] or the Arms Export Control Act [22 USC 2751 et seq.] to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.\u201d\u00a0 Restrictions may apply to any proposed assistance to police or other law enforcement.\u00a0 Among these, pursuant to section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), no assistance provided through this funding opportunity may be furnished to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country when there is credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.\u00a0 In accordance with the requirements of section 620M of the FAA, also known as the Leahy law, project beneficiaries or participants from a foreign government\u2019s security forces may need to be vetted by the Department before the provision of any assistance.\u00a0 If a proposed grant or cooperative agreement will provide assistance to foreign security forces or personnel, compliance with the Leahy Law is required.<\/p>\n<p>U.S. foreign assistance for Burma or Burmese beneficiaries is subject to restrictions.\u00a0 This includes restrictions, pursuant to section 7043(a)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2020 (Div. G, P.L. 116-94)(SFOAA), on funds appropriated under title III of the act for assistance for Burma.\u00a0 Section 7043(a)(3) provides that such funds \u201cmay not be made available to any organization or entity controlled by the armed forces of Burma, or to any individual or organization that advocates violence against ethnic or religious groups or individuals in Burma, as determined by the Secretary of State.\u201d\u00a0 In addition, funds cannot be made available to any individual or organization that has committed serious human rights abuse.<\/p>\n<p>Organizations should be cognizant of these restrictions when developing project proposals as these restrictions will require appropriate due diligence of program beneficiaries and collaboration with DRL to ensure compliance with these restrictions.\u00a0 Program beneficiaries subject to due diligence vetting will include any individuals or entities that are beneficiaries of foreign assistance funding or support.\u00a0 Due diligence vetting will include a review of open-source materials.<\/p>\n<p>Federal awards generally will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs; however, the Grants Officer may approve pre-award costs on a case-by-case basis.\u00a0 Generally, construction costs are not allowed under DRL awards.\u00a0 For additional information, please see the DRL Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for Applications:\u00a0 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/\">https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/<\/a><i>.<\/i><\/p>\n<h2><i>D.6 Application Submission<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>All application submissions must be made electronically via <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"http:\/\/www.grants.gov\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">www.grants.gov<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> or SAMS Domestic (<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>).\u00a0 Both systems require registration by the applying organization.\u00a0 Please note that the Grants.gov registration process can take ten (10) business days or longer, even if all registration steps are completed in a timely manner.<\/p>\n<p>It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that it has an active registration in SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov.\u00a0 Applicants are required to document that the application has been received by SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov in its entirety.\u00a0 DRL bears no responsibility for disqualification that result from applicants not being registered before the due date, for system errors in either SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov, or other errors in the application process.\u00a0 Additionally, applicants <b>must<\/b> save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.<\/p>\n<p>Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will <b>not<\/b> be accepted.\u00a0 Reasonable accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with disabilities or for security reasons.\u00a0 Applicants must follow all formatting instructions in the applicable NOFO and these instructions.<\/p>\n<p>DRL encourages organizations to <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>submit applications during normal business hours<\/b><\/span> (Monday \u2013 Friday, 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST)).\u00a0 If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted the appropriate help desk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g. if you have not received a response within 48 hours of contacting the help desk), you may contact the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO in Section G.\u00a0 The point of contact may assist in contacting the appropriate help desk.<\/p>\n<p>The Grants Officer will determine technical eligibility of all applications.<\/p>\n<p><b>SAMS Domestic Applications:<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Applicants using SAMS Domestic for the first time should complete their \u201cNew Organization Registration.\u201d\u00a0 To register with SAMS Domestic, click \u201cLogin to <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>\u201d and follow the \u201ccreate an account\u201d link.<\/p>\n<p>Organizations <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>must<\/b><\/span> remember to save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.<\/p>\n<p><b>SAMS Domestic Help Desk:\u00a0 <\/b><br \/>\nFor assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> .\u00a0 Customer support is available 24\/7.<\/p>\n<p><b>Grants.gov Applications:<\/b><br \/>\nApplicants who do not submit applications via SAMS Domestic may submit via www.grants.gov.<\/p>\n<p>Please be advised that completing all the necessary registration steps for obtaining a username and password from Grants.gov <b>can take ten (10) business days or longer.<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Please refer to the Grants.gov website for definitions of various “application statuses” and the difference between a submission receipt and a submission validation.\u00a0 Applicants will receive a validation e-mail from Grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application.\u00a0 Validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days.\u00a0 Additionally, organizations <b>must<\/b> remember to save a screenshot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.<\/p>\n<p><b>Grants.gov Helpdesk:\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n<p>For assistance with Grants.gov, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email <a href=\"mailto:support@grants.gov\">support@grants.gov<\/a>.\u00a0 The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.<\/p>\n<p>See <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.opm.gov\/policy-data-oversight\/pay-leave\/federal-holidays\/\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/www.opm.gov\/policy-data-oversight\/pay-leave\/federal-holidays\/<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> for a list of federal holidays.<\/p>\n<h2>E. Application Review Information<\/h2>\n<h2><i>E.1 Proposal Review Criteria<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>The DRL review panel will evaluate each application individually against the following criteria, listed below in order of importance, and not against competing applications.\u00a0 Please use the below criteria as a reference, but <b>do not structure your application according to the sub-sections<\/b>.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Quality of Project Idea<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Applications should be responsive to the program framework and policy objectives identified in the NOFO, appropriate in the country\/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to DRL\u2019s mission of promoting human rights and democracy.\u00a0 Projects should have the potential to have an immediate impact leading to long-term, sustainable reforms. DRL prefers new approaches that do not duplicate efforts by other entities.\u00a0 This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.\u00a0 In countries where similar activities are already taking place, an explanation should be provided as to how new activities will not duplicate or merely add to existing activities and how these efforts will be coordinated.\u00a0 Proposals that promote creative approaches to recognized ongoing challenges are highly encouraged.\u00a0 DRL prioritizes project proposals with inclusive approaches for advancing these rights.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Project Planning\/Ability to Achieve Objectives<\/span><\/p>\n<p>A strong application will include a clear articulation of how the proposed project activities contribute to the overall project objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed.\u00a0 A comprehensive monthly work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization.\u00a0 Objectives should be ambitious yet measurable, results-focused and achievable in a reasonable timeframe.\u00a0 A complete application must include a Logic Model to demonstrate how the project activities will have an impact on its proposed objectives.\u00a0 The Logic Model should match the objectives, outcomes, key activities, and outputs described in the narrative.\u00a0 Applications should address how the project will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate.<\/p>\n<p>If local partners have been identified, DRL strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners.\u00a0 Additionally, applicants should describe the division of labor among the direct applicant and any local partners.\u00a0 If applicable, applications should identify target geographic areas for activities, target participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and the specific roles of sub-awardees, among other pertinent details.<\/p>\n<p>DRL recognizes that all programs have some level of risk due to internal\/external variables that have the potential to adversely affect a program.\u00a0 Risk management should address how the project design incorporates the identification, assessment, and management of key risk factors.\u00a0 DRL will review the Risk Analysis based on the organization\u2019s ability to identify risks that could have an impact on the overall program as well as how the organization will manage these risks.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Institution\u2019s Record and Capacity<\/span><\/p>\n<p>DRL will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants.\u00a0 Applications should demonstrate an institutional record of successful democracy and human rights programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past grants.\u00a0 Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the project’s objectives.\u00a0 Projects should have potential for continued funding beyond DRL resources.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Addressing Barriers to Equal Participation<\/span><\/p>\n<p>DRL strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of all persons.\u00a0 As the U.S. government\u2019s lead bureau dedicated to promoting democratic governance, DRL requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.\u202f Discrimination,\u202fviolence, inequity, and inequality targeting any members of society undermines collective security and threatens democracy.\u00a0 DRL prioritizes inclusive and integrated program models that assess and address the barriers to access for individuals and groups based on their race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.\u00a0 The proposal should also demonstrate how the project will further engagement in underserved communities and with individuals from underserved communities. Applicants should describe how programming will impact all of its beneficiaries, including support for underserved and underrepresented communities.\u202f This approach should be an integral part of both the concept and explicit design, and implementation of all proposed project activities, objectives, and monitoring.\u00a0 Strong proposals will provide specific analysis, measures, and corresponding targets as appropriate.\u202f Stakeholders shall identify the difference between opportunities and barriers to access, and design projects accordingly to not perpetuate these inequalities, but rather enhance programmatic impact by including all people in society.\u00a0 The goal of this approach is to bring communities and those in power together in support of more stable and secure societies.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cost Effectiveness<\/span><\/p>\n<p>DRL strongly encourages applicants to clearly demonstrate project cost-effectiveness in their application, including examples of leveraging institutional and other resources.\u00a0 However, cost-sharing or other examples of leveraging other resources are not required.\u00a0 Inclusion of cost-sharing in the budget does not result in additional points awarded during the review process.\u00a0 Budgets should have low and\/or reasonable overhead and administration costs, and applicants should provide clear explanations and justifications for these costs in relation to the work involved.\u00a0 All budget items should be clearly explained and justified to demonstrate necessity, appropriateness, and connection to the project objectives.<\/p>\n<p><i>Please note:\u00a0 If cost share is included in the budget, the recipient must maintain written records to support all allowable costs that are claimed as its contribution to cost share, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government.\u00a0 Such records are subject to audit.\u00a0 In the event the recipient does not meet the minimum amount of cost-sharing as stipulated in the recipient\u2019s budget, DRL\u2019s contribution may be reduced in proportion to the recipient\u2019s contribution.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Multiplier Effect\/Sustainability<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Applications should clearly delineate how elements of the project will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant.\u00a0 A good multiplier effect will have an impact beyond the direct beneficiaries of the grant (e.g. participants trained under a grant go on to train other people; workshop participants use skills from a workshop to enhance a national level election that affects the entire populace).\u00a0 A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating continuing impact beyond the life of a project or garnering other donor support after DRL funding ceases.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Project Monitoring and Evaluation<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Complete applications will include a detailed M&E Narrative, which detail how the project\u2019s progress will be monitored and evaluated.\u00a0 Incorporating well-designed monitoring and evaluation processes into a project is an efficient method for documenting the change (intended and unintended) that a project seeks.\u00a0 Applications should demonstrate the capacity to provide objectives with measurable outputs and outcomes.<\/p>\n<p>The quality of the M&E sections will be judged on the narrative explaining how both monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for those related activities.\u00a0 The M&E Narrative should explain how evaluation(s), internal or external, will be incorporated into the project implementation plan or how the project will be systematically assessed in the absence of one.\u00a0 Please see the section on <i>Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative<\/i> in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the narrative.<\/p>\n<p>Note: Applicants are no longer required to submit a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in their proposals.\u00a0 However, applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.<\/p>\n<p>The output and outcome-based performance indicators should not only be separated by project objectives but also should match the objectives, outcomes, and outputs detailed in the Logic Model and Proposal Narrative.\u00a0 Performance indicators should be clearly defined (i.e., explained how the indicators will be measured and reported) either within the table or with a separate Performance Indicator Reference Sheet (PIRS).\u00a0 For each performance indicator, the table should also include baselines and quarterly and cumulative targets, data collection tools, data sources, types of data disaggregation, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation.\u00a0 There should also be metrics to capture how project activities target those who face discrimination due to their religion, gender, disabilities, ethnicity or sexual orientation and gender identity, where applicable.\u00a0 Please see the section on <i>Monitoring and Evaluation Plan<\/i> in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the plan.<\/p>\n<h2><i>E.2 Review and Selection Process<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>DRL strives to ensure that each application receives a balanced evaluation by a DRL review panel.\u00a0 AQM will determine technical eligibility for all applications.\u00a0 All technically eligible applications for a given NOFO are reviewed against the same seven criteria, which include quality of project idea, project planning\/ability to achieve objectives, institutional record and capacity, inclusive programming, cost effectiveness, multiplier effect\/sustainability, and project monitoring and evaluation.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the DRL review panel will evaluate how the application addresses the NOFO request, U.S. foreign policy goals, and the priority needs of DRL overall.\u00a0 DRL may also take into consideration the balance of the current portfolio of active projects, including geographic or thematic diversity, if needed.<\/p>\n<p>In most cases, the DRL review panel includes representatives from DRL, the appropriate Department of State regional bureau (to include feedback from U.S. embassies), and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (to include feedback from USAID missions).\u00a0 In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that are in a public-private partnership with DRL.\u00a0 At the end of the panel\u2019s discussion about an application, the review panel votes on whether to recommend the application for approval by the DRL Assistant Secretary.\u00a0 If more applications are recommended for approval than DRL can ultimately fund, the review panel will rank the recommended applications in priority order for consideration by the DRL Assistant Secretary.\u00a0 The Grants Officer Representative (GOR) for the eventual award does not vote on the panel.\u00a0 All panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest agreements.<\/p>\n<p>DRL review panels may provide conditions and recommendations on applications to enhance the proposed project, which must be addressed by the applicant before further consideration of the award.\u00a0 To ensure effective use of DRL funds, conditions or recommendations may include requests to increase, decrease, clarify, and\/or justify costs and project activities.<\/p>\n<h2>F. Federal Award Administration Information<\/h2>\n<h2><i>F.1 Federal Award Notices<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>DRL will provide a separate notification to applicants on the result of their applications.\u00a0 Successful applicants will receive a letter electronically via email requesting that the applicant respond to review panel conditions and recommendations.\u00a0 This notification is not an authorization to begin activities and does not constitute formal approval or a funding commitment.<\/p>\n<p>Final approval is contingent on the applicant successfully responding to the review panel\u2019s conditions and recommendations; being registered in required systems, including the U.S. government\u2019s Payment Management System (PMS), unless an exemption is provided; and completing and providing any additional documentation requested by DRL or AQM.\u00a0 Final approval is also contingent on Congressional Notification requirements being met and final review and approval by the Department\u2019s warranted Grants Officer.<\/p>\n<p>The notice of Federal award signed by the Department\u2019s warranted Grants Officers is the sole authorizing document.\u00a0 If awarded, the notice of Federal award will be provided to the applicant\u2019s designated Authorizing Official via SAMS Domestic to be electronically counter-signed in the system.<\/p>\n<h2><i>F.2 Administrative and <\/i><i>National Policy and Legal Requirements<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>DRL requires all recipients of foreign assistance funding to comply with all applicable Department and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to the following:<\/p>\n<p>The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR Chapter 200 (Sub-Chapters A through F) shall apply to all non-Federal entities, except for assistance awards to Individuals and Foreign Public Entities.\u202f Sub-Chapters A through E shall apply to all foreign organizations, and Sub-Chapters A through D shall apply to all U.S. and foreign for-profit entities.\u202fThe applicant\/recipient of the award and any sub-recipient under the award must comply with all applicable terms and conditions, in addition to the assurance and certifications made part of the Notice of Award.\u202f The Department\u2019s Standard Terms and Conditions can be viewed at <a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/about-us-office-of-the-procurement-executive\/\">https:\/\/www.state.gov\/about-us-office-of-the-procurement-executive\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, DRL supports implementation of the <b>National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality<\/b>; the <b>Women Peace and Security (WPS) Act of 2017<\/b>, which highlights the U.S. commitment to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution; and the Department of State WPS Implementation Plan.\u00a0 For additional information, please refer to the following link: <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/115th-congress\/senate-bill\/1141\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/115th-congress\/senate-bill\/1141<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Due to the determination made under the <b>Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) <\/b>for funds obligated during FY 2023, assistance that benefits the governments of the following countries may be subject to a restriction under the TVPA.\u202f The Department of State determines on a case-by-case basis what constitutes assistance to a government; the general principles listed below apply.<\/p>\n<p>Assistance to the government includes:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"30\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">All branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) at all levels (national, regional, local);<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"30\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Public schools, universities, hospitals, and state-owned enterprises, as well as government employees;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\uf0b7\" data-font=\"Symbol\" data-listid=\"30\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":1440,"335559991":360,"469769226":"Symbol","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\uf0b7","469777815":"hybridMultilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Cash, training, equipment, services, or other assistance provided directly to the government, assistance provided to an NGO or other implementer for the benefit of the government, and assistance to government employees.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><b>Subject to TVPA for funds obligated during FY 2023:<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>AF:<\/b>\u00a0 Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, South Sudan<\/p>\n<p><b>EAP:\u00a0 <\/b>Burma, China (PRC), Macau, North Korea<\/p>\n<p><b>EUR:\u00a0 <\/b>Belarus, Russia<\/p>\n<p><b>NEA:\u00a0 <\/b>Iran, Syria<\/p>\n<p><b>SCA:<\/b>\u00a0 Afghanistan<\/p>\n<p><b>WHA:\u00a0 <\/b>Cuba, Curacao, Nicaragua, Sint Maarten<\/p>\n<p>Additional requirements may be included depending on the content of the program.<\/p>\n<h2><i>F.3 Reporting<\/i><\/h2>\n<p>Applicants should be aware of the post-award reporting requirements for federal assistance awards as reflected in 2 CFR 200 Appendix XII – Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.<a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.ecfr.gov\/cgi-bin\/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=027fb85899500d580fc71df69d11573a&mc=true&n=pt2.1.200&r=PART&ty=HTML - ap2.1.200_1521.i\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/www.ecfr.gov\/cgi-bin\/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=027fb85899500d580fc71df69d11573a&mc=true&n=pt2.1.200&r=PART&ty=HTML – ap2.1.200_1521.i<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a> DRL awards require that all reports (financial and progress) are uploaded to the federal award file in SAMS Domestic on a quarterly basis.\u00a0 The Federal Financial Report (FFR or SF-425) is the required form for financial reports and must be submitted in PMS, and a copy of the report submitted in PMS then uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic.\u00a0 Progress reports uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic must include a narrative as described below as well as Program Indicators (or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer), including standard (F) framework indicators and DRL framework indicators.\u00a0 F and DRL framework indicators will be reviewed and negotiated during the final stages of issuing an award on a project-by-project basis.<\/p>\n<p>Narrative progress reports should reflect the focus on measuring the project\u2019s progress on the overarching objectives and should be compiled according to the objectives, outcomes, and outputs as outlined in the award\u2019s Scope of Work (SOW) and in the Monitoring & Evaluation Narrative.\u00a0 An assessment of the overall project\u2019s achievements should be included in each progress report.\u00a0 Where relevant, progress reports should include the following sections:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Relevant contextual information (limited);<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Explanation and evaluation of significant activities of the reporting period and how the activities reflect progress toward achieving objectives, including meeting benchmarks\/targets as set in the approved M&E Plan.\u00a0 In addition, attach the M&E Plan, comparing the target and actual numbers for the indicators;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Any qualitative impact or success stories from the project, when possible;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Copy of baseline, mid-term, and\/or final evaluation report(s) conducted by an external evaluator; if applicable;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Relevant supporting documentation or products related to the project activities (such as articles, meeting lists and agendas, participant surveys, photos, manuals, etc.) as separate attachments;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"5\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Description of how the recipient is pursuing sustainability, including looking for sources of follow-on funding;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Any problems\/challenges in implementing the project and a corrective action plan with an updated timeline of activities;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Reasons why established goals were not met;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Data for the required F and\/or DRL framework indicator(s) for the quarter as well as aggregate data by fiscal year;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Program Indicators or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer;<\/li>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"5\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Proposed activities for the next quarter; and,<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li data-leveltext=\"\u25cf\" data-font=\"Arial\" data-listid=\"9\" data-list-defn-props=\"{"335552541":1,"335559684":-2,"335559685":720,"335559731":360,"469769226":"Arial","469769242":[8226],"469777803":"left","469777804":"\u25cf","469777815":"multilevel"}\" aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\">Additional pertinent information, including analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs, if applicable.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Foreign Assistance Data Review:<\/b>\u00a0 As required by Congress, the Department of State must make progress in its efforts to improve tracking and reporting of foreign assistance data through the Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR).\u00a0 The FADR requires tracking of foreign assistance activity data from budgeting, planning, and allocation through obligation and disbursement.\u00a0 Successful applicants will be required to report and draw down federal funding based on the appropriate FADR Data Elements, indicated within their award documentation.\u00a0 In cases of more than one FADR Data Element, typically program or sector and\/or regions or country, the successful applicant will be required to maintain separate accounting records.<\/p>\n<p>A final narrative and financial report must also be submitted within 120 days after the expiration of the award.<\/p>\n<p>Please note:\u00a0 Delays in reporting may result in delays of payment approvals and failure to provide required reports may jeopardize the recipient’s\u2019 ability to receive future U.S. government funds.\u00a0 DRL reserves the right to request any additional programmatic and\/or financial project information during the award period.<\/p>\n<h2>G. Contact Information<\/h2>\n<p>For technical submission questions related to this NOFO, please contact DRL-GP-SCA-CORE@state.gov.<\/p>\n<p>For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/afsitsm.service-now.com\/ilms\/home\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/afsitsm.service-now.com\/ilms\/home<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 Customer support is available 24\/7.<\/p>\n<p>Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA).\u00a0 If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the helpdesk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.<\/p>\n<p>For assistance with Grants.gov accounts and technical issues related to using the system, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email <a href=\"mailto:support@grants.gov\">support@grants.gov<\/a>.\u00a0 The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.<\/p>\n<p>For a list of federal holidays visit:<\/p>\n<p><a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.opm.gov\/policy-data-oversight\/pay-leave\/federal-holidays\/\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">https:\/\/www.opm.gov\/policy-data-oversight\/pay-leave\/federal-holidays\/<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Except for technical submission questions, during the NOFO period U.S. Department of State staff in Washington and overseas shall not discuss this competition with applicants until the entire proposal review process has been completed and rejection and approval letters have been transmitted.<\/p>\n<h2>H. Other Information<\/h2>\n<p>Applicants should be aware that DRL understands that some information contained in applications may be considered sensitive or proprietary and will make appropriate efforts to protect such information.\u00a0 However, applicants are advised that DRL cannot guarantee that such information will not be disclosed, including pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or other similar statutes.<\/p>\n<p>The information in this NOFO and \u201cProposal Submission Instructions for Applications\u201d is binding and may not be modified by any DRL representative.\u00a0 Explanatory information provided by DRL that contradicts this language will not be binding.\u00a0 Issuance of the NOFO and negotiation of applications does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government.\u00a0 DRL reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets.<\/p>\n<p>This NOFO will appear on <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"http:\/\/www.grants.gov\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">www.grants.gov<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>, <a class=\"external-link\" href=\"https:\/\/mygrants.servicenowservices.com\/ilms\/\" target=\"_BLANK\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"external-link-title\">SAMS Domestic<\/span><span class=\"icon-external\">\u00a0<\/span><\/a>, and DRL\u2019s website <a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/\">https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/programs-and-grants\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Background Information on DRL and General DRL Funding<\/p>\n<p>DRL has the mission of promoting democracy and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms globally.\u00a0 DRL supports projects designed through an evidence-based framework that empower local civil society partners to promote and defend democracy globally, including efforts to counter authoritarianism, promote human rights, and meaningfully address diversity, equity, and inclusion as a core element of good governance.\u00a0 DRL typically focuses its work in countries facing human rights violations and abuses, where democracy and human rights defenders are under pressure, and where governance infrastructure is undemocratic, in transition, or at risk of backsliding.<\/p>\n<p>Additional background information on DRL and its efforts can be found on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureaus-offices\/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/\">https:\/\/www.state.gov\/bureaus-offices\/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights\/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><input type=\"hidden\" data-filter=\"100001000100\" \/><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>United States Department of State\u00a0 Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):\u00a0 DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0009355 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:\u00a0 19.345 Type of Solicitation:\u00a0 Open Competition Application Deadline:\u00a0 11:59 PM EST on 27 March, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":287,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"state_author_groups":[],"state_bureaus":[73,360],"state_countries_and_areas":[254],"state_document_type":[899],"state_policy_issues":[],"state_states":[],"state_subjects":[601],"state_archive_tags":[],"state_live_draft_tags":[],"state_rss_feeds":[],"acf":{"txt_audience":"","txt_location":"","txt_display_headline":"","tf_display_date":true,"tf_display_loc":true,"tf_display_audience":true,"link_button":"","subscribe_button":{"link_button":""},"po_header_breadcrumb":{"ID":32167,"post_author":"18","post_date":"2017-01-20 14:28:18","post_date_gmt":"2017-01-20 19:28:18","post_content":"","post_title":"Statements of Interest, Requests for Proposals, and Notices of Funding Opportunity","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"statements-of-interest-requests-for-proposals-and-notices-of-funding-opportunity","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-05-03 13:18:55","post_modified_gmt":"2024-05-03 17:18:55","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/?page_id=32167","menu_order":0,"post_type":"page","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},"fc_authors":[{"acf_fc_layout":"bureau","author_bureau":{"ID":7923,"post_author":"18","post_date":"2022-09-06 07:55:06","post_date_gmt":"2022-09-06 11:55:06","post_content":"","post_title":"Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-04-23 12:50:50","post_modified_gmt":"2024-04-23 16:50:50","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":2781,"guid":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/?post_type=state_bureau&p=7923","menu_order":0,"post_type":"state_bureau","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}}],"flex_summary_index":false,"document_date":"January 25, 2023","state_translations":"en","tf_downloadable_content":false,"tf_display_feat_image_on_related_content":true,"sel_feed_options":"default","page_subnavigation":false,"rel_bureau_related":[{"ID":850,"post_author":"14","post_date":"2019-07-11 14:01:11","post_date_gmt":"2019-07-11 18:01:11","post_content":"","post_title":"Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"bureau-of-south-and-central-asian-affairs","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-09-21 13:13:38","post_modified_gmt":"2021-09-21 17:13:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":1860,"guid":"https:\/\/migration.statedeptredesign.hugeops.com\/?post_type=state_bureau&p=850","menu_order":0,"post_type":"state_bureau","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"po_bureau":{"ID":7923,"post_author":"18","post_date":"2022-09-06 07:55:06","post_date_gmt":"2022-09-06 11:55:06","post_content":"","post_title":"Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-04-23 12:50:50","post_modified_gmt":"2024-04-23 16:50:50","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":2781,"guid":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/?post_type=state_bureau&p=7923","menu_order":0,"post_type":"state_bureau","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},"disable_classic_breadcrumbs":false,"parent_post_url_id":"","rep_trip_section":false},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v22.8 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"United States Department of State\u00a0 Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):\u00a0 DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0009355 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:\u00a0 19.345 Type of Solicitation:\u00a0 Open Competition Application Deadline:\u00a0 11:59 PM EST on 27 March, […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"United States Department of State\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Placeholder_seal_final.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"675\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Placeholder_seal_final.png\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/\",\"name\":\"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2023-01-25T20:44:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-01-25T20:44:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/\",\"name\":\"United States Department of State\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State","og_description":"United States Department of State\u00a0 Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):\u00a0 DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0009355 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:\u00a0 19.345 Type of Solicitation:\u00a0 Open Competition Application Deadline:\u00a0 11:59 PM EST on 27 March, […]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/","og_site_name":"United States Department of State","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":675,"url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Placeholder_seal_final.png","type":"image\/png"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_image":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Placeholder_seal_final.png","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/","url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/","name":"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal - United States Department of State","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/#website"},"datePublished":"2023-01-25T20:44:55+00:00","dateModified":"2023-01-25T20:44:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/drl-combatting-sexual-and-gender-based-violence-in-nepal\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"DRL Combatting Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Nepal"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/#website","url":"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/","name":"United States Department of State","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/10.0.108.84\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/413399"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/287"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=413399"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/413399\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":413410,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/413399\/revisions\/413410"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=413399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"state_author_groups","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_author_groups?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_bureaus","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_bureaus?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_countries_and_areas","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_countries_and_areas?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_document_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_document_type?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_policy_issues","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_policy_issues?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_states","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_states?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_subjects","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_subjects?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_archive_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_archive_tags?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_live_draft_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_live_draft_tags?post=413399"},{"taxonomy":"state_rss_feeds","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/state_rss_feeds?post=413399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/memoranda/2010/m-10-26.pdf.json	EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503 THE DIRECTOR June 28, 2010 M-10-26 MEMORANDUM FOR HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES FROM: Peter R. Orszag Director SUBJECT: Immediate Review of Financial Systems IT Projects Federal Information Technology (IT) projects too often cost more than they should, take longer than necessary to deploy, and deliver solutions that do not meet our business needs. Although these problems exist across our IT portfolio, financial systems modernization projects in particular have consistently underperformed in terms of cost, schedule, and performance. To address these problems, the White House Chief of Staff and I today signed a Memorandum launching an IT project management reform effort. As part of this effort, OMB is concurrently issuing this guidance that requires all CFO Act agencies to immediately halt the issuance of new task orders or new procurements for all financial system projects1 • Sets forth guiding principles for the acquisition and project management of new financial systems; pending review and approval from OMB. This guidance also: • Specifies the procedures for an immediate review and evaluation of current financial system modernization projects; and • Clarifies and updates OMB policies on financial management shared services, financial system standards, and financial software testing and certification. Overview Financial system modernizations projects in the Federal government have become too large and complex. By setting the scope of projects to achieve broad-based business transformations rather than focusing on essential business needs, Federal agencies are experiencing substantial cost overruns and lengthy delays in planned deployments. Compounding this problem, projects persistently fall short of planned functionality and efficiencies once deployed. There are two basic factors causing these results. First, the large-scale modernization efforts undertaken by Federal agencies are leading to complex project management requirements that 1 The focus of this effort is on core financial systems as defined in OMB Circular A-127. However, when an agency deploys a financial system modernization project in conjunction with other business systems, those non-core financial systems will also fall under the purview of this Memorandum and the review process described herein. are difficult to manage. Second, by the time the resulting lengthy projects are finished, they are technologically obsolete and/or no longer meet agency needs. In response to these problems, this guidance initiates a re-examination of these expensive and lengthy investments in financial modernization solutions in favor of shorter-term, lower-cost, and easier-to-manage solutions. By dividing projects into smaller segments that deliver the most critical functionality more quickly, Federal agencies will achieve greater functionality sooner, better align projects to their organizations capacity to manage change, and reduce risk and cost. This guidance also delineates related policy changes that will reduce project complexity by encouraging shared services where cost effective, initiating a performance-based approach for compliance with financial system requirements, and streamlining the process for certifying financial management software. Guiding Principles When seeking to deploy a financial modernization project, agencies should follow certain principles and adopt best practices that have been proven to reduce project risk and increase success rates. OMB reviews of financial projects will be based on these principles and practices. They include: • Split projects into smaller, simpler segments with clear deliverables. Project segments should generally take no longer than 90 -120 days to achieve specific project milestones. Although all specific milestones may not deliver functionality, all such milestones must support the delivery of well defined functionality. The overall length of a development2 • Focus on most critical business needs first. Historic practice in Federal IT system projects has been to attempt to address a wide range of needs at once through expansive process reengineering projects. The complexity involved in this approach has added substantially to costs, significantly increased risks and delayed implementation of all functionality, including the most critical needs. One of the benefits of the segmented approach outlined above is that it allows prioritization of needs and functionality. The most critical functionality can be delivered first while functions of lesser importance can be considered for subsequent delivery. Among other benefits, this process has been proven to cause a healthy reevaluation or reconsideration of secondary functions after critical functions are in place and being used. Therefore, revised projects plans should prioritize the most critical financial functions. project should not exceed 24 months. Historically, Federal government IT projects have involved expansive, long-term projects that attempt to change almost every aspect of a business system at once. These projects have taken years, sometimes a decade, and have failed at alarming rates. The best practice in IT project design now focuses on the development of an overall, high-level system architecture with specific development projects working on tight timetables with clear deliverables that provide interim functionality. This approach simplifies planning, development, project management and oversight, and training. It reduces risk and allows changes in technology to be incorporated into later phases at lower costs. 2 This includes the planning and development, as well as the implementation phases of the project. The focus is on modernization projects and software upgrades, not on-going operations and maintenance costs. • Ongoing, transparent project oversight. One of the major causes of IT system failure is insufficient oversight by senior management. Often in the Federal government, senior agency managers do not adequately monitor projects on an ongoing basis once they are underway. Proven best practices in this area include identifying up-front a series of milestones, warning flags, and stop points over the course of the segment lifecycle which, if deemed necessary, can cause the project to be suspended and returned to planning. Additionally, clear deliverables should be monitored closely and any delays in deliverables should automatically result in a more in-depth review of a project. Finally, mechanisms for review of project status by senior management should be built into a project plan. Revised agency projects plans should integrate these best practices into their oversight processes. OMB Review Process 1. Projects Subject to Review. Effective immediately, for all CFO Act agencies3, all financial system modernization projects with $20 million or more in planned spending on development or modernization expenses shall be halted pending an agency re-evaluation and a subsequent review by OMB4 Agencies that have previously completed modernization projects must refrain from moving into additional rounds of planning and development until OMB has approved a revised implementation plan for those projects consistent with this guidance. Lastly, OMB may review systems that have completed implementation when a failure occurs (e.g., the system fails in performing basic functions). as noted below. In addition, as a part of this review, projects identified as high-risk by OMB should require more frequent assessment to include review of task orders or activities. Review of projects nearing completion may be abbreviated and will include consideration of the costs and benefits of implementing the policy within the project. 2. Financial Systems Advisory Board. As of this date, OMB is establishing the Financial Systems Advisory Board (Board) under the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Council. The Board will include CFOs and CIOs from major agencies and have available experts from various communities, including acquisition and e-government. Its function will be to make recommendations to OMB, as requested, on projects being reviewed under this memorandum. Agencies with longstanding expertise in IT project management may also be asked to participate more extensively and directly with OMB in the overall review process. 3. Agency Project Plans. Within 60 days of this order, agencies will provide revised project plans for all projects covered herein to OMB for review. Such plans, as described in Attachment A, shall clearly outline the project’s strategy for reducing costs, shortening the project timeline, and reducing risks. Criteria for review will be the Guiding Principles described earlier in this Memorandum. 3 For purposes of this memorandum, the Intelligence Community agencies are included. 4 OMB review is a coordinated review led by the Office of Federal Financial Management that also includes staff from OMB’s Resource Management Offices and the E-gov Office. 4. Project Review. OMB will review revised project plans within 60 days of submission. This review may include presentation of plans to the Board for its evaluation and recommendations, but OMB will make the final decision regarding approval of a revised project plan. Many agencies have already begun working on revised project plans. Attachment B includes an initial schedule of review dates for these projects. 5. Funds Execution and Link to Project Reviews. Beginning in the first quarter of FY 2011, to align with this guidance, financial system investments subject to this guidance will be apportioned consistent with a segmented approach. Where the apportionment process is employed, funding shall be controlled under Category B on a quarterly basis. As such, contracts shall reflect the overall implementation phase of 18 to 24 months, with task orders written to reflect 90 to 120-day deliverables. Task orders shall be funded consistent with the apportionment – after OMB review throughout the development, modernization, and execution phases. For projects that OMB has not designated as high-risk or that have a proven track record of achieving specific milestones within well-defined segments, OMB may employ flexibility regarding funds control. Throughout the fiscal year, OMB shall assess whether or not an investment should receive funding for the next segment. If approved, OMB will apportion funding for the next segment under Category B. If approval is not granted, OMB will work with the affected agency to redirect funding pursuant to existing Congressional reprogramming requirements. An agency’s failure to complete a segment as planned may be a basis for canceling the remaining investment. Additionally, inconsistent, incomplete, or inaccurate data or documentation may be justification for redirecting funding. 6. Future Reviews. Subsequent to initial project reviews and approval of revised plans, OMB will review project status, and as necessary will re-engage the Board, on a quarterly basis through FY 2012. These reviews will be used, among other things, to inform the appropriations process for FY 2011 and OMB’s review of budget proposals for FY 2012. Funding for projects subject to the apportionment process under this guidance will continue to be apportioned on a quarterly basis through Category B allocations. Projects must continue to meet 90 to 120-day milestones in order for OMB to release project funding for additional segments. For projects that have a proven track record of achieving specific milestones within well-defined segments, OMB may employ flexibility regarding funds control. • Shared Services. OMB supports shared service arrangements when cost effective, but will no longer mandate them in all cases for financial management systems. Shared Services, Financial System Standards, and Financial Software Testing and Certification 5 5 OMB’s previous policy on financial management shared services was captured under the Financial Management Line of Business (FMLOB) initiative. Under FMLOB, Federal agencies were required to either serve as a shared service provider or leverage a shared service provider when modernizing a financial system. Past attempts to mandate use of financial management shared services yielded inconsistent results, as medium and large agencies encountered the same types of costs and risks with a shared service provider as they did when modernizing “in house.” These risks, along with early reluctance by Federal agencies to fully leverage the shared service model, led agencies to pursue shared service arrangements for low impact areas in terms of operational efficiency, such as common hosting, and to defer higher impact areas, such as common transaction processing. OMB expects the requirements to re-scope agency modernization projects contained in this guidance will enable greater adoption of shared service arrangements with lower risk and greater cost impacts. Further, financial management shared service efforts will now focus on the higher impact area of transaction processing. OMB, Department of the Treasury, and the CFO Council will identify the development of common automated solutions for transaction processing. The Office of Financial Innovation and Transformation, which has been recently established within Treasury’s Fiscal Service, will pilot these solutions. The first priorities will be to develop initial operating capabilities for vendor invoicing and intergovernmental transactions. Existing shared service relationships will remain unchanged, but agencies that are being cross-serviced can re-evaluate whether the current and future relationship remains cost-effective. • Financial System Standards. Current “Core Financial System” requirements6 remain in effect and Federal agencies have an ongoing responsibility to comply with them. OMB will soon issue a revision to OMB Circular A-127, Financial Management Systems, which will update existing requirements and include new guidance on how agencies and auditors will assess compliance with these requirements. Specifically, OMB will initiate a performancebased approach to assessing compliance that will assist in the overall objective to reduce the cost, risk, and complexity of financial system modernizations. The objective of this approach will be to provide additional flexibility for Federal agencies to initiate smaller scale financial modernizations as long as relevant financial management outcomes (e.g., clean audits, proper controls, timely reporting) are maintained. • Software Certification. The Financial Systems Integration Office (FSIO)7 previously required a formal test procedure of financial software as part of a certification program that confirmed the products contained the functionality required by issued system standard requirements. This process was established at a time when problems with software functionality posed a significant risk to system performance. Over time, this risk has diminished. In addition, the FSIO software certification process was lengthy and resource intensive, delaying the procurement process for software by 18 months and creating significant costs for the software vendor that were passed back to the taxpayer. This process was terminated by OMB in March 2010 because it did not align well with our objectives to deploy newer, 6 See http://www.fsio.gov/fsio/fsiodata/docs_systemrequirements.shtml. 7 The Financial System Integration Office (FSIO), previously referred to as the Joint Financial Managers Improvement Program (JFMIP) office, was an organization within the General Services Administration (GSA) whose mission included the development and implementation of a testing protocol applied to financial software to ensure such software met minimum functionality requirements. cost-effective technologies more timely. In addition, the certification program still resulted in products that did not have some required functionality, despite the testing. Therefore, OMB is reforming the certification process by shifting the accountability for software performance to the vendor through self-certification. To the extent software functionality does not perform in accordance with vendor certification, the Federal agency will hold the vendor accountable in the same manner in which other contractual obligations are enforced, such as through the imposing of liquidated damages, requiring repair or replacement, or terminating the contract. If the contractor is found to have made any materially false or fraudulent statements or representations, it may be subject to penalties under the False Statement Act. This should make contractors clearly accountable for delivering what they promise. OMB will, as appropriate, revisit this policy on an annual basis to determine the potential need for refinement. Additional details related to this change to the testing process will be provided in an upcoming revision to OMB CircularA-127, scheduled to be issued this summer, as well as the OMB Audit Bulletin. We look forward to working with you as we implement the steps outlined in this guidance to achieve our mutual goals. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact Debra Bond, Deputy Controller of the Office of Federal Financial Management/OMB. Attachments: A. Template for Submissions B. Initial Review Schedule Attachment A 1 Financial System Template Instructions The components to include in the systems review package for each of the Department’s financial management IT systems follows. If you have questions regarding the template, please submit them to the Financial Management Community page in MAX [ Please provide a systems review package, which should not exceed 20 pages, and a current project plan to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Financial Systems Advisory Board (FSAB) one calendar week prior to the scheduled system review outlined in Attachment B. The systems review package and the project plan will be discussed during the 50 minute review session, of which 15 minutes will be provided to the agency or component being reviewed and the remaining 35 minutes will be for questions from the FSAB. https://max.omb.gov/community/x/KIJlHg]. Agencies are encouraged to leverage the Exhibit 300 required by OMB Circular A-11 as applicable. Future Exhibit 300 submissions should be consistent with the information presented in this systems review package. Project Name: Provide the name of the project and system being modernized. If the name has changed or there are multiple component names, please list each. Executive Summary Agency: Provide the name of the agency implementing the project. If the project is being implemented in multiple bureaus or components, please list each. For shared service providers, please list the impacted Departments and bureaus/programs. System Status: Fill out the below chart and self-assess each status item. SYSTEM STATUS Status Item Current Status* Prior Status* Summary Overall Project Status Yellow Red Include a brief overall summary for the project Cost Yellow Red Include a description of any variance in cost (costs to date against projects costs; also total estimated costs) Schedule Red Green Include a description of any variance in Schedule for the lifecycle of the project Performance (Scope) Yellow Red Include a description of any changes in Performance Project Risk Green Yellow Include a description of any changes in the project risk(s) Note: the Prior Status will be blank for the first review. Attachment A 2 Chart Key: Red = missed defined milestones during the 90-120 day segment (e.g., cost, schedule, scope) Yellow = risks identified that could place the project in jeopardy (e.g., cost, schedule, scope) . Green = on track to meet deliverables; no project slippage Blue = task completed * Agencies are encouraged to use the formula based/ variance approach as defined within the OMB Office of E-gov’s IT Dashboard. [ http://itdashboard.gov/?q=content/faq-agencies]. Type of Project: Provide a description of what type of project is being reviewed (new initiative, major enhancement/upgrade, or ongoing initiative-e.g., steady state). In addition, please describe what lifecycle phase the project is currently in (pre-acquisition/planning, full acquisition/implementation, deployed/operations and maintenance, or mixed life cycle). Section 1 Project Description: Provide a description of the project objectives, including what functionality is being obtained, interfaces required internally or by external stakeholders. In addition please provide number of users, number of locations and description of the locations (e.g. national, localized, international), and a description of the type of users and who is impacted by the system. Business Needs/Solution: Provide a description of what critical business needs are being addressed and the need or problem driving the proposed project, including the timeframe the critical business needs must be addressed. Please include detailed contingency plans that outline budgetary and performance impact. Describe how the project is consistent with the agency’s mission and/or strategic plan. Also, please highlight “in-scope” and “outof-scope” changes/issues. In addition, please describe the alternatives that were evaluated when choosing the solution. Benefits: Provide a description of the outcomes of the project that would resolve the business need or problem. Provide a description of direct benefits anticipated from the project. Specify the measurable improvement of the project and the implications of not doing the project. Please relate these descriptions to the overall mission of the Department. Technology Solution: Provide a description of the technology solution being obtained and the flexibility of that solution (e.g. is it open or closed, does it leverage cloud technology, is it proprietary). Management Structure: Provide a description of the management structure of the project including, the name and contact information for the project manager and the number of staff working on the project. In addition, provide the grades, job series, and office locations of the staff. If staff only work less than 100 percent of their time on the project, please delineate full or partial FTE ratio. Lastly, include a list of the contractors working on the project with their classification and billable rate. Section 2 Project Oversight: Provide a description of the project oversight including the date(s) of internal project review(s), highlights from the review(s) and a description of the body reviewing the project (e.g. Department Investment Review Board). In addition, provide the names and titles of the project sponsor(s), how often senior leaders are briefed on the project, and the level of senior leader involvement in the project. Attachment A 3 Communication Plan: Provide a description of the communication plan including the identification of all stakeholders, how the agency will communicate critical information on the project to the stakeholders, and how frequently the agency will communicate with each stakeholders. Training Plan. Provide a detailed description of the agency training plan for all users (e.g., financial management personnel, program personnel, field and headquarter personnel). Project Risk: Provide a description of the identified risks associated with acquiring and implementing this project and explain how the risks will be mitigated. Provide a description of risk associated with the project, such as legacy data cleanup, human resource constraints, and change management needs. Agencies should reflect the probability of occurrence as well as the magnitude of impact of these potential risks. In addition, provide planned risk mitigation steps that would be performed to limit identified project risk and alternatives considered (e.g. in-house development versus outsourcing). Section 3 Emerging Issues (applicable if in implementation or deployed phase): List any issues identified that were not anticipated during the planning phase, the impact to the project, and required actions. Organizational Change Management: Provide a description of the training needs identified for stakeholders associated with this project and the plan for providing the training, including timelines. Cost: Provide a cost estimate for the project, including all funding for the project regardless of source and spanning all years of the project. Estimates should be separated by initial planning, acquisition (development), and annual (recurring) operation and maintenance costs (including FTE costs). Provide original estimated cost of the project, revised estimated cost of the project, and a brief description of any increased or decreased cost projections from the original estimate. In addition, include the amount of actual cost incurred. Section 4 Initial Budget Current Budget Variance to Initial Budget Available Funding to Date Actual Costs to Date Schedule: Summarize the strategy that will be used to implement the outcomes of the project, identify the key pieces of development, and the high-level milestones and dates. Provide an overview of the overall timeline of the project with deliverables identified in 90-120 day segments. Provide the following high-level information on the project timeline. Initial Schedule (in Months) Current Schedule (in Months) Variance to Initial Schedule Actual Schedule to date (in Months) Attachment A 4 Performance: Provide a description of any major scope changes that has occurred, including the impact the change had on the schedule and budget. Provide the following high-level information on the projects deliverables. Provide a narrative describing the change control process and the number and costs associated with approved changes. Number of Initial Deliverables Number of Current Deliverables Number of Scope Changes Actual Deliverables provided to date Narrative on Change Control Process Segments: For each segment of the project (e.g., 90-120 day timeframes) being presented for review, identify the estimated cost, timeframe and deliverable(s). For each deliverable being presented, describe the criteria that must be met in order for the deliverable to be considered acceptable. Estimated Cost Timeframe (90-120 days) Deliverable Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Attachment B 1 Financial System Review Schedule Please see the below draft review schedule of agency financial systems to the Financial Systems Advisory Board. The schedule is also posted on the Financial Management Community page in MAX and agencies may post conflicts or requests for changes through that site at https://max.omb.gov/community/x/KIJlHg. Please note that the system review package is due to the Board a calendar week prior to the review session. 1st Review: July 9, 2010 Departments of Homeland Security, Energy, and Veterans Affairs 2nd Review: July 16, 2010 Departments of Interior, Commerce, and Housing and Urban Development 3rd Review: July 23, 2010 Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency 4th Review: July 30, 2010 Department of the Treasury 5th Review: August 6, 2010 Department of Transportation, General Services Administration, and the Office of Personnel Management 6th Review: August 13, 2010 U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7th Review: August 20, 2010 Departments of Education and Labor, and the Social Security Administration 8th Review: August 27, 2010 Department of State, US AID, and NASA * Note this includes departmental and component financial systems.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/stats.bls.gov/opub/ted/2007/nov/wk3/art02.htm.json	Skip to Content An official website of the United States government Here is how you know United States Department of Labor The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site. The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Follow UsRelease CalendarBlog - Search buttonSearch: Follow Us \| Release Calendar \| Blog - Home - About BLS - History - Our Leadership - Budget and Performance - Questions and Answers - A-Z Index - Glossary - Careers at BLS - BLS Speakers Available - Errata - Contact BLS - Overview of BLS Statistics - Guide to Programs & Services - Demographics - Industries - Business Costs - Occupations - Geography - Resources For - Business Leaders - Consumers - Developers - Economists - Investors - Jobseekers - Media - Public Policymakers - Researcher - Students & Teachers - Survey Respondents - Subjects - Inflation & Prices - Consumer Price Index - Producer Price Indexes - Import/Export Price Indexes - Contract Escalation - Price Index Research - Pay & Benefits - Employment Cost Index - Employer Costs for Employee Compensation - Wage Data by Occupation - Earnings by Demographics - Earnings by Industry - County Wages - Benefits - Modeled Wage Estimates - Compensation Research - Strikes & Lockouts - Wage Records from Unemployment Insurance - Occupational Requirements - Unemployment - National Unemployment Rate - State & Local Unemployment Rates - Unemployment Research - Employment - National Employment - State & Local Employment - County Employment - Worker Characteristics - American Indian Report - Employment Projections - Job Openings & Labor Turnover Survey - Business Response Survey - Employment by Occupation - Work Experience Over Time - Business Employment Dynamics - Foreign Direct Investment - Employment Research - Workplace Injuries - Productivity - Labor and Total Factor Productivity - Productivity Research - Spending & Time Use - Consumer Expenditures - How Americans Spend Time - International - International Technical Cooperation - Import/Export Price Indexes - Geographic Information - Northeast (Boston-New York) - Mid-Atlantic (Philadelphia) - Southeast (Atlanta) - Midwest (Chicago) - Southwest (Dallas) - Mountain-Plains (Kansas City) - West (San Francisco) - Data Tools - Data Retrieval Tools - BLS Popular Series - Series Report - Top Picks, One Screen, Multi-Screen, and Maps - Data Finder - Public Data API - Charts and Applications - Charts for Economic News Releases - CPI Inflation Calculator - Injury and Illness Calculator - Pay Measure Comparison - Demographic Data Sources - COVID-19 Economic Trends - Industry Productivity Viewer - Employment and Wages Data Viewer - Industry Finder from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages - Customized Tables - U.S. Economy at a Glance - Regions, States & Areas at a Glance - Industry at a Glance - Text Files - News Release Tables - More Sources of Data - Restricted Data Access - Discontinued Databases - Questions & Answers - Special Notices - Publications - Latest Publications - The Economics Daily - Monthly Labor Review - Beyond the Numbers - Spotlight on Statistics - Reports - Commissioner's Corner - Videos - Career Outlook - Occupational Outlook Handbook - Geographic Profile - Handbook of Methods - Research Papers - Copyright Information - Contact & Help - Weekly Update - Economic Releases - Latest Releases - Major Economic Indicators - Schedules for news Releases - By Month - By News Release - Current Year - Prior Years - Archived News Releases - Employment & Unemployment - Monthly - Quarterly, annual, and other - Inflation & Prices - Pay & Benefits & Workplace Injuries - Productivity & Technology - Employment Projections - Regional News Releases - Classroom - K-12 Student & Teacher Resources - Games & Quizzes - Student's Desk - Teacher's Desk - Questions & Answers - Beta - Redesigned News Releases # TED: The Economics Daily PRINT: - TED HOME - TOPICS - ARCHIVE BY YEAR - ARCHIVE BY PROGRAM - ABOUT TED - SUBSCRIBE ## Job losses and gains by industry, first quarter of 2007 From December 2006 to March 2007, the number of job gains from opening and expanding private sector establishments was 7.5 million, and the number of job losses from closing and contracting establishments was 7.1 million. [Chart data—TXT] Gross job gains in manufacturing decreased to a level of 500,000 jobs in the first quarter of 2007 and gross job losses fell to 579,000, resulting in a net loss of 79,000 jobs. In education and health services, gross job gains were 799,000, while gross job losses were 655,000, resulting in a net job gain of 144,000. In construction, gross job gains from December 2006 to March 2007 increased to 850,000 and gross job losses fell to 816,000, resulting in a net gain of 34,000 jobs. Gross job gains in retail trade inched up to 1,087,000 and gross job losses fell to 971,000, resulting in a net gain of 116,000 jobs. This was the second consecutive quarter that this sector had a net gain. The leisure and hospitality sector gained 1,165,000 jobs and lost 1,096,000 jobs in the first quarter of 2007, for a net gain of 69,000. These data are from the Business Employment Dynamics program. To learn more, see "Business Employment Dynamics: First Quarter 2007" (PDF) (TXT), news release USDL 07-1790. RELATED SUBJECTS - Employment - Industry Studies - Unemployment SUGGESTED CITATION Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, The Economics Daily, Job losses and gains by industry, first quarter of 2007 at https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2007/nov/wk3/art02.htm (visited May 21, 2024). OF INTEREST Recent editions of Spotlight on Statistics - Fatal Injuries to Foreign-Born Hispanic or Latino Workers Explores the industries, occupations, and events related to these fatalities. - For-Profit, Nonprofit, and Government Sector Jobs in 2022 Compares the labor force characteristics and experiences of workers in the for-profit, nonprofit, government, and self-employed sectors. - Union Membership, Activity, and Compensation in 2022 Focuses on trends in union membership, work stoppages, and pay and benefits among union members. - A Look at a Neat Industry: Distilleries Examines trends in employment, establishments, wages, and consumer prices for distilleries. - Healthcare Occupations: Characteristics of the Employed Compares the demographic characteristics of workers in healthcare occupations. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn - Home - Subjects - Data Tools - Publications - Economic Releases - Classroom - Beta U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Telephone: 1-202-691-5200 Telecommunications Relay Service: 7-1-1www.bls.govContact Us resources - Inspector General (OIG) - Budget and Performance - Department of Labor Grants - No Fear Act - USA.gov - Vote.gov about the site - Sitemap - Freedom of Information Act - Privacy and Security Statement - Disclaimers - Linking and Copyright Info - Important Website Notices - Help and Tutorials - Babel Notice: accessing language services Connect With BLS TwitterYoutubeEmail - Publications - The Economics Daily
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/NPFC/Claims/2020/Initial 920007-0001 RC OFFER_Redacted.pdf?ver=IjgAVmrNqnTmUm6GD3IdHw==&timestamp=1636045116267.json	5 Absent limited circumstances, the federal regulations implementing the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)23 require all claims for removal costs or damages must be presented to the responsible party before seeking compensation from NPFC.24 TKPOA indicated in its initial claim submission to the NPFC that it had presented a claim to the RP but did not indicate on which day.25 During the initial review of the claim, the supporting documentation did not substantiate that proper presentment had occurred as stated on the OSLTF claim form. Therefore the NPFC placed the claim in a preclaim status until TKPOA made proper presentment of its invoices to the RP. After TKPOA sent its removal costs to the RP, the claimant’s letter was returned to the claimant marked, “Return to Sender.” At this point presentment was initiated by the claimant and on February 11, 2020, the NPFC was able to assign TKPOA’s claim submission an OPA claim number and begin adjudication of its costs. III. CLAIMANT AND NPFC: When an RP has not settled a claim after 90 days, a claimant may elect to present its claim to the NPFC.26 On December 27, 2019, the NPFC received a submission for uncompensated removal costs from Tahoe Keys Property Owners Association dated December 13, 2019. IV. DETERMINATION PROCESS: The NPFC utilizes an informal process when adjudicating claims against the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF).27 As a result, 5 U.S.C. § 555(e) requires the NPFC to provide a brief statement explaining its decision. This determination is issued to satisfy that requirement. When adjudicating claims against the OSLTF, the NPFC acts as the finder of fact. In this role, the NPFC considers all relevant evidence, including evidence provided by claimants and evidence obtained independently by the NPFC, and weighs its probative value when determining the facts of the claim.28 The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, or conclusions reached by other entities.29 If there is conflicting evidence in the record, the NPFC makes a determination as to what evidence is more credible or deserves greater weight, and makes its determination based on the preponderance of the credible evidence. V. DISCUSSION: An RP is liable for all removal costs and damages resulting from either an oil discharge or a substantial threat of oil discharge into a navigable water of the United States.30 An RP’s liability is strict, joint, and several.31 When enacting OPA, Congress “explicitly recognized that the existing federal and 23 33 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. 24 33 CFR 136.103. 25 OSLTF Claim Form dated December 13, question # 5. 26 33 CFR 136.103. 27 33 CFR Part 136. 28 See, e.g., Boquet Oyster House, Inc. v. United States, 74 ERC 2004, 2011 WL 5187292, (E.D. La. 2011), “[T]he Fifth Circuit specifically recognized that an agency has discretion to credit one expert's report over another when experts express conflicting views.” (Citing, Medina County v. Surface Transp. Bd., 602 F.3d 687, 699 (5th Cir. 2010)). 29 See, e.g., Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds Center, 71 Fed. Reg. 60553 (October 13, 2006) and Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds Center 72 Fed. Reg. 17574 (concluding that NPFC may consider marine casualty reports but is not bound by them). 30 33 U.S.C. § 2702(a). 31 See, H.R. Rep. No 101-653, at 102 (1990), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 779, 780. 6 states laws provided inadequate cleanup and damage remedies, required large taxpayer subsidies for costly cleanup activities and presented substantial burdens to victim’s recoveries such as legal defenses, corporate forms, and burdens of proof unfairly favoring those responsible for the spills.”32 OPA was intended to cure these deficiencies in the law. OPA provides a mechanism for compensating parties who have incurred removal costs where the responsible party has failed to do so. Removal costs are defined as “the costs of removal that are incurred after a discharge of oil has occurred or, in any case in which there is a substantial threat of a discharge of oil, the costs to prevent, minimize, or mitigate oil pollution from an incident.”33 The term “remove” or “removal” means “containment and removal of oil [...] from water and shorelines or the taking of other actions as may be necessary to minimize or mitigate damage to the public health or welfare, including, but not limited to fish, shellfish, wildlife, and public and private property, shorelines, and beaches.”34 The NPFC is authorized to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).35 The NPFC has promulgated a comprehensive set of regulations governing the presentment, filing, processing, settling, and adjudicating such claims.36 The claimant bears the burden of providing all evidence, information, and documentation deemed relevant and necessary by the Director of the NPFC, to support and properly process the claim.37 Before reimbursement can be authorized for uncompensated removal costs, the claimant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence: (a) That the actions taken were necessary to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the effects of the incident; (b) That the removal costs were incurred as a result of these actions; (c) That the actions taken were directed by the FOSC or determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan. (d) That the removal costs were uncompensated and reasonable.38 Upon review and adjudication of the claim submission, the NPFC worked closely with the Claimant to ensure it made proper presentment of its costs to the RP. The NPFC also made several requests for additional supporting information to the claimant and worked with them to obtain US EPA FOSC coordination. On March 9, 2020, the Claimant provided its invoices to Mr. , US EPA OnScene Coordinator, for his review, as it pertained to the response actions undertaken by the Claimant as well as the response contractor, Tow Boat US.39 The US EPA FOSC responded to the Claimant via email on March 10, 2020 and provided a statement that based on his review of the Claimant’s invoices combined with a conversation with the Claimant, led him to believe the costs were reasonable and consistent with the work performed.40 The NPFC obtained a copy of the Claimant’s rate schedule in support of the costs claimed. The NPFC requested that the Claimant provide a Tow Boat US rate schedule, but the Claimant has failed to to respond to tht portion of the request. The Claimant provided proof of payment for the Tow Boat US costs. Upon adjudicateion of the costs claimed, the NPFC has determined that some of the costs claimed are 32 Apex Oil Co., Inc. v United States, 208 F. Supp. 2d 642, 651-52 (E.D. La. 2002) (citing S. Rep. No. 101-94 (1989), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 722). 33 33 U.S.C. § 2701(31). 34 33 U.S.C. § 2701(30). 35 See generally, 33 U.S.C. §2712 (a) (4); 33 U.S.C. § 2713; and 33 CFR Part 136. 36 33 CFR Part 136. 37 33 CFR 136.105. 38 33 CFR 136.203; 33 CFR 136.205. 39 March 9, 2020 Claimant’s email to the FOSC requesting his review of its costs. 40 March 10, 2020 FOSC email to the Claimant and the NPFC. 7 OPA compensable and have been coordinated with the FOSC. The NPFC has determined that the approved TKPOA invoiced costs were billed in accordance with the rate schedule in place at the time services were rendered. Based on the supporting documentation and information provided and/or obtained from various sources, the NPFC has determined which of the costs invoiced were billed in accordance with the quoted and/or billed rates between the parties. All costs approved for payment by the NPFC were verified as being invoiced at the appropriate pricing, including but not limited to, any approved third party or out of pocket expenses. All approved costs are supported by adequate documentation which include invoices, rate schedules, and were coordinated with the FOSC and determined to be reasonable, necessary. The amount of compensable costs is $2,797.00, while $7,045.6041 were deemed not compensable for the following reasons: 1. $300.00 for vessel Recovery, Removal, and Transport of the vessel. A Towboat Marine US rate schedule was not provided to verify and support these costs. The NPFC requests that each of the response actions claimed be broken out into a personnel, materials and equipment category. Each section should then be further broken down by individual names of employees, position and rate, total hours claimed per person per day along with a description of duties performed. All equipment , materials and supplies should be itemized with the appropriate costs attributed to each item. Finally, details for the transport of the vessel portion of the claimed costs needs to be itemized so that the NPFC can determine how much of the incurred costs were incurred after the vessel was removed from the water; 2. $200.00 for damaged equipment. Please provide the supporting documentation associated with the damaged costs claimed. Provide a detailed description of the nature of how the damage was incurred along with an itemization of what the $200.00 cost is for; 3. $69.90 for 30-feet of chain. Please provide a detailed explanation associated with the cost claimed. Provide evidence of the existence of the item and evidence that supports the damage was incurred as a direct result of the oil spill incident as; 4. $40.70 for Pad Locks. Please provide a copy of the receipts for the purchase of claimed item(s) and provide a detailed description and evidence that the damage/loss claimed is related to the oil spill incident; and. 5. $435.00 in personnel / labor costs. On August 2, 2019, The Claimant had 7 additional personnel listed without the appropriate supporting documentation to support their necessity in working this response incident. The NPFC acknowledges the four people listed in the incident reports. Anyone outside of the primary four employees, must be supported by documents that articulate the duties each were directly performing as part of this incident. Overall Denied Costs = $7,045.6042 VI. CONCLUSION: Based on a comprehensive review of the record, the applicable law and regulations, and for the reasons outlined above, Tahoe Keys Property Owners Association’s request for uncompensated removal costs is approved in the amount of $2,797.00. 41 Enclosure (1) NPFC Summary of Costs spreadsheet. 42 Enclosure (1) Summary of Costs spreadsheet.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.southcom.mil/MEDIA/NEWS-ARTICLES/Article/3678329/kentucky-guard-hosts-ecuadorian-military-for-leader-engagement/index.html.json	An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Official websites use .mil A .mil website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States. Secure .mil websites use HTTPS A lock (lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Skip to main content (Press Enter). U.S. Southern Command Search Search Search - Home - About - About Main - Area of Responsibility - Leadership - SOUTHCOM Components and Units - History - SOUTHCOM Inspector General - Commander's Priorities - Commander's Priorities Main - Strengthen Partnerships - Theater Maintenance Partnership Initiative (TMPI) - Counter Threats - Build Our Team - Media - Media Main - News - Press Releases - Photos - Videos - Speeches \| Transcripts - Special Coverage - SOUTHCOM Podcast - USAG-M / Military-Family Services - U.S. Army Garrison-Miami - Equal Employment Opportunity Office - Overview of Services at SOUTHCOM - About the SOUTHCOM Installation and Local Community - Miami Family and MWR - Army Community Services - Child, Youth and School Services - Leisure Travel Services - Fitness Center - Visiting SOUTHCOM - Army Health Clinic SOUTHCOM - Hurricane Preparedness Info - Conference Center of the Americas - Theater Clearance Info - SOUTHCOM Chaplain - TEAM SOUTHCOM - Total Engagement for All Members of U.S. Southern Command - Logistics Readiness Center-Miami - Public Notice – Environmental Assessment for the Construction of a Military Housing Development - SHARP (SAPR) - Newcomers - Newcomers Main - Sponsor Request - Directions to SOUTHCOM - Army Newcomers - Navy Newcomers - Air Force Newcomers - Marine Corps Newcomers - Coast Guard Newcomers - Reserve Newcomers - Civilian Newcomers - Contractor Newcomers - Family Member Newcomers - Newcomers to Overseas Locations in SOUTHCOM - Work With Us - Employment \| Careers - Public / Private Cooperation - Operational Contract Support - SOUTHCOM Industry Engagement - FOIA - FOIA Main - How to file A FOIA Request - FOIA Fees and Exemptions - Your FOIA Rights - FOIA Reading Room - Contact - Contact SOUTHCOM - Community Requests - FAQ - Contact SOUTHCOM Inspector General - Directions to SOUTHCOM HomeMediaNews PHOTO INFORMATION  Download  Details  Share # Kentucky Guard Hosts Ecuadorian Military for Leader Engagement By Sgt. 1st Class Benjamin Crane,Kentucky National Guard Public Affairs Office FRANKFORT, Ky. – Senior Kentucky National Guard leaders welcomed military personnel from the Armed Forces of Ecuador in a State Partnership Program exchange Jan. 30 - Feb. 1. Eight senior officials representing Ecuador’s Army, Navy, and Air Force heard and saw what the Kentucky National Guard was about. Ecuador has partnered with Kentucky since 1996, enhancing interoperability and readiness. During the four-day visit, the Ecuadorians participated in briefings by the Kentucky Army National Guard and Kentucky Emergency Management, toured the capitol, and met Gov. Andy Beshear. They also visited Airmen at the 123rd Airlift Wing in Louisville to learn about the Kentucky Air Guard’s support of U.S. military operations worldwide while also serving the commonwealth of Kentucky during times of crisis or natural disaster.  Over the past few years, Kentucky and Ecuador have faced many of the same challenges, from civil unrest to flooding. Because of that, they met with Lexington Fire Training Center leaders and viewed static displays of rescue equipment and boats available to the fire department and its search and rescue teams. “I don’t have a lot of information as far as this equipment,” said Admiral Jaime Vela Erazo, chief of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces. “But I do like and enjoy the capabilities that they have here in the event that there’s a natural disaster.” Military leaders of both countries said this international partnership is about more than just discussing new technologies and equipment. “There’s not necessarily one right way to conduct military operations,” said Maj. Gen. Haldane Lamberton, the adjutant general of Kentucky. “We learn from the military in Ecuador. They learn how we do things, and it works out terrifically well for an integrated dynamic of sharing information.” After the visit to the Fire Academy, they were flown over eastern Kentucky in a UH-60 Black Hawk for a tour of the areas hit hardest during the flooding of 2022. The discussions continued at the airport in Hazard that served as the command post during Kentucky’s response to that natural disaster. Following the flight back to Kentucky National Guard Headquarters in Frankfort, Lamberton and Erazo signed a new memorandum of agreement that continues the partnership into 2026. “I enjoy every time I get an opportunity to participate in the State Partnership Program, whether it’s here in Kentucky or going to Ecuador, which is a beautiful, awesome country,” said Col. Tim Starke, director of operations for the KYARNG. “I feel like this week has gone really well because we’ve enabled our partners to meet Soldiers and Airmen to see the people who actually operate the equipment and conduct the missions, and hear directly from them about how we’re moving forward as an organization.” Since the partnership began in 1996, Soldiers and Airmen from the Kentucky National Guard have engaged with their Ecuadorian counterparts in Kentucky and Ecuador. Highlights include joint training exercises, collaborative engineering and medical projects, and cultural exchanges. SHARE ** PRINT ## Related Links More about the State Partnership Program Kentucky National GuardState Partnership ProgramEcuador
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.cftc.gov/files/dea/cotarchives/2020/futures/deacbtlf060920.htm.json	``` WHEAT-SRW - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-001602 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS) : : : : All : 380,528: 119,979 118,818 88,225 144,159 133,122 352,363 340,165: 28,165 40,363 Old : 363,278: 118,468 120,732 80,305 139,207 125,802 337,980 326,839: 25,298 36,439 Other: 17,250: 7,167 3,742 2,264 4,952 7,320 14,383 13,326: 2,867 3,924 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -19,674: 2,482 5,878 -6,412 -15,320 -18,339 -19,250 -18,873: -424 -801 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 31.5 31.2 23.2 37.9 35.0 92.6 89.4: 7.4 10.6 Old : 100.0: 32.6 33.2 22.1 38.3 34.6 93.0 90.0: 7.0 10.0 Other: 100.0: 41.5 21.7 13.1 28.7 42.4 83.4 77.3: 16.6 22.7 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 341: 100 107 115 74 96 244 263: Old : 338: 102 106 110 73 96 238 260: Other: 98: 19 22 9 22 40 49 66: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 14.6 11.7 24.1 20.3 14.6 9.5 23.6 17.2 Old : 14.4 12.1 23.8 21.0 14.4 10.2 23.4 18.3 Other: 42.9 39.1 58.5 49.6 38.4 33.1 52.1 40.6 BLACK SEA WHEAT FINANCIAL - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-00160F Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : 50 Metric Tons : : : : All : 23,887: 13,773 400 260 9,215 22,617 23,248 23,277: 639 610 Old : 23,887: 13,773 400 260 9,215 22,617 23,248 23,277: 639 610 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -888: 291 140 -640 -798 -299 -1,147 -799: 259 -89 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 57.7 1.7 1.1 38.6 94.7 97.3 97.4: 2.7 2.6 Old : 100.0: 57.7 1.7 1.1 38.6 94.7 97.3 97.4: 2.7 2.6 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 30: 6 2 1 12 22 19 24: Old : 30: 6 2 1 12 22 19 24: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 64.5 45.8 85.4 65.0 58.5 37.3 66.9 52.6 Old : 64.5 45.8 85.4 65.0 58.5 37.3 66.9 52.6 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 WHEAT-HRW - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-001612 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS) : : : : All : 224,805: 45,665 66,520 47,789 110,097 87,795 203,551 202,104: 21,254 22,701 Old : 221,545: 45,935 66,377 46,482 108,651 87,053 201,068 199,912: 20,477 21,633 Other: 3,260: 988 1,401 49 1,446 742 2,483 2,192: 777 1,068 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -4,481: -1,246 -4,738 85 -4,481 -2,499 -5,642 -7,152: 1,161 2,671 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 20.3 29.6 21.3 49.0 39.1 90.5 89.9: 9.5 10.1 Old : 100.0: 20.7 30.0 21.0 49.0 39.3 90.8 90.2: 9.2 9.8 Other: 100.0: 30.3 43.0 1.5 44.4 22.8 76.2 67.2: 23.8 32.8 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 230: 63 57 68 71 72 175 166: Old : 229: 67 55 67 70 72 172 166: Other: 55: 6 13 3 11 26 19 40: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 15.7 21.0 25.5 31.1 14.6 19.6 23.1 27.5 Old : 16.0 21.3 25.9 31.5 14.8 20.0 23.5 28.0 Other: 65.0 38.1 71.6 51.2 65.0 36.7 71.2 49.8 CORN - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-002602 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS) : : : : All : 1,534,533: 236,127 471,140 300,211 800,039 602,479 1,336,377 1,373,830: 198,156 160,703 Old : 868,416: 239,764 408,621 84,343 417,095 299,996 741,202 792,960: 127,214 75,456 Other: 666,117: 150,426 216,582 61,805 382,944 302,483 595,175 580,870: 70,942 85,247 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 15,607: 256 15,831 -19 12,372 -6,368 12,609 9,444: 2,998 6,163 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 15.4 30.7 19.6 52.1 39.3 87.1 89.5: 12.9 10.5 Old : 100.0: 27.6 47.1 9.7 48.0 34.5 85.4 91.3: 14.6 8.7 Other: 100.0: 22.6 32.5 9.3 57.5 45.4 89.3 87.2: 10.7 12.8 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 726: 140 156 160 332 293 579 528: Old : 662: 139 144 87 272 216 464 400: Other: 565: 107 110 72 217 244 366 388: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 9.7 9.2 16.0 16.1 8.6 7.3 14.2 13.1 Old : 11.7 11.8 20.3 20.9 11.7 10.4 19.9 17.7 Other: 12.9 14.1 21.0 22.7 12.1 12.1 19.0 20.0 OATS - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-004603 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS) : : : : All : 4,995: 2,105 90 143 813 3,147 3,061 3,380: 1,934 1,615 Old : 4,995: 2,105 90 143 813 3,147 3,061 3,380: 1,934 1,615 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -509: -141 90 -2 -219 -369 -362 -281: -147 -228 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 42.1 1.8 2.9 16.3 63.0 61.3 67.7: 38.7 32.3 Old : 100.0: 42.1 1.8 2.9 16.3 63.0 61.3 67.7: 38.7 32.3 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 29: 15 1 3 5 11 20 15: Old : 29: 15 1 3 5 11 20 15: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 27.9 45.4 43.6 60.8 27.8 45.4 41.6 60.6 Old : 27.9 45.4 43.6 60.8 27.8 45.4 41.6 60.6 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SOYBEANS - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-005602 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS) : : : : All : 871,756: 187,287 103,178 183,954 432,992 527,011 804,233 814,143: 67,523 57,613 Old : 284,698: 91,964 78,770 19,589 142,746 163,392 254,299 261,751: 30,399 22,947 Other: 587,058: 134,464 63,549 125,224 290,246 363,619 549,934 552,392: 37,124 34,666 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -3,889: 8,354 -3,919 2,362 -13,482 -5,721 -2,766 -7,278: -1,123 3,389 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 21.5 11.8 21.1 49.7 60.5 92.3 93.4: 7.7 6.6 Old : 100.0: 32.3 27.7 6.9 50.1 57.4 89.3 91.9: 10.7 8.1 Other: 100.0: 22.9 10.8 21.3 49.4 61.9 93.7 94.1: 6.3 5.9 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 533: 170 110 159 180 180 442 386: Old : 442: 143 93 51 127 129 296 250: Other: 451: 137 94 122 147 159 356 318: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 11.3 19.4 20.3 30.7 8.0 16.8 13.5 26.1 Old : 16.4 23.2 26.7 32.6 14.7 22.3 24.3 31.0 Other: 14.1 23.3 23.6 36.0 11.2 21.4 18.6 31.6 SOYBEAN OIL - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-007601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 60,000 POUNDS) : : : : All : 473,515: 73,124 68,430 104,307 259,820 274,074 437,251 446,811: 36,264 26,704 Old : 217,577: 52,350 55,493 29,437 119,124 118,636 200,911 203,566: 16,666 14,011 Other: 255,938: 56,986 49,149 38,658 140,696 155,438 236,340 243,245: 19,598 12,693 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -7,965: -6,031 8,562 -7,240 5,146 -6,348 -8,125 -5,026: 160 -2,939 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 15.4 14.5 22.0 54.9 57.9 92.3 94.4: 7.7 5.6 Old : 100.0: 24.1 25.5 13.5 54.8 54.5 92.3 93.6: 7.7 6.4 Other: 100.0: 22.3 19.2 15.1 55.0 60.7 92.3 95.0: 7.7 5.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 314: 76 80 99 107 92 244 233: Old : 279: 73 74 57 93 80 196 185: Other: 236: 60 63 56 78 62 177 151: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 10.6 25.3 18.7 35.2 7.0 18.9 13.0 24.8 Old : 18.7 20.8 29.1 30.6 13.7 13.1 21.9 21.0 Other: 13.2 34.9 22.6 47.3 12.8 33.2 21.9 43.7 U.S. TREASURY BONDS - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-020601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $100,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 984,514: 98,868 178,424 10,578 724,624 630,707 834,070 819,709: 150,444 164,805 Old : 984,514: 98,868 178,424 10,578 724,624 630,707 834,070 819,709: 150,444 164,805 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -26,183: -4,257 495 -6,523 -15,546 -54,341 -26,326 -60,369: 143 34,186 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 10.0 18.1 1.1 73.6 64.1 84.7 83.3: 15.3 16.7 Old : 100.0: 10.0 18.1 1.1 73.6 64.1 84.7 83.3: 15.3 16.7 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 159: 33 18 16 72 81 112 108: Old : 159: 33 18 16 72 81 112 108: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 25.0 29.0 35.4 41.4 19.9 23.9 29.6 34.1 Old : 25.0 29.0 35.4 41.4 19.9 23.9 29.6 34.1 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ULTRA U.S. TREASURY BONDS - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-020604 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $100,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 1,062,910: 97,351 388,027 2,416 814,112 557,880 913,879 948,323: 149,031 114,587 Old : 1,062,910: 97,351 388,027 2,416 814,112 557,880 913,879 948,323: 149,031 114,587 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 5,713: -129 28,049 -4,009 13,835 -18,846 9,697 5,194: -3,984 519 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 9.2 36.5 0.2 76.6 52.5 86.0 89.2: 14.0 10.8 Old : 100.0: 9.2 36.5 0.2 76.6 52.5 86.0 89.2: 14.0 10.8 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 134: 11 20 7 77 74 91 98: Old : 134: 11 20 7 77 74 91 98: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 24.9 34.2 38.6 47.0 20.3 33.1 33.0 45.3 Old : 24.9 34.2 38.6 47.0 20.3 33.1 33.0 45.3 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SOYBEAN MEAL - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-026603 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 100 TONS) : : : : All : 445,736: 83,846 91,870 54,911 252,019 268,063 390,776 414,844: 54,960 30,892 Old : 198,706: 53,999 72,375 12,214 100,634 95,313 166,847 179,902: 31,859 18,804 Other: 247,030: 43,192 32,840 29,352 151,385 172,750 223,929 234,942: 23,101 12,088 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -9,713: 556 3,331 -4,751 -8,760 -8,024 -12,955 -9,444: 3,242 -269 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 18.8 20.6 12.3 56.5 60.1 87.7 93.1: 12.3 6.9 Old : 100.0: 27.2 36.4 6.1 50.6 48.0 84.0 90.5: 16.0 9.5 Other: 100.0: 17.5 13.3 11.9 61.3 69.9 90.6 95.1: 9.4 4.9 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 271: 72 57 65 107 90 210 192: Old : 247: 64 55 34 96 76 175 153: Other: 207: 55 43 47 85 66 164 133: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 13.9 27.1 22.1 34.6 11.7 22.1 17.5 28.8 Old : 16.6 19.2 24.6 28.5 16.3 16.9 23.2 25.9 Other: 15.7 35.7 25.2 47.3 14.6 30.1 23.5 40.6 ROUGH RICE - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-039601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF 200,000 POUNDS) : : : : All : 11,779: 3,700 824 579 4,916 9,353 9,195 10,756: 2,584 1,023 Old : 3,750: 2,218 1,064 0 405 2,196 2,623 3,260: 1,127 490 Other: 8,029: 2,027 305 34 4,511 7,157 6,572 7,496: 1,457 533 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -272: -90 -30 35 109 183 54 188: -326 -460 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 31.4 7.0 4.9 41.7 79.4 78.1 91.3: 21.9 8.7 Old : 100.0: 59.1 28.4 0.0 10.8 58.6 69.9 86.9: 30.1 13.1 Other: 100.0: 25.2 3.8 0.4 56.2 89.1 81.9 93.4: 18.1 6.6 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 55: 25 6 12 16 20 45 34: Old : 40: 11 13 0 3 14 14 27: Other: 47: 22 1 4 16 15 38 20: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 41.9 53.1 51.6 72.7 41.1 52.5 49.9 71.3 Old : 47.2 46.1 59.5 65.3 47.2 46.1 59.5 65.3 Other: 46.2 69.3 56.8 84.6 46.2 68.4 56.8 83.1 2-YEAR U.S. TREASURY NOTES - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-042601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $200,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 2,122,515: 427,355 669,720 47,644 1,473,205 1,271,113 1,948,204 1,988,477: 174,311 134,038 Old : 2,122,515: 427,355 669,720 47,644 1,473,205 1,271,113 1,948,204 1,988,477: 174,311 134,038 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -103,521: -52,489 -42,013 -37,276 -17,763 -62,169 -107,528 -141,458: 4,007 37,937 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 20.1 31.6 2.2 69.4 59.9 91.8 93.7: 8.2 6.3 Old : 100.0: 20.1 31.6 2.2 69.4 59.9 91.8 93.7: 8.2 6.3 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 287: 56 36 26 149 128 220 175: Old : 287: 56 36 26 149 128 220 175: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 16.2 31.1 26.4 43.3 15.2 26.0 24.2 37.2 Old : 16.2 31.1 26.4 43.3 15.2 26.0 24.2 37.2 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10-YEAR U.S. TREASURY NOTES - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-043602 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $100,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 3,306,051: 701,546 699,292 73,126 2,159,946 2,167,247 2,934,618 2,939,665: 371,433 366,386 Old : 3,306,051: 701,546 699,292 73,126 2,159,946 2,167,247 2,934,618 2,939,665: 371,433 366,386 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -24,197: 23,695 -31,479 -44,790 18,087 43,886 -3,008 -32,383: -21,189 8,186 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 21.2 21.2 2.2 65.3 65.6 88.8 88.9: 11.2 11.1 Old : 100.0: 21.2 21.2 2.2 65.3 65.6 88.8 88.9: 11.2 11.1 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 352: 74 53 35 158 181 248 253: Old : 352: 74 53 35 158 181 248 253: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 23.1 20.3 32.4 32.7 17.5 16.7 25.9 26.2 Old : 23.1 20.3 32.4 32.7 17.5 16.7 25.9 26.2 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ULTRA 10-YEAR U.S. T-NOTES - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-043607 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $100,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 972,264: 173,263 164,908 17,557 682,154 596,920 872,974 779,385: 99,290 192,879 Old : 972,264: 173,263 164,908 17,557 682,154 596,920 872,974 779,385: 99,290 192,879 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 67,117: 36,151 8,335 192 27,133 46,990 63,476 55,517: 3,641 11,600 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 17.8 17.0 1.8 70.2 61.4 89.8 80.2: 10.2 19.8 Old : 100.0: 17.8 17.0 1.8 70.2 61.4 89.8 80.2: 10.2 19.8 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 114: 16 10 10 63 68 81 86: Old : 114: 16 10 10 63 68 81 86: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 29.0 27.9 43.4 36.8 28.8 27.4 41.8 35.1 Old : 29.0 27.9 43.4 36.8 28.8 27.4 41.8 35.1 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5-YEAR U.S. TREASURY NOTES - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-044601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $100,000 FACE VALUE) : : : : All : 3,466,509: 401,227 607,032 85,011 2,683,447 2,430,318 3,169,685 3,122,361: 296,824 344,148 Old : 3,466,509: 401,227 607,032 85,011 2,683,447 2,430,318 3,169,685 3,122,361: 296,824 344,148 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -67,922: -67,503 -5,371 -40,493 50,494 -72,799 -57,502 -118,663: -10,420 50,741 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 11.6 17.5 2.5 77.4 70.1 91.4 90.1: 8.6 9.9 Old : 100.0: 11.6 17.5 2.5 77.4 70.1 91.4 90.1: 8.6 9.9 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 302: 61 31 28 143 166 218 211: Old : 302: 61 31 28 143 166 218 211: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 34.7 21.2 45.6 35.2 30.1 21.0 38.6 33.2 Old : 34.7 21.2 45.6 35.2 30.1 21.0 38.6 33.2 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30-DAY FEDERAL FUNDS - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-045601 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000) : : : : All : 1,591,846: 722,610 237,019 237,158 607,557 1,093,849 1,567,325 1,568,026: 24,521 23,820 Old : 1,591,846: 722,610 237,019 237,158 607,557 1,093,849 1,567,325 1,568,026: 24,521 23,820 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 6,900: 97,920 23,726 -50,296 -39,827 36,326 7,797 9,756: -897 -2,856 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 45.4 14.9 14.9 38.2 68.7 98.5 98.5: 1.5 1.5 Old : 100.0: 45.4 14.9 14.9 38.2 68.7 98.5 98.5: 1.5 1.5 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 114: 22 22 32 61 61 101 97: Old : 114: 22 22 32 61 61 101 97: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 45.7 38.3 54.4 53.5 42.9 29.5 47.8 41.4 Old : 45.7 38.3 54.4 53.5 42.9 29.5 47.8 41.4 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DJIA Consolidated - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-12460+ Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : ($10 X DJIA INDEX) : : : : All : 39,723: 8,106 15,200 826 24,008 15,569 32,940 31,595: 6,784 8,129 Old : 39,723: 8,106 15,200 826 24,008 15,569 32,940 31,595: 6,784 8,129 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 665: 1,026 -743 -109 -1,039 1,799 -122 947: 787 -282 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 20.4 38.3 2.1 60.4 39.2 82.9 79.5: 17.1 20.5 Old : 100.0: 20.4 38.3 2.1 60.4 39.2 82.9 79.5: 17.1 20.5 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 94: 20 25 8 35 25 60 53: Old : 94: 20 25 8 35 25 60 53: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 32.1 40.3 44.2 50.5 31.5 38.8 43.4 49.0 Old : 32.1 40.3 44.2 50.5 31.5 38.8 43.4 49.0 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DOW JONES INDUSTRIAL AVG- x $5 - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-124603 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : ($5 X DJIA INDEX) : : : : All : 79,446: 16,212 30,400 1,651 48,016 31,138 65,879 63,189: 13,567 16,257 Old : 79,446: 16,212 30,400 1,651 48,016 31,138 65,879 63,189: 13,567 16,257 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 1,330: 2,052 -1,486 -218 -2,078 3,598 -244 1,894: 1,574 -564 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 20.4 38.3 2.1 60.4 39.2 82.9 79.5: 17.1 20.5 Old : 100.0: 20.4 38.3 2.1 60.4 39.2 82.9 79.5: 17.1 20.5 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 94: 20 25 8 35 25 60 53: Old : 94: 20 25 8 35 25 60 53: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 32.1 40.3 44.2 50.5 31.5 38.8 43.4 49.0 Old : 32.1 40.3 44.2 50.5 31.5 38.8 43.4 49.0 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DOW JONES U.S. REAL ESTATE IDX - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-124606 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : ($100 X DJ US REAL ESTATE INDEX) : : : : All : 55,530: 4,555 454 0 46,220 54,199 50,775 54,653: 4,755 877 Old : 55,530: 4,555 454 0 46,220 54,199 50,775 54,653: 4,755 877 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : -2,865: 850 -987 0 -6,323 -1,911 -5,473 -2,898: 2,608 33 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 8.2 0.8 0.0 83.2 97.6 91.4 98.4: 8.6 1.6 Old : 100.0: 8.2 0.8 0.0 83.2 97.6 91.4 98.4: 8.6 1.6 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 28: 5 1 0 15 11 20 12: Old : 28: 5 1 0 15 11 20 12: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 69.8 78.1 81.0 97.3 68.1 72.6 77.5 91.9 Old : 69.8 78.1 81.0 97.3 68.1 72.6 77.5 91.9 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 BLOOMBERG COMMODITY INDEX - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-221602 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : ($100 X INDEX) : : : : All : 27,162: 13,470 26,614 486 12,900 26 26,856 27,126: 306 36 Old : 27,162: 13,470 26,614 486 12,900 26 26,856 27,126: 306 36 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 4,519: 313 4,718 -18 4,179 -190 4,474 4,510: 45 9 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 49.6 98.0 1.8 47.5 0.1 98.9 99.9: 1.1 0.1 Old : 100.0: 49.6 98.0 1.8 47.5 0.1 98.9 99.9: 1.1 0.1 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 37: 13 18 3 5 1 21 19: Old : 37: 13 18 3 5 1 21 19: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 60.4 60.8 88.6 81.5 60.4 60.8 88.6 81.5 Old : 60.4 60.8 88.6 81.5 60.4 60.8 88.6 81.5 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 YEAR DELIVERABLE IR - CHICAGO BOARD OF TRADE Code-246605 Commitments of Traders - Futures Only, June 09, 2020 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Total : Reportable Positions : Nonreportable :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Positions : Open : Non-Commercial : Commercial : Total : : Interest : Long : Short : Spreading: Long : Short : Long : Short : Long : Short ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : (NOTIONAL VALUE OF $100,000) : : : : All : 106,406: 9,402 21,738 57,117 39,870 26,926 106,389 105,781: 17 625 Old : 106,406: 9,402 21,738 57,117 39,870 26,926 106,389 105,781: 17 625 Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 : : : : : Changes in Commitments from: June 2, 2020 : : 20,837: 3,646 7,534 3,911 13,283 9,134 20,840 20,579: -3 258 : : : : : Percent of Open Interest Represented by Each Category of Trader : All : 100.0: 8.8 20.4 53.7 37.5 25.3 100.0 99.4: 0.0 0.6 Old : 100.0: 8.8 20.4 53.7 37.5 25.3 100.0 99.4: 0.0 0.6 Other: 100.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 : : : :# Traders : Number of Traders in Each Category : All : 22: 7 6 2 5 7 14 13: Old : 22: 7 6 2 5 7 14 13: Other: 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : Percent of Open Interest Held by the Indicated Number of the Largest Traders : By Gross Position By Net Position : 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders 4 or Less Traders 8 or Less Traders : Long: Short Long Short: Long Short Long Short :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All : 94.1 94.2 99.3 98.1 35.3 32.3 38.0 36.1 Old : 94.1 94.2 99.3 98.1 35.3 32.3 38.0 36.1 Other: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ``` ---- Updated June 12, 2020
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.southcom.mil/News/PressReleases/Year/2019/Month/9/index.html.json	An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Official websites use .mil A .mil website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States. Secure .mil websites use HTTPS A lock (lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Skip to main content (Press Enter). U.S. Southern Command Search Search Search - Home - About - About Main - Area of Responsibility - Leadership - SOUTHCOM Components and Units - History - SOUTHCOM Inspector General - Commander's Priorities - Commander's Priorities Main - Strengthen Partnerships - Theater Maintenance Partnership Initiative (TMPI) - Counter Threats - Build Our Team - Media - Media Main - News - Press Releases - Photos - Videos - Speeches \| Transcripts - SOUTHCOM Podcast - USAG-M / Military-Family Services - U.S. Army Garrison-Miami - Equal Employment Opportunity Office - Overview of Services at SOUTHCOM - About the SOUTHCOM Installation and Local Community - Miami Family and MWR - Army Community Services - Child, Youth and School Services - Leisure Travel Services - Fitness Center - Visiting SOUTHCOM - Army Health Clinic SOUTHCOM - Hurricane Preparedness Info - Conference Center of the Americas - Theater Clearance Info - SOUTHCOM Chaplain - TEAM SOUTHCOM - Total Engagement for All Members of U.S. Southern Command - Logistics Readiness Center-Miami - Public Notice – Environmental Assessment for the Construction of a Military Housing Development - SHARP (SAPR) - Newcomers - Newcomers Main - Sponsor Request - Directions to SOUTHCOM - Army Newcomers - Navy Newcomers - Air Force Newcomers - Marine Corps Newcomers - Coast Guard Newcomers - Reserve Newcomers - Civilian Newcomers - Contractor Newcomers - Family Member Newcomers - Newcomers to Overseas Locations in SOUTHCOM - Work With Us - Employment \| Careers - Public / Private Cooperation - Operational Contract Support - SOUTHCOM Industry Engagement - FOIA - FOIA Main - How to file A FOIA Request - FOIA Fees and Exemptions - Your FOIA Rights - FOIA Reading Room - Contact - Contact SOUTHCOM - Community Requests - FAQ - Contact SOUTHCOM Inspector General - Directions to SOUTHCOM HomeMediaPress Releases Sept. 13, 2019 National Guard Leaders Discuss Western Hemisphere Partnerships Sept. 12, 2019 SOUTHCOM Announces Findings of Investigation on Former GTMO Commander April 2024 (1)March 2024 (3)February 2024 (1)August 2023 (1)March 2023 (1)December 2022 (2)November 2022 (1)October 2022 (1)August 2022 (1)March 2022 (1)February 2022 (1)October 2021 (1)August 2021 (2)July 2021 (1)June 2021 (2)April 2021 (1)January 2021 (1)December 2020 (1)November 2020 (3)September 2020 (2)August 2020 (2)July 2020 (2)June 2020 (3)May 2020 (2)March 2020 (3)January 2020 (1)December 2019 (1)November 2019 (1)September 2019 (2)July 2019 (2)June 2019 (3)May 2019 (6)April 2019 (2)February 2019 (1)January 2019 (1)November 2018 (1)October 2018 (1)August 2018 (3)July 2018 (1)June 2018 (3)April 2018 (1)March 2018 (1)February 2018 (1)December 2017 (1)November 2017 (5)October 2017 (1)September 2017 (5)June 2017 (2)April 2017 (1)March 2017 (1)February 2017 (1)October 2016 (16)July 2016 (1)June 2016 (1) ## COMMANDER'S PRIORITIES Strengthen Partnerships Counter Threats Build Our Team ## LATEST FROM SOUTHCOM USSPACECOM advances space partnerships in South America as part of Space Symposium 39 international engagements ---- USSPACECOM, Brazilian Air Force Sign Liaison Officer Agreement ---- USSPACECOM and Uruguayan Air Force Sign Space Situational Awareness Information Sharing Agreement ---- USS Leyte Gulf Takes Down Semi-Submersible Vessel ### Stay Connected ## QUICK LINKS Defense.gov \| Contact Us \| SOUTHCOM FAQ \| DVIDS \| USA.Gov \| Available Jobs within DoD \| Privacy and Security \| DoD Privacy Program \| Links Disclaimer \| DoD Inspector General \| SOUTHCOM Inspector General \| DoD Section 508 \| Join the Military \| DoD Web Policies \| No FEAR Act  \| DoD Resources \|  DoD FOIA \| SOUTHCOM FOIA \| Plain Writing Act ## SOUTHCOM COMPONENTS 12th Air Force / Air Forces Southern ---- U.S. Army South ---- U.S. Marine Corps Forces, South ----   U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command /U.S. 4th Fleet ---- Special Operations Command South   ## SOUTHCOM TASK FORCES Joint Task Force-Bravo ---- Joint Task Force-Guantanamo ---- Joint Interagency Task Force South ---- ## DIRECT REPORTING UNITS - Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation - Naval Small Craft Instruction & Technical Training School - Inter American Air Forces Academy ## SOUTHCOM ACCESS ### PORTALS & COLLABORATIVE SITES: - Webmail - CAC Access - Microsoft Office Home - CAC Access - Telework Access for SOUTHCOM Personnel - NIPR/Internal Portals - APAN (All Partners Access Network) ### SITES OF INTEREST: - Theater Clearance Info - Army Health Clinic SOUTHCOM - Conference Center of the Americas   ### EQUAL OPPORTUNITY (EO) OFFICE: 305-437-0261 ### EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY (EEO) OFFICE: 305-437-1826   SOUTHCOM SHARP Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
text/markdown	1.89223	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/CRI/CRI-1983/CRI-1983-SU-KOK-D-AND-GRACE/txt.json	SU, KOK D. AND GRACE Bills and resolutions Relief (see S. 1494) Texts of S. 1494, relief, 34299 [18NO]
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.whitehouse.gov/es/iga/index.html.json	# Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales   La Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales está dedicada a involucrar a los gobiernos estatales, locales y tribales, además de los funcionarios electos en Puerto Rico y comunidades isleñas, para abordar los problemas más apremiantes que afectan al país y comunidades. El presidente Biden ha nombrado a Julie Chavez Rodriguez para servir como directora de la Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales. Julie lidera un equipo que incluye exfuncionarios electos en oficinas gubernamentales estatales y locales, organizaciones sin fines de lucro y asociaciones intergubernamentales, y en administraciones anteriores. Regístrate aquí para recibir actualizaciones de la Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales, así como actualizaciones de la Casa Blanca, del presidente y de la vicepresidenta. Regístrate aquí para las llamadas semanales de la Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales los jueves a las 4:00 p.m. ET. Para comunicarse con la Oficina de Asuntos Intergubernamentales, envía un correo electrónico a IGA46@who.eop.gov ## Mantente informado Nos comunicaremos con la información más reciente sobre cómo el presidente Biden y su administración trabajan por el pueblo estadounidense y le haremos saber de qué maneras puede usted involucrarse y ayudar a nuestro país a reconstruirse. Seleccione para enviar y recibir mensajes de texto del presidente Biden. - Compartir esta página en Facebook - Share this page on X - https://www.whitehouse.gov/es/iga/?utm_source=link
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/bulletins/2010/b10-02.pdf.json	### EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503 THE DIRECTOR ### December 1, 2009 OMB BULLETIN NO. 10-02 TO THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS SUBJECT: Update of Statistical Area Definitions and Guidance on Their Uses 1. Purpose: This bulletin, which includes an attachment and an appendix, updat es and supersedes OMB Bulletin No. 09-01, issued on November 20, 2008 . The attachment to the bulletin provides detailed information on the update of statistical areas since that time. The bulletin also provides guidance to Federal agencies that use the d efinitions of these statistical areas for program administrative and fund allocation purposes. 2. Background: Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(3) and 31 U.S.C. 1104(d) and Executive Order No. 10253 (June 11, 1951), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) def ines Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical Areas, and New England City and Town Areas for use in Federal statistical activities. 3. Update of Statistical Areas: This bulletin provides the definitions of al l Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical Areas, and New England City and Town Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico based on the standards published on December 27, 2000, in the Federal Register (65 FR 82228 - 82238) and Census 2000 data as well as Census Bureau population estimates for 2007 and 2008. The attachment provides details on the updates to the statistical areas, principal cities, and area titles to reflect changes in popu lation estimates . The appendix to this bulletin provides complete lists of all statistical areas that are recognized under the standards. This will be the final update of the statistical areas prior to the 2010 Census of Population and Housing. 4. Eff ective Date: The changes to the statistical areas contained in the attachment take effect immediately. 5. Guidance on Uses of Statistical Area Definitions : All agencies that conduct statistical activities to collect and publish data for Metropolit an, Micropolitan, and Combined Statistical Areas, and New England City and Town Areas should use the most recent definitions of these areas established by OMB. OMB establishes and maintains the definitions of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area s, Combined Statistical Areas, and New England City and Town Areas solely for statistical purposes. This classification is intended to provide nationally consistent definitions for collecting, tabulating, and publishing Federal statistics for a set of geo graphic areas. The Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards do not equate to an urban- rural classification; many counties included in Metropolitan and Micropolitan ### Statistical Areas, and many other counties, contain both urban and rural t erritory and populations. Nonstatistical Program Uses of the Statistical Area Definitions: In periodically reviewing and revising the definitions of these areas, OMB does not take into account or attempt to anticipate any nonstatistical uses that may be made of the definitions, nor will OMB modify the definitions to meet the requirements of any nonstatistical program. Thus, OMB cautions that Metropolitan Statistical Area and Micropolitan Statistical Area definitions should not be used to develop and i mplement Federal, state, and local nonstatistical programs and policies without full consideration of the effects of using these definitions for such purposes. These areas are not intended to serve as a general -purpose geographic framework for nonstatisti cal activities, and they may or may not be suitable for use in program funding formulas. OMB recognizes that some legislation specifies the use of Metropolitan Statistical Areas for program purposes, including the allocation of Federal funds, and will continue to work with the Congress to clarify the foundations of these definitions and the resultant, often unintended consequences of their use for nonstatistical purposes. In cases where there is no statutory requirement and an agency elects to use the Metropolitan, Micropolitan, or Combined Statistical Area definitions in nonstatistical programs, it is the sponsoring agency's responsibility to ensure that the definitions are appropriate for such use. When an agency is publishing for comment a proposed regulation that would use the definitions for a nonstatistical purpose, the agency should seek public comment on the proposed use. An agency using the statistical definitions in a nonstatistical program may modify the definitions, but only for the purposes of that program. In such cases, any modifications should be clearly identified as deviations from the OMB statistical area definitions in order to avoid confusion with OMB’s official definitions of Metropolitan, Micropolitan, and Combined Statistical Areas. Federal agencies that use the statistical area definitions for nonstatistical program purposes should note that the 2000 standards changed the terminology used for classifying the areas. Under the 1980 and 1990 standards there were two types of areas: (1) Metropolitan Statistical Areas and (2) Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas that consisted of Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas. The terms “Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area” and “Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area” are now obsolete. Under the 2000 standards, “Metropolitan Statistical Area” and “Micropolitan Statistical Area” are the terms used for the basic set of county - based areas defined under this classification. In addition, the term “Metropolitan Division” is u sed to refer to a county or group of counties within a Metropolitan Statistical Area that has a population core of at least 2.5 million. A Metropolitan Division is most generally comparable in concept, and equivalent to, the now obsolete Primary Metropoli tan Statistical Area. ### While a Metropolitan Division is a subdivision of a larger Metropolitan Statistical Area, it often functions as a distinct social, economic, and cultural area within the larger region. Metropolitan Divisions retain their separate statistical identities. Federal agencies will continue to provide detailed data for each Metropolitan Division, just as they did in the past for the Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas. If Federal agencies had been using the Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas for program administrative and fund allocation purposes, they should now consider using the Metropolitan Division definitions, the comparable geographic units of the classification based on the 2000 standards. Research and analyses that previously used data for Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas should now use data for Metropolitan Divisions. Data users and analysts interested in demographic and economic patterns, trends, and processes within large Metropolitan Statistical Areas should consider data for specific Metropolitan Divisions when conducting analyses. Users making comparisons with areas defined under the 1990 standards should note that when the 2000 standards were applied, the result, in some cases, was to create several are as from an existing Metropolitan Statistical Area. The resulting reconfigured areas may also qualify under the 2000 standards to form a complementary Combined Statistical Area, while retaining their separate designations as Metropolitan or Micropolitan St atistical Areas. In these situations, the Combined Statistical Area may be the approximate geographic equivalent of the previous Metropolitan Statistical Area, and thus may be the more appropriate geographic unit for analytic and program purposes. Fe deral agencies will be making economic and demographic data available for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, New England City and Town Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas. Because of sample sizes and associated data quality and confidentiality issues, there may be instances where agencies will produce data only at the level of Combined Statistical Areas. 6. Availability of Information on Metropolitan, Micropolitan, and Combined Statistical Area and New England City and Town Area Definitions: This bulletin is available from the OMB web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB -- go to “Bulletins” or “Statistical Programs and Standards.” The 2000 Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Are as are available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_statpolicy/ . Historical information about the definitions of the statistical areas is available from the Census Bureau’s web site at http://www.census.gov. ### 7. Inquiries : Inquiries concerning the Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards and the statistical uses of their definitions should be directed to Suzann Evinger (202-395-3093). Inquiries about uses of the statistical area definitions in program administration or regulat ion should be directed to the appropriate agency. Peter R. Orszag AttachmentsOMB Bulletin No. 10 - 02 Attachment UPDATES TO STATISTICAL AREAS This attachment highlights the updates to the statistical areas based on the application of the 2000 Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas to Census Bureau population estimates for July 1, 2007 , and July 1, 2008 . The updates include designation of two micropolitan statistical areas and a combined statistical area as well as identification of changes in principal cities and area titles. T he complete lists of statistical areas incorporating these changes are provided in the appendix to this bulletin. New Micropolitan Statistical Areas with Principal Cities and County Components 1. 31920 Marble Falls, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marble Falls Burnet County 2. 48220 Weatherford, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Weatherford Custer County New Combined Statistical Area 126 Austin - Round Rock - Marble Falls, TX Combined Statistical Ar ea Austin - Round Rock - San Marcos, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Marble Falls, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Changes to Principal Cities and Titles of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Metropolitan Divisions New Principal Cities and, if Applicable, Titles 1. San Marcos, TX qualifies as a new principal city of the Austin - Round Rock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Austin - Round Rock - San Marcos, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area. 2. Delano, CA qualifies as a new principal city of the Bakersfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Bakersfield - Delano, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area. 3. Gulf Shores, AL qualifies as a new principal city of the Daphne - Fairhope - Foley, AL Micropolita n Statistical Area. 4. Conroe, TX qualifies as a new principal city of the Houston - Sugar Land - Baytown, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area. 5. North Port, FL qualifies as a new principal city of the Bradenton - Sarasota - Venice, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: North Port - Bradenton - Sarasota, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. The new code is 35840. 6. Sanford, FL qualifies as a new principal city of the Orlando - Kissimmee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Orlando - Kissimmee - Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. ### 2 7. Glendale, AZ qualifies as a new principal city of the Phoenix - Mesa - Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Phoenix - Mesa - Glendale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area. 8. Palm Desert, CA qualifies as a new principal city of the Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area. 9. New Braunfels, TX qualifies as a new principal city of the San Antonio, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: San Antonio - New Braunfels, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area. 10. Auburn, WA qualifies as a new principal city of the Seattle - Tacoma - Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area. Title Changes Resulting from Changes to the Order of Principal Cities Based on Population 1. Rockville , MD replaces Frederick, MD as the second most populous principal city in the Bethesda Frederick - Rockville, MD Metropolitan Division. New title: Bethesda - Rockville - Frederick, MD Metropolitan Division. 2. Rock Hill, SC replaces Concord, NC as the third most populous principal city in the Charlotte Gastonia - Concord, NC - SC Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Charlotte - Gastonia - Rock Hill, NC - SC. 3a. Joliet, IL replaces Naperville, IL as the second most populous principal city in the Chicago - Nape rville Joliet, IL - IN - WI Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Chicago - Joliet - Naperville, IL - IN - WI Metropolitan Statistical Area. 3b. Joliet, IL replaces Naperville, IL as the second most populous principal city in the Chicago - Naperville Joliet, IL M etropolitan Division. New title: Chicago - Joliet - Naperville, IL Metropolitan Division. 4. Crestview, FL replaces Fort Walton Beach. FL as the most populous principal city in the Fort Walton Beach - Crestview - Destin, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Crestview - Fort Walton Beach - Destin, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area. The new code is 18880. 5. Hillsboro, OR replaces Beaverton, OR as the third most populous principal city in the Portland Vancouver - Beaverton, OR - WA Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Portland - Vancouver - Hillsboro, OR - WA Metropolitan Statistical Area. 6. Steubenville, OH replaces Weirton, WV as the most populous principal city in the Weirton Steubenville, WV - OH Metropolitan Statistical Area. New title: Steubenville - Wei rton, OH - WV Metropolitan Statistical Area. The new code is 44600. Other Changes 1. The name of Canon City, CO, the principal city of the Canon City, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area has been changed to Cañon City. New title: Cañon City, CO Micropolita n Statistical Area. 2. The name of De Ridder, LA, the principal city of the De Ridder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area, as well as a principal city in the Fort Polk South - De Ridder, LA Combined Statistical Area, ha s been changed to DeRidder, LA. The new title of the micropolitan statistical area is DeRidder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area, and the new title of the combined statistical area is Fort Polk South - DeRidder, LA Combined Statistical Area. ### OMB Bulletin No. 10-02 Appendix METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS METROPOLITAN DIVISIONS MICROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS COMBINED STATISTICAL AREAS NEW ENGLAND CITY AND TOWN AREAS COMBINED NEW ENGLAND CITY AND TOWN AREAS Lists 1 through 9 Statistical and Science Policy Branch Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and BudgetMetropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical Areas, New England City and Town Areas, and Combined New England City and Town Areas 1. Brief Overview of the Classification The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published the Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas in a Federal Register Notice (65 FR 82228 - 82238) on December 27, 2000. (The standards are available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_statpolicy /. ) That Notice also provides information on the multi-year public review process that preceded the adoption of the standards, and an explanation of the key terms used in the st andards. The 2000 standards replace and supersede the 1990 standards for defining Metropolitan Areas. OMB’s 2000 standards provide for the identification of the following statistical areas in the United States and Puerto Rico:  Metropolitan Statistical Areas (including Metropolitan Divisions, where applicable)  Micropolitan Statistical Areas  Combined Statistical Areas  New England City and Town Areas (including New England City and Town Area Divisions, where applicable)  Combined New England City and Town Areas Metropolitan Statistical Areas have at least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and ec onomic integration with the core as measured by commuting ties. Micropolitan Statistical Areas – a new set of statistical areas – have at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 populati on, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured by commuting ties. Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas are defined in terms of whole counties (or equivalent entities), including in the six New England States. If t he specified criteria are met, a Metropolitan Statistical Area containing a single core with a population of 2.5 million or more may be subdivided to form smaller groupings of counties referred to as Metropolitan Divisions. The classification includes about 94 percent of t he U.S. population – about 84 percent in metropolitan statistical areas and about 10 percent in micropolitan statistical areas. Of 3,142 counties in the United States, 1,100 will be in the 366 metropolitan statistical areas in the United States and 688 counties will be in the 576 micropolitan statistical areas (1,354 counties will remain outside the classification). (Under the 1990 standards, the classification as of June 1999 included 847 metropolitan counties and about 80 percent of the U.S. population.) In view of the importance of cities and town in New England, the 2000 standards also provide for a set of geographic areas that are defined using cities a nd towns in the six New England states. The New England City and Town Areas (NECTAs) are defined using the same criteria as Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and are identified as either metropolitan or micropolitan, based, respectively, on the presence of either an urbaniz ed area of 50,000 or more population or an urban cluster of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 population. If the specified criteria are met, a New England City and Town Area containing a single core with a p opulation of at least 2.5 million may be subdivided to form smaller groupings of cities and towns referred to as New England City and Town Area Divisions. If specified criteria are met, adjacent Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, in various combinations, may become the components of a new set of complementary areas called Combined Statistical Areas. For instance, a Combined Statis tical Area may comprise two or more Metropolitan Statistical Areas, a Metropolitan Statistical Area and a Micropolitan Statistical Area, two or more Micropolitan Statistical Areas, or multiple Metropolit an and Micropolitan Statistical Areas that have social and economic ties as measured by commuting, but at lower levels than are found among counties within Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas. The geographic components of Combined New England City and Town Areas are individual metropolitan and micropolitan NECTAs, in various combinations. The areas that combine retain their own designations as Metropolitan or Micropolitan Statistical Areas (or ### 2NECTAs) within the larger Combined Statistical Area (or Combined NECTA). Combinations for adjacent areas with an employment interchange of 25 or more are automatic. Combinations for adjacent areas with an employment interchange of at least 15 but less than 25 are based on local opinion as expressed through the Congressional delegations. Combined Stat istical Areas can be characterized as representing larger regions that reflect broader social and econom ic interactions, such as wholesaling, commodity distribution, and weekend recreation activities, and are likely to be of considerable interest to regional authorities and the private sector. OMB’s standards provide for the ident ification of one or more principal cities within each Metropolitan Statistical Area, Micropolitan Statistical Area, and NE CTA. (The term “principal city” replaces “central city,” the term used in previous standards.) Prin cipal cities encompass both incorporated places and census designated places (CDPs). The decision to identify CDPs as principal cities represents a break with practice in previous standards that (with some exceptions) limited potential c entral city identification to incorporated places. In addition to identifying the more significant places in each Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area or NECTA in terms of population and employment, principal cities also are used in titling Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Combined Statistical Areas, NECTAs, NECTA Divisions, and Combined NECTAs. The geographic components of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Metropolitan Divisions are counties and equivalent entities (boroughs and census areas in Alaska, parishes in Louisiana, municipios in Puerto Rico, and independent cities in Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia). The counties and equivalent entities used in the definit ions of the Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas are those that were in existence as of January 1, 2008. The 2000 standards do not provide for the categorization of the areas based on total population comparable to Levels A – D under the 1990 standards. This appendix includes the following nine lists that provide information on the statistical areas that are recognized under the 2000 standards using data from Census 2000 and Census Bureau population estimates for 2007 and 2008:  List 1 is an alphabetical list by title of 955 Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Micropolitan Statistical Areas.  List 2 provides titles, definitions, principal ci ties, and Metropolitan Divisions for 374 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (366 in the United States and 8 in Puerto Rico).  List 3 provides titles, codes, and definitions for the 29 Metropolitan Divisions within their respective Metropolitan Statistical Areas.  List 4 presents the titles, definitions, and princi pal cities for 581 Micropolitan Statistical Areas (576 in the United States and 5 in Puerto Rico). The two new Micropolitan Statistical Areas are identified on the list.  List 5 identifies 128 Combined Statistical Areas and their 358 component Metropolitan and/or Micropolitan Statistical Areas. One new Combined Statistical Area is identified in the list.  List 6 identifies in each state the Metropo litan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas.  List 7 provides titles, definitions, principal cities, and New England City and Town Area Divisions for 43 New England City and Town Areas. ### 3 List 8 provides titles and definitions for 10 Co mbined New England City and Town Areas and their 27 component New England City and Town Areas.  List 9 identifies in each state the New Engl and City and Town Areas, the New England City and Town Area Divisions, and the Combined New England City and Town Areas. 2. Guidance on Presenting Data for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Combined Statistical Areas, NECTAs, NECTA Divisions, and Combined NECTAs Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas repr esent the basic set of county based areas defined under this classification. If specified criteria are met, Metropolitan Divisions are defined within Metropolitan Statistical Areas that have a single core with a population of at least 2.5 million. Not all Metropolitan Statistical Areas with ur banized areas of this size will c ontain Metropolitan Divisions. The criteria used to determine what counties are included in a Metropolitan Statistical Area are different from the criteria that are used to group counties in Metropolitan Divisions, which represent the subdivisions of (larger) Metropolitan Statistical Areas. As a result, it is generally not appropriate to rank or directly compare Metropolitan Divisions (or NECTA Divisions) with Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (or Metropolitan and Micropolitan NECTAs). However, because of the large population concentrations represented by Metropolitan Divisions, it may be des irable for some analyses, for example, to include Metropolitan Divisions in a table in which Metropolitan Statistical Areas are ranked. It would, of course, be appropriate to rank and compare Metropolitan Divisions. Even though Metropolitan Divisions represent subdivisions of (larger) Metropolitan Statis tical Areas, they often function as distinct areas within Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Resear chers analyzing demographic and economic patterns, trends, and processes within large Metropolitan Statisti cal Areas should also take into consideration data for specific Metropolitan Divisions. Research and an alyses that previously made use of data for Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas should now us e data for Metropolitan Divisions. Because Combined Statistical Areas represent grou pings of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (in any combination), they should not be rank ed or compared with individual Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas. Because Combined New England City and Town Areas (NECTAs) represent groupings of Metropolitan and Micropolitan NECTAs (in any combination), they should not be ranked or compared with individual Metropolitan and Micropolitan NECTAs. 3. Codes for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistica l Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Combined Statistical Areas, New England City and Town Areas (NEC TAs), NECTA Divisions, and Combined NECTAs Codes for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Ar eas, Metropolitan Divisions, NECTAs, and NECTA Divisions will be 5 digits in length. This replaces t he 4-digit code previously used. Codes for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Metropolitan Divisions fall within the 10000 to 49999 range and are assigned in alphabetical order by area title. Metr opolitan Divisions are distinguished by a 5-digit code ending in “4.” NECTA and NECTA Division codes fall within the 70000 to 79999 range and are assigned in alphabetical order by ar ea title. NECTA Divisions will be distinguished by a 5-digit code ending in “4.” Combined Statistical Area and Combined NECTA codes will be 3 digits in length. Combined Statistical Area codes will fall within the 100 to 599 range. Combined NECTA codes will fall within the 700 to 799 range. ### 4List 1 Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas This list provides an alphabetical list by title of all 955 Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas. The code for each Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statis tical Area also is provided. The two new Micropolitan Statistical Areas are shown in bold print. Code Metropolitan or Micropolitan Statistical Area Title 10020 Abbeville, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 10100 Aberdeen, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 10140 Aberdeen, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 10180 Abilene, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 10220 Ada, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 10260 Adjuntas, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 10300 Adrian, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10380 Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastián, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 10420 Akron, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 10460 Alamogordo, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 10500 Albany, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 10540 Albany-Lebanon, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 10580 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 10620 Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 10660 Albert Lea, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 10700 Albertville, AL Micro politan Statistical Area 10740 Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 10760 Alexander City, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 10780 Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 10820 Alexandria, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 10860 Alice, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 10880 Allegan, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10900 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA- NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 10940 Alma, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10980 Alpena, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 11020 Altoona, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 11060 Altus, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 11100 Amarillo, TX Metrop olitan Statistical Area 11140 Americus, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 11180 Ames, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 11220 Amsterdam, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 11260 Anchorage, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area 11300 Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 11340 Anderson, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 11380 Andrews, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 11420 Angola, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 11460 Ann Arbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 11500 Anniston-Oxford, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 11540 Appleton, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 11580 Arcadia, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 11620 Ardmore, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 11660 Arkadelphia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 11700 Asheville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 511740 Ashland, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 11780 Ashtabula, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 11820 Astoria, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 11860 Atchison, KS Micropo litan Statistical Area 11900 Athens, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 11940 Athens, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 11980 Athens, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 12020 Athens-Clarke County, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12060 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12100 Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 12140 Auburn, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 12180 Auburn, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 12220 Auburn-Opelika, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 12260 Augusta-Richmond County, GA-S C Metropolitan Statistical Area 12300 Augusta-Waterville, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area 12380 Austin, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 12420 Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos , TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 12460 Bainbridge, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 12540 Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12580 Baltimore-Towson, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 12620 Bangor, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 12660 Baraboo, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 12700 Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12740 Barre, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area 12780 Bartlesville, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 12820 Bastrop, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 12860 Batavia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 12900 Batesville, AR Microp olitan Statistical Area 12940 Baton Rouge, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12980 Battle Creek, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 13020 Bay City, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 13060 Bay City, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 13100 Beatrice, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 13140 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 13180 Beaver Dam, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 13220 Beckley, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 13260 Bedford, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 13300 Beeville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 13340 Bellefontaine, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 13380 Bellingham, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 13420 Bemidji, MN Micropo litan Statistical Area 13460 Bend, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 13500 Bennettsville, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 13540 Bennington, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area 13620 Berlin, NH-VT Micropo litan Statistical Area 13660 Big Rapids, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 13700 Big Spring, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 13740 Billings, MT Metrop olitan Statistical Area 13780 Binghamton, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 13820 Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 13860 Bishop, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 13900 Bismarck, ND Metropolitan Statistical Area 13940 Blackfoot, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 13980 Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radfor d, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 14020 Bloomington, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 14060 Bloomington-Normal, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 614100 Bloomsburg-Berwick, PA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 14140 Bluefield, WV-VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 14180 Blytheville, AR Microp olitan Statistical Area 14220 Bogalusa, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 14260 Boise City-Nampa, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 14300 Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14340 Boone, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 14380 Boone, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 14420 Borger, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14460 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA -NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 14500 Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 14540 Bowling Green, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 14580 Bozeman, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 14620 Bradford, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 14660 Brainerd, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 14700 Branson, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 14740 Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 14780 Brenham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14820 Brevard, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 14860 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 14940 Brigham City, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area 15020 Brookhaven, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 15060 Brookings, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 15100 Brookings, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 15140 Brownsville, TN Micr opolitan Statistical Area 15180 Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 15220 Brownwood, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 15260 Brunswick, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 15340 Bucyrus, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 15380 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 15420 Burley, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 15460 Burlington, IA-IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 15500 Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 15540 Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area 15580 Butte-Silver Bow, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 15620 Cadillac, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 15660 Calhoun, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 15700 Cambridge, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 15740 Cambridge, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 15780 Camden, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 15820 Campbellsville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 15860 Cañon City, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 15900 Canton, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 15940 Canton-Massillon, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 15980 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 16020 Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO -IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 16060 Carbondale, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 16100 Carlsbad-Artesia, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 16180 Carson City, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 16220 Casper, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area 16260 Cedar City, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area 16300 Cedar Rapids, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 16340 Cedartown, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 16380 Celina, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 16420 Central City, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 16460 Centralia, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 716500 Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 16540 Chambersburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 16580 Champaign-Urbana, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 16620 Charleston, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 16660 Charleston-Mattoon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 16700 Charleston-North Charleston-Summer ville, SC Metropolit an Statistical Area 16740 Charlotte-Gastonia- Rock Hill, NC-SC Metrop olitan Statistical Area 16820 Charlottesville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 16860 Chattanooga, TN-GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 16900 Chester, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 16940 Cheyenne, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-I N-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 17020 Chico, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 17060 Chillicothe, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 17140 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 17200 Claremont, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 17220 Clarksburg, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 17260 Clarksdale, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17300 Clarksville, TN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 17340 Clearlake, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 17380 Cleveland, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17420 Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 17460 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 17500 Clewiston, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 17540 Clinton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 17580 Clovis, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 17620 Coamo, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 17660 Coeur d'Alene, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 17700 Coffeyville, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17740 Coldwater, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 17780 College Station-Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 17820 Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 17860 Columbia, MO Metrop olitan Statistical Area 17900 Columbia, SC Metro politan Statistical Area 17940 Columbia, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 17980 Columbus, GA-AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 18020 Columbus, IN Metropo litan Statistical Area 18060 Columbus, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 18100 Columbus, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 18140 Columbus, OH Metro politan Statistical Area 18180 Concord, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 18220 Connersville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 18260 Cookeville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 18300 Coos Bay, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 18340 Corbin, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 18380 Cordele, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 18420 Corinth, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 18460 Cornelia, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 18500 Corning, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 18580 Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 18620 Corsicana, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 18660 Cortland, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 18700 Corvallis, OR Metr opolitan Statistical Area 18740 Coshocton, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 18820 Crawfordsville, IN Micr opolitan Statistical Area 18860 Crescent City, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 818880 Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Dest in, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 18900 Crossville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 18940 Crowley, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 18980 Cullman, AL Micropo litan Statistical Area 19020 Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 19060 Cumberland, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 19100 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 19140 Dalton, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 19180 Danville, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19220 Danville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 19260 Danville, VA Metropo litan Statistical Area 19300 Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 19340 Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19380 Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 19460 Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19500 Decatur, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19540 Decatur, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 19580 Defiance, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 19620 Del Rio, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 19660 Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19700 Deming, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 19740 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 19760 DeRidder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 19780 Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 19820 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 19860 Dickinson, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 19900 Dillon, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 19940 Dixon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 19980 Dodge City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 20020 Dothan, AL Metropo litan Statistical Area 20060 Douglas, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20100 Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area 20140 Dublin, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20180 DuBois, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20220 Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 20260 Duluth, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 20300 Dumas, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20340 Duncan, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 20380 Dunn, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 20420 Durango, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 20460 Durant, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 20500 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 20540 Dyersburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 20580 Eagle Pass, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20620 East Liverpool-Salem, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 20660 Easton, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 20700 East Stroudsburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20740 Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 20780 Edwards, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 20820 Effingham, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 20900 El Campo, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20940 El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 20980 El Dorado, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 21020 Elizabeth City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 21060 Elizabethtown, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 921120 Elk City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 21140 Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 21220 Elko, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 21260 Ellensburg, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 21300 Elmira, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 21340 El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 21380 Emporia, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 21420 Enid, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 21460 Enterprise-Ozark, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 21500 Erie, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 21540 Escanaba, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 21580 Espanola, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 21640 Eufaula, AL-GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 21660 Eugene-Springfield, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 21700 Eureka-Arcata-Fortuna, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 21740 Evanston, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 21780 Evansville, IN-KY Metr opolitan Statistical Area 21820 Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area 21860 Fairmont, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 21900 Fairmont, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 21940 Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 21980 Fallon, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 22020 Fargo, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 22060 Faribault-Northfield, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 22100 Farmington, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22140 Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 22180 Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 22220 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 22260 Fergus Falls, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 22280 Fernley, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 22300 Findlay, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 22340 Fitzgerald, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 22380 Flagstaff, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 22420 Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 22500 Florence, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 22520 Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 22540 Fond du Lac, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 22580 Forest City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 22620 Forrest City, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 22660 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 22700 Fort Dodge, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 22780 Fort Leonard Wood, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22800 Fort Madison-Keokuk, IA-MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22820 Fort Morgan, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22840 Fort Payne, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 22860 Fort Polk South, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 22900 Fort Smith, AR-OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 22980 Fort Valley, GA Micr opolitan Statistical Area 23060 Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 23140 Frankfort, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 23180 Frankfort, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 23240 Fredericksburg, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 23300 Freeport, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 23340 Fremont, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 23380 Fremont, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 23420 Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 1023460 Gadsden, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 23500 Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 23540 Gainesville, FL Metrop olitan Statistical Area 23580 Gainesville, GA Metr opolitan Statistical Area 23620 Gainesville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 23660 Galesburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 23700 Gallup, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 23780 Garden City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 23820 Gardnerville Ranchos, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 23860 Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 23900 Gettysburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 23940 Gillette, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 23980 Glasgow, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 24020 Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 24100 Gloversville, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 24140 Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 24180 Granbury, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 24220 Grand Forks, ND-MN Me tropolitan Statistical Area 24260 Grand Island, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 24300 Grand Junction, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 24340 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 24380 Grants, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 24420 Grants Pass, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 24460 Great Bend, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24500 Great Falls, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area 24540 Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 24580 Green Bay, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 24620 Greeneville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 24660 Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 24700 Greensburg, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 24740 Greenville, MS Microp olitan Statistical Area 24780 Greenville, NC Metro politan Statistical Area 24820 Greenville, OH Microp olitan Statistical Area 24860 Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 24900 Greenwood, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24940 Greenwood, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 24980 Grenada, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 25020 Guayama, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 25060 Gulfport-Biloxi, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 25100 Guymon, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 25180 Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD -WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 25220 Hammond, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 25260 Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 25300 Hannibal, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 25340 Harriman, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 25380 Harrisburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 25420 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 25460 Harrison, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 25500 Harrisonburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 25540 Hartford-West Hartfo rd-East Hartford, CT Metr opolitan Statistical Area 25580 Hastings, NE Micropo litan Statistical Area 25620 Hattiesburg, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 25660 Havre, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 25700 Hays, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 25720 Heber, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area 25740 Helena, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 1125760 Helena-West Helena, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 25780 Henderson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 25820 Hereford, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 25860 Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 25900 Hilo, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area 25940 Hilton Head Island-Beaufort, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 25980 Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 26020 Hobbs, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 26100 Holland-Grand Haven, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 26140 Homosassa Springs, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 26180 Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area 26220 Hood River, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 26260 Hope, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 26300 Hot Springs, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 26340 Houghton, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 26380 Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 26420 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 26460 Hudson, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 26480 Humboldt, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26500 Huntingdon, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 26540 Huntington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26580 Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 26620 Huntsville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 26660 Huntsville, TX Microp olitan Statistical Area 26700 Huron, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 26740 Hutchinson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 26780 Hutchinson, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26820 Idaho Falls, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 26860 Indiana, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 26900 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 26940 Indianola, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 26980 Iowa City, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 27020 Iron Mountain, MI-WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 27060 Ithaca, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 27100 Jackson, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 27140 Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 27180 Jackson, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 27220 Jackson, WY-ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 27260 Jacksonville, FL Metr opolitan Statistical Area 27300 Jacksonville, IL Micro politan Statistical Area 27340 Jacksonville, NC Metrop olitan Statistical Area 27380 Jacksonville, TX Micr opolitan Statistical Area 27420 Jamestown, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 27460 Jamestown-Dunkirk-Fredonia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 27500 Janesville, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 27540 Jasper, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 27580 Jayuya, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 27620 Jefferson City, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 27660 Jennings, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 27700 Jesup, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 27740 Johnson City, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 27780 Johnstown, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 27860 Jonesboro, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 27900 Joplin, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 27940 Juneau, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area 27980 Kahului-Wailuku, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 1228020 Kalamazoo-Portage, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 28060 Kalispell, MT Micropo litan Statistical Area 28100 Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 28140 Kansas City, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 28180 Kapaa, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area 28260 Kearney, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 28300 Keene, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 28340 Kendallville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 28380 Kennett, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 28420 Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 28500 Kerrville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 28540 Ketchikan, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area 28580 Key West, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 28620 Kill Devil Hills, NC Micr opolitan Statistical Area 28660 Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 28700 Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN -VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 28740 Kingston, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 28780 Kingsville, TX Micro politan Statistical Area 28820 Kinston, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 28860 Kirksville, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 28900 Klamath Falls, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 28940 Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 28980 Kodiak, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area 29020 Kokomo, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 29060 Laconia, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 29100 La Crosse, WI-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 29140 Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 29180 Lafayette, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 29220 La Follette, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 29260 La Grande, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 29300 LaGrange, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 29340 Lake Charles, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 29380 Lake City, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 29420 Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 29460 Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 29500 Lamesa, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 29540 Lancaster, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 29580 Lancaster, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 29620 Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 29660 Laramie, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 29700 Laredo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 29740 Las Cruces, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 29780 Las Vegas, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 29820 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 29860 Laurel, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 29900 Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 29940 Lawrence, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 29980 Lawrenceburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 30020 Lawton, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 30060 Lebanon, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 30100 Lebanon, NH-VT Micropolitan Statistical Area 30140 Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 30220 Levelland, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 30260 Lewisburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 1330280 Lewisburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 30300 Lewiston, ID-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 30340 Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 30380 Lewistown, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 30420 Lexington, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 30460 Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 30500 Lexington Park, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 30580 Liberal, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 30620 Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 30660 Lincoln, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 30700 Lincoln, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area 30740 Lincolnton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 30780 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conwa y, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 30820 Lock Haven, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 30860 Logan, UT-ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 30900 Logansport, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 30940 London, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 30980 Longview, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 31020 Longview, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31060 Los Alamos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 31100 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31140 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY- IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 31180 Lubbock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 31260 Lufkin, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 31300 Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 31340 Lynchburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31380 Macomb, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 31420 Macon, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31460 Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31500 Madison, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 31540 Madison, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 31580 Madisonville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 31620 Magnolia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 31660 Malone, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 31700 Manchester-Nashua, NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 31740 Manhattan, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 31820 Manitowoc, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 31860 Mankato-North Mankato, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 31900 Mansfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 31920 Marble Falls, TX Micr opolitan Statistical Area 31940 Marinette, WI-MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 31980 Marion, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 32020 Marion, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 32060 Marion-Herrin, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 32100 Marquette, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 32140 Marshall, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 32180 Marshall, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 32220 Marshall, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 32260 Marshalltown, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 32270 Marshfield-Wisconsin Rapids, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 32280 Martin, TN Micro politan Statistical Area 32300 Martinsville, VA Microp olitan Statistical Area 32340 Maryville, MO Micro politan Statistical Area 32380 Mason City, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 32420 Mayagüez, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 32460 Mayfield, KY Micropo litan Statistical Area ### 1432500 Maysville, KY Micro politan Statistical Area 32540 McAlester, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 32580 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 32620 McComb, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 32660 McMinnville, TN Micr opolitan Statistical Area 32700 McPherson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 32740 Meadville, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 32780 Medford, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 32820 Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 32860 Menomonie, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 32900 Merced, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 32940 Meridian, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 32980 Merrill, WI Micro politan Statistical Area 33020 Mexico, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 33060 Miami, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 33100 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 33140 Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 33180 Middlesborough, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 33220 Midland, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 33260 Midland, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 33300 Milledgeville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 33340 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 33380 Minden, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 33420 Mineral Wells, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 33460 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 33500 Minot, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 33540 Missoula, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area 33580 Mitchell, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 33620 Moberly, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 33660 Mobile, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 33700 Modesto, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 33740 Monroe, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 33780 Monroe, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 33820 Monroe, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 33860 Montgomery, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 33940 Montrose, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 33980 Morehead City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 34020 Morgan City, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34060 Morgantown, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 34100 Morristown, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 34140 Moscow, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 34180 Moses Lake, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34220 Moultrie, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34260 Mountain Home, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 34300 Mountain Home, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 34340 Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 34380 Mount Pleasant, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 34420 Mount Pleasant, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 34460 Mount Sterling, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 34500 Mount Vernon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 34540 Mount Vernon, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 34580 Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 34620 Muncie, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 34660 Murray, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 34700 Muscatine, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34740 Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 1534780 Muskogee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 34820 Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach- Conway, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 34860 Nacogdoches, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 34900 Napa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 34940 Naples-Marco Island, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 34980 Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—Frank lin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 35020 Natchez, MS-LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35060 Natchitoches, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35100 New Bern, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 35140 Newberry, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 35220 New Castle, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 35260 New Castle, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35300 New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 35340 New Iberia, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35380 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 35420 New Philadelphia-Dover, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 35460 Newport, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 35500 Newton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35580 New Ulm, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 35620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isl and, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 35660 Niles-Benton Harbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 35700 Nogales, AZ Micropo litan Statistical Area 35740 Norfolk, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 35820 North Platte, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 35840 North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 35860 North Vernon, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 35900 North Wilkesboro, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 35940 Norwalk, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 35980 Norwich-New London, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 36020 Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36060 Oak Hill, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 36100 Ocala, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 36140 Ocean City, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 36180 Ocean Pines, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 36220 Odessa, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 36260 Ogden-Clearfield, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area 36300 Ogdensburg-Massena, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36340 Oil City, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36380 Okeechobee, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 36420 Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 36460 Olean, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36500 Olympia, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 36540 Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-I A Metropolitan Statistical Area 36580 Oneonta, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36620 Ontario, OR-ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 36660 Opelousas-Eunice, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36700 Orangeburg, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 36740 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 36780 Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 36820 Oskaloosa, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36860 Ottawa-Streator, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 36900 Ottumwa, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36940 Owatonna, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 36980 Owensboro, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 37020 Owosso, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 37060 Oxford, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 1637100 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 37140 Paducah, KY-IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 37220 Pahrump, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 37260 Palatka, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 37300 Palestine, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 37340 Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville , FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 37380 Palm Coast, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 37420 Pampa, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 37460 Panama City-Lynn Haven-Panama City B each, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 37500 Paragould, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 37540 Paris, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 37580 Paris, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 37620 Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 37660 Parsons, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 37700 Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 37740 Payson, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 37780 Pecos, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 37800 Pella, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 37820 Pendleton-Hermiston, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 37860 Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 37900 Peoria, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 37940 Peru, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 38020 Phoenix Lake-Cedar Ridge, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 38060 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 38100 Picayune, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 38180 Pierre, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 38200 Pierre Part, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 38220 Pine Bluff, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 38260 Pittsburg, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 38300 Pittsburgh, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 38340 Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 38380 Plainview, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 38420 Platteville, WI Micr opolitan Statistical Area 38460 Plattsburgh, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 38500 Plymouth, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 38540 Pocatello, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 38580 Point Pleasant, WV-OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 38620 Ponca City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 38660 Ponce, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 38700 Pontiac, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 38740 Poplar Bluff, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 38780 Portales, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 38820 Port Angeles, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 38860 Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 38900 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 38940 Port St. Lucie, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 39020 Portsmouth, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 39060 Pottsville, PA Micro politan Statistical Area 39100 Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 39140 Prescott, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 39220 Price, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area 39260 Prineville, OR Micro politan Statistical Area 39300 Providence-New Bedford-Fall Rive r, RI-MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 39340 Provo-Orem, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area 39380 Pueblo, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 1739420 Pullman, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 39460 Punta Gorda, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 39500 Quincy, IL-MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 39540 Racine, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 39580 Raleigh-Cary, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 39660 Rapid City, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area 39700 Raymondville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 39740 Reading, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 39780 Red Bluff, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 39820 Redding, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 39860 Red Wing, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 39900 Reno-Sparks, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 39940 Rexburg, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 39980 Richmond, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 40060 Richmond, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40080 Richmond-Berea, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 40100 Rio Grande City-Roma, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 40140 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario , CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40180 Riverton, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 40220 Roanoke, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40260 Roanoke Rapids, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 40300 Rochelle, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 40340 Rochester, MN Metro politan Statistical Area 40380 Rochester, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 40420 Rockford, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 40460 Rockingham, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 40500 Rockland, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area 40540 Rock Springs, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 40580 Rocky Mount, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 40620 Rolla, MO Micro politan Statistical Area 40660 Rome, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40700 Roseburg, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 40740 Roswell, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 40760 Ruidoso, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 40780 Russellville, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 40820 Ruston, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 40860 Rutland, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area 40900 Sacramento—Arden-Ar cade—Roseville, CA Metrop olitan Statistical Area 40940 Safford, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 40980 Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 41060 St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 41100 St. George, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area 41140 St. Joseph, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 41180 St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 41220 St. Marys, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 41260 St. Marys, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 41420 Salem, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 41460 Salina, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 41500 Salinas, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 41540 Salisbury, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 41580 Salisbury, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 41620 Salt Lake City, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area 41660 San Angelo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 41700 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 41740 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 1841780 Sandusky, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 41820 Sanford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 41860 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 41900 San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 41940 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 41980 San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 42020 San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42060 Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42100 Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42140 Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 42180 Santa Isabel, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 42220 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42300 Sault Ste. Marie, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 42340 Savannah, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42380 Sayre, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 42420 Scottsbluff, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 42460 Scottsboro, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 42500 Scottsburg, IN Microp olitan Statistical Area 42540 Scranton—Wilkes-Barre, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42580 Seaford, DE Micropolitan Statistical Area 42620 Searcy, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 42660 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42680 Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 42700 Sebring, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 42740 Sedalia, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 42780 Selinsgrove, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 42820 Selma, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 42860 Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 42900 Seneca Falls, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 42940 Sevierville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 42980 Seymour, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 43060 Shawnee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 43100 Sheboygan, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 43140 Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 43180 Shelbyville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 43220 Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 43260 Sheridan, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area 43300 Sherman-Denison, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 43320 Show Low, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 43340 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 43380 Sidney, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 43420 Sierra Vista-Douglas, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 43460 Sikeston, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 43500 Silver City, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 43540 Silverthorne, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 43580 Sioux City, IA-NE-SD Metropolitan Statistical Area 43620 Sioux Falls, SD Metro politan Statistical Area 43660 Snyder, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 43700 Somerset, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 43740 Somerset, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 43780 South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-M I Metropolitan Statistical Area 43860 Southern Pines-Pinehurst, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 43900 Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 43940 Spearfish, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 43980 Spencer, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44020 Spirit Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 1944060 Spokane, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44100 Springfield, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 44140 Springfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44180 Springfield, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 44220 Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 44260 Starkville, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 44300 State College, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44340 Statesboro, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44380 Statesville-Mooresville, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 44420 Staunton-Waynesboro, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44500 Stephenville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 44540 Sterling, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 44580 Sterling, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 44600 Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 44620 Stevens Point, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 44660 Stillwater, OK Micro politan Statistical Area 44700 Stockton, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44740 Storm Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44780 Sturgis, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 44860 Sulphur Springs, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 44900 Summerville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44940 Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 44980 Sunbury, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45000 Susanville, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45020 Sweetwater, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 45060 Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 45140 Tahlequah, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 45180 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 45220 Tallahassee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 45260 Tallulah, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45300 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 45340 Taos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 45380 Taylorville, IL Micr opolitan Statistical Area 45460 Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 45500 Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 45520 The Dalles, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 45540 The Villages, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 45580 Thomaston, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45620 Thomasville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45640 Thomasville-Lexington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 45660 Tiffin, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 45700 Tifton, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45740 Toccoa, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45780 Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 45820 Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 45860 Torrington, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area 45900 Traverse City, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 45940 Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 45980 Troy, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 46020 Truckee-Grass Valley, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46060 Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 46100 Tullahoma, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 46140 Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 46180 Tupelo, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 46220 Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 46260 Tuskegee, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 2046300 Twin Falls, ID Micr opolitan Statistical Area 46340 Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 46380 Ukiah, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46420 Union, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 46460 Union City, TN-KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 46500 Urbana, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 46540 Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 46580 Utuado, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 46620 Uvalde, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 46660 Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 46700 Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 46740 Valley, AL Micro politan Statistical Area 46780 Van Wert, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 46820 Vermillion, SD Microp olitan Statistical Area 46860 Vernal, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area 46900 Vernon, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 46980 Vicksburg, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 47020 Victoria, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 47080 Vidalia, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47180 Vincennes, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47220 Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 47260 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 47300 Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47340 Wabash, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47380 Waco, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 47420 Wahpeton, ND-MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47460 Walla Walla, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47500 Walterboro, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 47540 Wapakoneta, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 47580 Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47620 Warren, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47660 Warrensburg, MO Micr opolitan Statistical Area 47700 Warsaw, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47780 Washington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47820 Washington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC- VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 47920 Washington Court House, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 47940 Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47980 Watertown, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 48020 Watertown-Fort Atkinson, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 48060 Watertown-Fort Drum, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 48100 Wauchula, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 48140 Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 48180 Waycross, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 48220 Weatherford, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 48300 Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 48460 West Plains, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 48500 West Point, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 48540 Wheeling, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 48580 Whitewater, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 48620 Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 48660 Wichita Falls, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 48700 Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 48740 Willimantic, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area 48780 Williston, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 48820 Willmar, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 2148900 Wilmington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 48940 Wilmington, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 48980 Wilson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 49020 Winchester, VA-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 49060 Winfield, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 49100 Winona, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 49180 Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 49260 Woodward, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 49300 Wooster, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 49340 Worcester, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49380 Worthington, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 49420 Yakima, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49460 Yankton, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 49500 Yauco, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 49540 Yazoo City, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 49620 York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49660 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH -PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49700 Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49740 Yuma, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 49780 Zanesville, OH Microp olitan Statistical Area ### 22List 2 Metropolitan Statistical Areas This list provides titles and codes, principal cities, Metropolitan Division titles and codes (where applicable), and definitions in counties and equivalent entities for all 374 Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. There are 11 Metropolitan St atistical Areas that have a total of 29 Metropolitan Divisions. Central counties are shown in italics. 10180 Abilene, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Abilene Callahan County, Jones County, Taylor County 10380 Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastián, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Aguadilla, Isabela, San Sebastián Aguada Municipio , Aguadilla Municipio , Añasco Municipio , Isabela Municipio , Lares Municipio , Moca Municipio , Rincón Municipio , San Sebastián Municipio 10420 Akron, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Akron Portage County , Summit County 10500 Albany, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Albany Baker County, Dougherty County , Lee County , Terrell County, Worth County 10580 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Albany, Schenectady, Troy Albany County , Rensselaer County , Saratoga County , Schenectady County , Schoharie County 10740 Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Albuquerque Bernalillo County , Sandoval County , Torrance County, Valencia County 10780 Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alexandria Grant Parish, Rapides Parish 10900 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA- NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area  Principal Cities: Allentown, PA; Bethlehem, PA Warren County, NJ ; Carbon County, PA ; Lehigh County, PA ; Northampton County, PA 11020 Altoona, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Altoona Blair County 11100 Amarillo, TX Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Amarillo Armstrong County, Carson County, Potter County , Randall County  Pursuant to P.L. 101-136, Section 525, Easton was added to the title effective November 3, 1989. ### 2311180 Ames, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ames Story County 11260 Anchorage, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Anchorage Anchorage Municipality , Matanuska-Susitna Borough 11300 Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Anderson Madison County 11340 Anderson, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Anderson Anderson County 11460 Ann Arbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ann Arbor Washtenaw County 11500 Anniston-Oxford, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Anniston, Oxford Calhoun County 11540 Appleton, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Appleton Calumet County , Outagamie County 11700 Asheville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Asheville Buncombe County , Haywood County , Henderson County , Madison County 12020 Athens-Clarke County, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Athens-Clarke County (balance)  Clarke County , Madison County, Oconee County , Oglethorpe County 12060 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Atlanta, Sandy Springs, Marietta Barrow County, Bartow County, Butts County, Carroll County, Cherokee County , Clayton County , Cobb County , Coweta County , Dawson County, DeKalb County , Douglas County , Fayette County , Forsyth County , Fulton County , Gwinnett County , Haralson County, Heard County, Henry County , Jasper County, Lamar County, Meriwether County, Newton County , Paulding County , Pickens County, Pike County, Rockdale County , Spalding County , Walton County  Athens-Clark County (balance) refers to the portion of the consolidated government of Athens city and Clark County minus the separately incor porated places of Bogart and Winter ville within the consolidated city. ### 2412100 Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Atlantic City, Hammonton Atlantic County 12220 Auburn-Opelika, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Auburn, Opelika Lee County 12260 Augusta-Richmond County, GA-S C Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Augusta-Richmond County (balance), GA  Burke County, GA; Columbia County, GA ; McDuffie County, GA; Richmond County, GA ; Aiken County, SC ; Edgefield County, SC 12420 Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos , TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Austin, Round Rock, San Marcos Bastrop County, Caldwell County, Hays County, Travis County , Williamson County 12540 Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Bakersfield, Delano Kern County 12580 Baltimore-Towson, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Baltimore, Towson Anne Arundel County , Baltimore County , Carroll County, Harford County, Howard County , Queen Anne's County, Baltimore city 12620 Bangor, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bangor Penobscot County 12700 Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Barnstable Town Barnstable County 12940 Baton Rouge, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Baton Rouge Ascension Parish , East Baton Rouge Parish , East Feliciana Parish, Iberville Parish, Livingston Parish , Pointe Coupee Parish, St. Helena Parish, West Baton Rouge Parish , West Feliciana Parish 12980 Battle Creek, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Battle Creek Calhoun County 13020 Bay City, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bay City Bay County 13140 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Beaumont, Port Arthur Hardin County, Jefferson County , Orange County  Augusta-Richmond County (balance) refers to the port ion of the consolidated government of Augusta city and Richmond County minus the separately incorp orated places of Blythe and Hephzibah within the consolidated city. ### 2513380 Bellingham, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bellingham Whatcom County 13460 Bend, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bend Deschutes County 13740 Billings, MT Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Billings Carbon County, Yellowstone County 13780 Binghamton, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Binghamton Broome County , Tioga County 13820 Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Birmingham, Hoover Bibb County, Blount County, Chilton County, Jefferson County , St. Clair County, Shelby County , Walker County 13900 Bismarck, ND Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bismarck Burleigh County , Morton County 13980 Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Blacksburg, Christiansburg, Radford Giles County, Montgomery County , Pulaski County, Radford city 14020 Bloomington, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bloomington Greene County, Monroe County , Owen County 14060 Bloomington-Normal, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Bloomington, Normal McLean County 14260 Boise City-Nampa, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Boise City, Nampa Ada County , Boise County, Canyon County, Gem County, Owyhee County 14460 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA -NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Boston, MA; Cambridge, MA; Quincy, MA; Newton, MA; Framingham, MA; Waltham, MA; Peabody, MA 14484 Boston-Quincy, MA Metropolitan Division Norfolk County , Plymouth County , Suffolk County 15764 Cambridge-Newton-Framingham, MA Metropolitan Division Middlesex County 37764 Peabody, MA Metropolitan Division Essex County 40484 Rockingham County-Strafford County, NH Metropolitan Division Rockingham County , Strafford County ### 2614500 Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Boulder Boulder County 14540 Bowling Green, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bowling Green Edmonson County, Warren County 14740 Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Bremerton, Silverdale Kitsap County 14860 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Bridgeport, Stamford, Norwalk, Danbury, Stratford Fairfield County 15180 Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Brownsville, Harlingen Cameron County 15260 Brunswick, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brunswick Brantley County, Glynn County , McIntosh County 15380 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Buffalo, Cheektowaga, Tonawanda, Niagara Falls Erie County , Niagara County 15500 Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Burlington Alamance County 15540 Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Burlington, South Burlington Chittenden County , Franklin County, Grand Isle County 15940 Canton-Massillon, OH Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Canton, Massillon Carroll County, Stark County 15980 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Cape Coral, Fort Myers Lee County 16020 Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO -IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Cape Girardeau, MO; Jackson, MO Alexander County, IL; Bollinger County, MO; Cape Girardeau County, MO 16180 Carson City, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Carson City Carson City 16220 Casper, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Casper Natrona County ### 2716300 Cedar Rapids, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cedar Rapids Benton County, Jones County, Linn County 16580 Champaign-Urbana, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Champaign, Urbana Champaign County , Ford County, Piatt County 16620 Charleston, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Charleston Boone County, Clay County, Kanawha County , Lincoln County, Putnam County 16700 Charleston-North Charleston-Summer ville, SC Metropolit an Statistical Area Principal Cities: Charleston , North Charleston, Summerville Berkeley County , Charleston County , Dorchester County 16740 Charlotte-Gast onia-Rock Hill, NC-SC Metr opolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Charlotte, NC; Gastoni a, NC; Rock Hill, SC; Concord, NC Anson County, NC; Cabarrus County, NC; Gaston County, NC; Mecklenburg County, NC ; Union County, NC ; York County, SC 16820 Charlottesville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Charlottesville Albemarle County , Fluvanna County, Greene County, Nelson County, Charlottesville city 16860 Chattanooga, TN-GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Chattanooga, TN Catoosa County, GA ; Dade County, GA; Walker County, GA ; Hamilton County, TN ; Marion County, TN; Sequatchie County, TN 16940 Cheyenne, WY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cheyenne Laramie County 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN -WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Chicago, IL; Joliet, IL; Naperv ille, IL; Elgin, IL; Gary, IN; Evanston, IL; Arlington Heights, IL; Schaumburg, IL; Skokie, IL; Des Plaines, IL; Hoffman Estates, IL 16974 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL Metropolitan Division Cook County , DeKalb County, DuPage County , Grundy County, Kane County , Kendall County , McHenry County , Will County 23844 Gary, IN Metropolitan Division Jasper County, Lake County , Newton County, Porter County 29404 Lake County-Kenosha County , IL-WI Metropolitan Division Lake County, IL ; Kenosha County, WI 17020 Chico, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Chico Butte County 17140 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Cincin nati, OH; Middletown, OH Dearborn County, IN; Franklin County, IN; Ohio County, IN; Boone County, KY ; Bracken County, KY; Campbell County, KY ; Gallatin County, KY; Grant County, KY; Kenton County , KY ; Pendleton County, KY; Brown County, OH; Butler County, OH ; Clermont County, OH ; Hamilton County, OH ; Warren County, OH ### 2817300 Clarksville, TN-KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clarksville, TN Christian County, KY; Trigg County, KY; Montgomery County, TN ; Stewart County, TN 17420 Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cleveland Bradley County , Polk County 17460 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Cleveland, Elyria, Mentor Cuyahoga County , Geauga County , Lake County , Lorain County, Medina County 17660 Coeur d'Alene, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Coeur d'Alene Kootenai County 17780 College Station-Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: College Station, Bryan Brazos County , Burleson County, Robertson County 17820 Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Colorado Springs El Paso County , Teller County 17860 Columbia, MO Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbia Boone County , Howard County 17900 Columbia, SC Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbia Calhoun County, Fairfield County, Kershaw County, Lexington County , Richland County , Saluda County 17980 Columbus, GA-AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbus, GA Russell County, AL ; Chattahoochee County, GA ; Harris County, GA; Marion County, GA; Muscogee County, GA 18020 Columbus, IN Metropolit an Statistical Area Principal City: Columbus Bartholomew County 18140 Columbus, OH Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbus Delaware County , Fairfield County, Franklin County , Licking County, Madison County, Morrow County, Pickaway County, Union County 18580 Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Corpus Christi Aransas County, Nueces County , San Patricio County 18700 Corvallis, OR Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Corvallis Benton County ### 2918880 Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Destin , FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Crestview, Fort Walton Beach, Destin Okaloosa County 19060 Cumberland, MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cumberland, MD Allegany County, MD ; Mineral County, WV 19100 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlin gton, Plano, Irving, Carrollton, Denton, McKinney, Richardson 19124 Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX Metropolitan Division Collin County , Dallas County , Delta County, Denton County, Ellis County , Hunt County, Kaufman County, Rockwall County 23104 Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Division Johnson County, Parker County, Tarrant County , Wise County 19140 Dalton, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dalton Murray County, Whitfield County 19180 Danville, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Danville Vermilion County 19260 Danville, VA Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Danville Pittsylvania County , Danville city 19340 Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Davenport, IA; Moline, IL; Rock Island, IL Henry County, IL; Mercer County, IL; Rock Island County, IL ; Scott County, IA 19380 Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dayton Greene County , Miami County , Montgomery County , Preble County 19460 Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Decatur Lawrence County, Morgan County 19500 Decatur, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Decatur Macon County 19660 Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Deltona, Daytona Beach, Ormond Beach Volusia County ### 3019740 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: D enver, Aurora, Broomfield Adams County , Arapahoe County , Broomfield County  , Clear Creek County, Denver County , Douglas County , Elbert County, Gilpin County, Jefferson County , Park County 19780 Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Des Moines, West Des Moines Dallas County , Guthrie County, Madison County, Polk County , Warren County 19820 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Detroit, Warren, Livonia, Dear born, Troy, Farmington Hills, Southfield, Pontiac, Taylor, Novi 19804 Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Division Wayne County 47644 Warren-Troy-Farmington H ills, MI Metropolitan Division Lapeer County, Livingston County, Macomb County , Oakland County , St. Clair County 20020 Dothan, AL Metropolit an Statistical Area Principal City: Dothan Geneva County, Henry County, Houston County 20100 Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dover Kent County 20220 Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dubuque Dubuque County 20260 Duluth, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Duluth, MN Carlton County, MN; St. Louis County, MN ; Douglas County, WI 20500 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Durham, Chapel Hill Chatham County, Durham County , Orange County , Person County 20740 Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Eau Claire Chippewa County , Eau Claire County 20940 El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: El Centro Imperial County 21060 Elizabethtown, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Elizabethtown Hardin County , Larue County 21140 Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Elkhart, Goshen Elkhart County  Broomfield organized as a new county on November 15, 2001 and is coextensive with Broomfield city. For purposes of defining metropolitan statis tical areas, Broomfield city was treat ed as if it were a county at the time of the 2000 census; the standards we re applied to data for Broomfield city. ### 3121300 Elmira, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Elmira Chemung County 21340 El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: El Paso El Paso County 21500 Erie, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Erie Erie County 21660 Eugene-Springfield, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Eugene, Springfield Lane County 21780 Evansville, IN-KY Metr opolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Evansville, IN Gibson County, IN; Posey County, IN; Vanderburgh County, IN ; Warrick County, IN ; Henderson County, KY ; Webster County, KY 21820 Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fairbanks Fairbanks North Star Borough 21940 Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fajardo Ceiba Municipio , Fajardo Municipio , Luquillo Municipio 22020 Fargo, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fargo, ND Clay County, MN , Cass County, ND 22140 Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Farmington San Juan County 22180 Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fayetteville Cumberland County , Hoke County 22220 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR -MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Fayetteville, AR; Springdale, AR; Rogers, AR; Bentonville, AR Benton County, AR ; Madison County, AR; Washington County, AR ; McDonald County, MO 22380 Flagstaff, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Flagstaff Coconino County 22420 Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Flint Genesee County ### 3222500 Florence, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Florence Darlington County, Florence County 22520 Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Fl orence, Muscle Shoals Colbert County , Lauderdale County 22540 Fond du Lac, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fond du Lac Fond du Lac County 22660 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Fort Collins, Loveland Larimer County 22900 Fort Smith, AR-OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Smith, AR Crawford County, AR ; Franklin County, AR; Sebastian County, AR ; Le Flore County, OK; Sequoyah County, OK 23060 Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Wayne Allen County , Wells County, Whitley County 23420 Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fresno Fresno County 23460 Gadsden, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gadsden Etowah County 23540 Gainesville, FL Metrop olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gainesville Alachua County , Gilchrist County 23580 Gainesville, GA Metrop olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gainesville Hall County 24020 Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Glens Falls Warren County , Washington County 24140 Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Goldsboro Wayne County 24220 Grand Forks, ND-MN Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grand Forks, ND Polk County, MN ; Grand Forks County, ND 24300 Grand Junction, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grand Junction Mesa County ### 3324340 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Grand Rapids, Wyoming Barry County, Ionia County, Kent County , Newaygo County 24500 Great Falls, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Great Falls Cascade County 24540 Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Greeley Weld County 24580 Green Bay, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Green Bay Brown County , Kewaunee County, Oconto County 24660 Greensboro-High Point, NC Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Greensboro, High Point Guilford County , Randolph County, Rockingham County 24780 Greenville, NC Metropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Greenville Greene County, Pitt County 24860 Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Greenville, Mauldin, Easley Greenville County , Laurens County, Pickens County 25020 Guayama, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Guayama Arroyo Municipio , Guayama Municipio , Patillas Municipio 25060 Gulfport-Biloxi, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Gulfport, Biloxi Hancock County , Harrison County , Stone County 25180 Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-W V Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hagers town, MD; Martinsburg, WV Washington County, MD ; Berkeley County, WV ; Morgan County, WV 25260 Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hanford, Corcoran Kings County 25420 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Harrisburg, Carlisle Cumberland County , Dauphin County , Perry County 25500 Harrisonburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Harrisonburg Rockingham County , Harrisonburg city 25540 Hartford-West Hartford -East Hartford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Middletown Hartford County , Middlesex County , Tolland County ### 3425620 Hattiesburg, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hattiesburg Forrest County , Lamar County , Perry County 25860 Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hickory, Lenoir, Morganton Alexander County, Burke County , Caldwell County , Catawba County 25980 Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hinesville, Fort Stewart Liberty County , Long County 26100 Holland-Grand Haven, MI Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Holland, Grand Haven Ottawa County 26180 Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Honolulu Honolulu County 26300 Hot Springs, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hot Springs Garland County 26380 Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Houma, Bayou Cane, Thibodaux Lafourche Parish , Terrebonne Parish 26420 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Houston, Sugar Land, Baytown, Galveston, Conroe Austin County, Brazoria County , Chambers County, Fort Bend County , Galveston County, Harris County , Liberty County, Montgomery County, San Jacinto County, Waller County 26580 Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Huntington, WV; Ashland, KY Boyd County, KY ; Greenup County, KY ; Lawrence County, OH ; Cabell County, WV ; Wayne County, WV 26620 Huntsville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Huntsville Limestone County, Madison County 26820 Idaho Falls, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Idaho Falls Bonneville County , Jefferson County 26900 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Indianapolis city (balance),  Carmel Boone County, Brown County, Hamilton County , Hancock County, Hendricks County , Johnson County , Marion County , Morgan County , Putnam County, Shelby County  Indianapolis (balance) refers to the portion of the consolidated government of Indianapolis city and Marion County minus the separately inco rporated places of Clermont, Crows Nest, Cumberland, Homecroft, Meridian Hills, North Crows Nest, Rocky Ripple, Sp ring Hill, Warren Park, Williams Creek, and Wynnedale within the consolidated city. It excludes the citi es of Beech Grove, Lawrence, Southport, and Speedway which are within Marion County, but ar e not part of the consolidated city. ### 3526980 Iowa City, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Iowa City Johnson County , Washington County 27060 Ithaca, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ithaca Tompkins County 27100 Jackson, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jackson Jackson County 27140 Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jackson Copiah County, Hinds County , Madison County , Rankin County , Simpson County 27180 Jackson, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jackson Chester County, Madison County 27260 Jacksonville, FL Metro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Jacksonville Baker County, Clay County , Duval County , Nassau County, St. Johns County 27340 Jacksonville, NC Metrop olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jacksonville Onslow County 27500 Janesville, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Janesville Rock County 27620 Jefferson City, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jefferson City Callaway County, Cole County , Moniteau County, Osage County 27740 Johnson City, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Johnson City Carter County , Unicoi County, Washington County 27780 Johnstown, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Johnstown Cambria County 27860 Jonesboro, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jonesboro Craighead County , Poinsett County 27900 Joplin, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Joplin Jasper County , Newton County 28020 Kalamazoo-Portage, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Kalamazoo, Portage Kalamazoo County , Van Buren County ### 3628100 Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Kankakee, Bradley Kankakee County 28140 Kansas City, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area  Principal Cities: Kansas City, MO , Overland Park, KS, Kansas City, KS Franklin County, KS; Johnson County, KS ; Leavenworth County, KS; Linn County, KS; Miami County, KS; Wyandotte County, KS ; Bates County, MO; Caldwell County, MO; Cass County, MO ; Clay County, MO ; Clinton County, MO; Jackson County, MO ; Lafayette County, MO; Platte County, MO ; Ray County, MO 28420 Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Kennewick, Pasco, Richland Benton County , Franklin County 28660 Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Killeen, Temple, Fort Hood Bell County , Coryell County , Lampasas County 28700 Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN -VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Kingsport, TN; Bristol, TN; Bristol, VA Hawkins County, TN ; Sullivan County, TN ; Scott County, VA; Washington County, VA; Bristol city, VA 28740 Kingston, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kingston Ulster County 28940 Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Knoxville Anderson County, Blount County , Knox County , Loudon County , Union County 29020 Kokomo, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kokomo Howard County , Tipton County 29100 La Crosse, WI-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: La Crosse, WI Houston County, MN ; La Crosse County, WI 29140 Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lafayette Benton County, Carroll County, Tippecanoe County 29180 Lafayette, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lafayette Lafayette Parish , St. Martin Parish 29340 Lake Charles, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lake Charles Calcasieu Parish , Cameron Parish  The title is pursuant to P.L. 98-369, Section 611 (July 18, 1984); all counties specified in that legislation, plus five additional counties, qualify under the 2000 sta ndards and are included in the definition of the Kansas City, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area. ### 3729420 Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Lake Havasu City, Kingman Mohave County 29460 Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Lakeland, Winter Haven Polk County 29540 Lancaster, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lancaster Lancaster County 29620 Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Lansing, East Lansing Clinton County , Eaton County , Ingham County 29700 Laredo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Laredo Webb County 29740 Las Cruces, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Las Cruces Dona Ana County 29820 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Las Vegas, Paradise Clark County 29940 Lawrence, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lawrence Douglas County 30020 Lawton, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lawton Comanche County 30140 Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lebanon Lebanon County 30300 Lewiston, ID-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lewiston, ID Nez Perce County, ID ; Asotin County, WA 30340 Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Lewiston, Auburn Androscoggin County 30460 Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lexington-Fayette Bourbon County, Clark County, Fayette County , Jessamine County, Scott County, Woodford County 30620 Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lima Allen County ### 3830700 Lincoln, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lincoln Lancaster County , Seward County 30780 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conwa y, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Little Rock, North Little Rock, Conway Faulkner County, Grant County, Lonoke County , Perry County, Pulaski County , Saline County 30860 Logan, UT-ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Logan, UT Franklin County, ID; Cache County, UT 30980 Longview, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Longview Gregg County , Rusk County, Upshur County 31020 Longview, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Longview Cowlitz County 31100 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Los Angeles, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Anaheim, Irvine, Glendale, Pomona, Pasadena, Torrance, Orange, Fullerton, Cost a Mesa, Burbank, Compton, Carson, Santa Monica, Newport Beach, Tustin, Montebello, Monterey Park, Gardena, Arcadia, Paramount, Fountain Valley, Cerritos 31084 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA Metropolitan Division Los Angeles County 42044 Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA Metropolitan Division Orange County 31140 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Louisville/Jefferson County (balance), KY  Clark County, IN ; Floyd County, IN ; Harrison County, IN; Washington County, IN; Bullitt County, KY ; Henry County, KY; Jefferson County, KY ; Meade County, KY; Nelson County, KY; Oldham County, KY ; Shelby County, KY; Spencer County, KY; Trimble County, KY 31180 Lubbock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lubbock Crosby County, Lubbock County  Louisville/Jefferson County (balance) refers to the po rtion of the consolidated gov ernment of Louisville city and Jefferson County minus the separately incorporated places of Anchorage, Audubon Park, Bancroft, Barbourmeade, Beechwood Village, Bellemeade, Belle wood, Blue Ridge Manor, Briarwood, Broeck Pointe, Brownsboro Farm, Brownsboro Village, Cambridge, Coldstream, Creekside, Crossgate, Douglas Hills, Druid Hills, Fincastle, Forest Hills, Glenview, Glenview Hills, Glenview Manor, Goose Creek, GraymoorDevondale, Green Spring, Heritage Creek, Hickory Hill, Hills and Dales, Hollow Creek, Hollyvilla, Houston Acres, Hurstbourne, Hurstbourne Acres, Indian Hills, Jeffersontown, Kingsley, Langdon Place, Lincolnshire, Lyndon, Lynnview, Manor Creek, Maryhill Estates, Meadowbrook Farm, Meadow Vale, Meadowview Estates, Middletown, Mockingbird Valley, Moorland ci ty, Murray Hill, Norbourne Estates, Northfield, Norwood, Old Brownsboro Place, Parkway Village, Plant ation, Poplar Hills, Prospect, Richlawn, Riverwood, Rolling Fields, Rolling Hills, Seneca Gardens, Shively, South Park View, Spring Mill, Spring Valley, St. Matthews, St. Regis Park, Strathmoor Manor, Stra thmoor Village, Sycamore, Ten Broeck, Thornhill, Watterson Park, Wellington, West Buec hel, Westwood, Wildwood, Windy H ills, Woodland Hills, Woodlawn Park, and Worthington Hills. ### 3931340 Lynchburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lynchburg Amherst County , Appomattox County, Bedford County , Campbell County , Bedford city , Lynchburg city 31420 Macon, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Macon Bibb County , Crawford County, Jones County, Monroe County, Twiggs County 31460 Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Madera, Chowchilla Madera County 31540 Madison, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Madison Columbia County, Dane County , Iowa County 31700 Manchester-Nashua, NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Manchester, Nashua Hillsborough County 31740 Manhattan, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Manhattan Geary County, Pottawatomie County, Riley County 31860 Mankato-North Mankato, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Mankato, North Mankato Blue Earth County , Nicollet County 31900 Mansfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mansfield Richland County 32420 Mayagüez, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mayagüez Hormigueros Municipio , Mayagüez Municipio 32580 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: McAllen, Edinburg, Mission, Pharr Hidalgo County 32780 Medford, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Medford Jackson County 32820 Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Memphis, TN Crittenden County, AR ; DeSoto County, MS ; Marshall County, MS; Tate County, MS; Tunica County, MS; Fayette County, TN; Shelby County, TN ; Tipton County, TN 32900 Merced, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Merced Merced County ### 4033100 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Po mpano Beach, West Palm Beach, Miami Beach, Kendall, Boca Raton, Deerfield Beach, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Homestead 22744 Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfi eld Beach, FL Metropolitan Division Broward County 33124 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL Metropolitan Division Miami-Dade County 48424 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, FL Metropolitan Division Palm Beach County 33140 Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Michigan City, La Porte LaPorte County 33260 Midland, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Midland Midland County 33340 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Milwau kee, Waukesha, West Allis Milwaukee County , Ozaukee County , Washington County, Waukesha County 33460 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Minneapolis, MN; St. Paul, MN; Bloomington, MN; Plymouth, MN; Eagan, MN; Eden Prairie, MN; Minnetonka, MN Anoka County, MN ; Carver County, MN ; Chisago County, MN; Dakota County, MN ; Hennepin County, MN ; Isanti County, MN; Ramsey County, MN ; Scott County, MN ; Sherburne County, MN; Washington County, MN ; Wright County, MN; Pierce County, WI; St. Croix County, WI 33540 Missoula, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Missoula Missoula County 33660 Mobile, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mobile Mobile County 33700 Modesto, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Modesto Stanislaus County 33740 Monroe, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Monroe Ouachita Parish , Union Parish 33780 Monroe, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Monroe Monroe County 33860 Montgomery, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Montgomery Autauga County, Elmore County, Lowndes County, Montgomery County ### 4134060 Morgantown, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Morgantown Monongalia County , Preston County 34100 Morristown, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Morristown Grainger County, Hamblen County , Jefferson County 34580 Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Mount Vernon, Anacortes Skagit County 34620 Muncie, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Muncie Delaware County 34740 Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Muskegon, Norton Shores Muskegon County 34820 Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach-Co nway, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Myrtle Beach, North Myrtle Beach, Conway Horry County 34900 Napa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Napa Napa County 34940 Naples-Marco Island, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Naples, Marco Island Collier County 34980 Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—Frank lin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Na shville-Davidson (balance)  , Murfreesboro, Franklin Cannon County, Cheatham County, Davidson County , Dickson County, Hickman County, Macon County, Robertson County , Rutherford County, Smith County, Sumner County , Trousdale County, Williamson County , Wilson County 35300 New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: New Haven, Milford city (balance)  New Haven County 35380 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: New Orleans, Metairie, Kenner Jefferson Parish , Orleans Parish , Plaquemines Parish , St. Bernard Parish , St. Charles Parish, St. John the Baptist Parish, St. Tammany Parish  Nashville-Davidson (balance) refers to the portion of the consolidated government of Nashville city and Davidson County minus the separately incorporated places of Belle Meade, Berry Hill, Forest Hills, Goodlettesville, Lakewood, Oak Hill, and Ridgetop within the consolidated city.  Milford (balance) refers to the portion of the cons olidated government of Milford city and Milford town minus the separately incorporated place of Woodmont within the consolidated city. ### 4235620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isl and, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: New York, NY; Newark, NJ; Ed ison, NJ; White Plains, NY; Wayne, NJ; Union, NJ; New Brunswick, NJ 20764 Edison-New Brunswick, NJ Metropolitan Division Middlesex County , Monmouth County , Ocean County , Somerset County 35004 Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division Nassau County , Suffolk County 35084 Newark-Union, NJ-PA Metropolitan Division Essex County, NJ ; Hunterdon County, NJ ; Morris County, NJ ; Sussex County, NJ ; Union County, NJ ; Pike County, PA 35644 New York-White Plains-Way ne, NY-NJ Metropolitan Division Bergen County, NJ ; Hudson County, NJ ; Passaic County, NJ ; Bronx County, NY ; Kings County, NY ; New York County, NY ; Putnam County, NY ; Queens County, NY ; Richmond County, NY ; Rockland County, NY ; Westchester County, NY 35660 Niles-Benton Harbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Niles, Benton Harbor Berrien County 35840 North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: North Port, Bradenton, Sarasota, Venice Manatee County , Sarasota County 35980 Norwich-New London, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Norwich, New London New London County 36100 Ocala, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ocala Marion County 36140 Ocean City, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ocean City Cape May County 36220 Odessa, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Odessa Ector County 36260 Ogden-Clearfield, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Ogden, Clearfield Davis County , Morgan County, Weber County 36420 Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oklahoma City Canadian County , Cleveland County, Grady Count y, Lincoln County, Logan County, McClain County, Oklahoma County 36500 Olympia, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Olympia Thurston County 36540 Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Omaha, NE; Council Bluffs, IA Harrison County, IA; Mills County, IA; Pottawattamie County, IA ; Cass County, NE; Douglas County, NE ; Sarpy County, NE ; Saunders County, NE; Washington County, NE ### 4336740 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Orlando, Kissimmee, Sanford Lake County, Orange County , Osceola County, Seminole County 36780 Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Oshkosh, Neenah Winnebago County 36980 Owensboro, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Owensboro Daviess County , Hancock County, McLean County 37100 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, San Buenaventura (Ventura), Camarillo Ventura County 37340 Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Palm Bay, Melbourne, Titusville Brevard County 37380 Palm Coast, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Palm Coast Flagler County 37460 Panama City-Lynn Haven-Panama City B each, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Panama City , Lynn Haven, Panama City Beach Bay County 37620 Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV -OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Parkersburg, WV; Marietta, OH; Vienna, WV Washington County, OH ; Pleasants County, WV; Wirt County, WV; Wood County, WV 37700 Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pascagoula George County, Jackson County 37860 Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Pensacola, Ferry Pass, Brent Escambia County , Santa Rosa County 37900 Peoria, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Peoria Marshall County, Peoria County , Stark County, Tazewell County , Woodford County 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Philadelphia, PA; Camden, NJ; Wilmington, DE 15804 Camden, NJ Metropolitan Division Burlington County , Camden County , Gloucester County 37964 Philadelphia, PA Metropolitan Division Bucks County , Chester County , Delaware County , Montgomery County , Philadelphia County 48864 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ Metropolitan Division New Castle County, DE ; Cecil County, MD ; Salem County, NJ ### 4438060 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Phoenix, Mesa, Glendale, Scottsdale, Tempe Maricopa County , Pinal County 38220 Pine Bluff, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pine Bluff Cleveland County, Jefferson County , Lincoln County 38300 Pittsburgh, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pittsburgh Allegheny County , Armstrong County, Beaver County , Butler County, Fayette County, Washington County , Westmoreland County 38340 Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pittsfield Berkshire County 38540 Pocatello, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pocatello Bannock County , Power County 38660 Ponce, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ponce Juana Díaz Municipio, Ponce Municipio , Villalba Municipio 38860 Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Portland, South Portland, Biddeford Cumberland County , Sagadahoc County, York County 38900 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR -WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Portland, OR; Vancou ver, WA; Hillsboro, OR; Beaverton, OR Clackamas County, OR ; Columbia County, OR; Multnomah County, OR ; Washington County, OR ; Yamhill County, OR; Clark County, WA ; Skamania County, WA 38940 Port St. Lucie, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Port St. Lucie Martin County , St. Lucie County 39100 Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Poughkeepsie, Newburgh, Middletown, Arlington Dutchess County , Orange County 39140 Prescott, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Prescott Yavapai County 39300 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Providence, RI; New Bedford, MA; Fall River, MA; Warwick, RI; Cranston, RI Bristol County, MA ; Bristol County, RI ; Kent County, RI ; Newport County, RI ; Providence County, RI ; Washington County, RI 39340 Provo-Orem, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Provo, Orem Juab County, Utah County ### 4539380 Pueblo, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pueblo Pueblo County 39460 Punta Gorda, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Punta Gorda Charlotte County 39540 Racine, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Racine Racine County 39580 Raleigh-Cary, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Raleigh, Cary Franklin County, Johnston County, Wake County 39660 Rapid City, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rapid City Meade County, Pennington County 39740 Reading, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Reading Berks County 39820 Redding, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Redding Shasta County 39900 Reno-Sparks, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Reno, Sparks Storey County, Washoe County 40060 Richmond, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Richmond Amelia County, Caroline County, Charles City County, Chesterfield County , Cumberland County, Dinwiddie County , Goochland County, Hanover County , Henrico County , King and Queen County, King William County, Louisa Co unty, New Kent County, Powhatan County, Prince George County , Sussex County, Colonial Heights city , Hopewell city , Petersburg city , Richmond city 40140 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario , CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Riverside, San Bernardino, Ontario, Victorville, Temecula, Chino, Hemet, Redlands, Colton, Palm Desert Riverside County , San Bernardino County 40220 Roanoke, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Roanoke Botetourt County , Craig County, Franklin County, Roanoke County , Roanoke city , Salem city 40340 Rochester, MN Metro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Rochester Dodge County, Olmsted County , Wabasha County ### 4640380 Rochester, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rochester Livingston County, Monroe County , Ontario County, Orleans County, Wayne County 40420 Rockford, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rockford Boone County , Winnebago County 40580 Rocky Mount, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rocky Mount Edgecombe County , Nash County 40660 Rome, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rome Floyd County 40900 Sacramento—Arden-Arca de—Roseville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Sacramento, Arden-Arcade, Roseville, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, Woodland El Dorado County, Placer County , Sacramento County , Yolo County 40980 Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Saginaw, Saginaw Township North Saginaw County 41060 St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: St. Cloud Benton County , Stearns County 41100 St. George, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: St. George Washington County 41140 St. Joseph, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: St. Joseph, MO Doniphan County, KS; Andrew County, MO; Buchanan County, MO ; DeKalb County, MO 41180 St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area  Principal Cities: St. Louis, MO; St. Charles, MO Bond County, IL; Calhoun County, IL; Clint on County, IL; Jersey County, IL; Macoupin County, IL; Madison County, IL ; Monroe County, IL ; St. Clair County, IL ; Crawford County, MO (part—Sullivan city)  ; Franklin County, MO; Jefferson County, MO ; Lincoln County, MO; St. Charles County, MO ; St. Louis County, MO ; Warren County, MO; Washington County, MO; St. Louis city, MO 41420 Salem, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salem Marion County , Polk County  The title and definition reflect the provisions of P.L. 98-473, Section 119A (October 12, 1984), plus six additional counties that qualify under the 2000 standards.  Pursuant to P.L. 100-202, Section 530, the part of Sullivan city in Crawford County, MO was added to the St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area effective December 22, 1987. ### 4741500 Salinas, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salinas Monterey County 41540 Salisbury, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salisbury Somerset County, Wicomico County 41620 Salt Lake City, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salt Lake City Salt Lake County , Summit County, Tooele County 41660 San Angelo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: San Angelo Irion County, Tom Green County 41700 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Antonio, New Braunfels Atascosa County, Bandera County, Bexar County , Comal County, Guadalupe County, Kendall County, Medina County, Wilson County 41740 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Diego, Carlsbad, San Marcos, National City San Diego County 41780 Sandusky, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sandusky Erie County 41860 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Francisco, Oakland, Fremont, Hayward, Berkeley, San Mateo, San Leandro, Redwood City, Pleasanton, Walnut Creek, South San Fr ancisco, San Rafael 36084 Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Division Alameda County , Contra Costa County 41884 San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA Metropolitan Division Marin County , San Francisco County , San Mateo County 41900 San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Germán, Cabo Rojo Cabo Rojo Municipio , Lajas Municipio , Sabana Grande Municipio , San Germán Municipio 41940 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Mountain View, Milpitas, Palo Alto, Cupertino San Benito County, Santa Clara County ### 4841980 San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Juan, Caguas, Guaynabo Aguas Buenas Municipio , Aibonito Municipio , Arecibo Municipio, Barceloneta Municipio, Barranquitas Municipio , Bayamón Municipio , Caguas Municipio , Camuy Municipio, Canóvanas Municipio , Carolina Municipio , Cataño Municipio , Cayey Municipio , Ciales Municipio , Cidra Municipio , Comerío Municipio , Corozal Municipio , Dorado Municipio , Florida Municipio, Guaynabo Municipio , Gurabo Municipio , Hatillo Municipio, Humacao Municipio , Juncos Municipio , Las Piedras Municipio , Loíza Municipio , Manatí Municipio , Maunabo Municipio , Morovis Municipio , Naguabo Municipio , Naranjito Municipio , Orocovis Municipio , Quebradillas Municipio, Río Grande Municipio , San Juan Municipio , San Lorenzo Municipio , Toa Alta Municipio , Toa Baja Municipio , Trujillo Alto Municipio , Vega Alta Municipio , Vega Baja Municipio , Yabucoa Municipio 42020 San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Luis Obispo, El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles) San Luis Obispo County 42060 Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, Goleta Santa Barbara County 42100 Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Santa Cruz, Watsonville Santa Cruz County 42140 Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Santa Fe Santa Fe County 42220 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Santa Rosa, Petaluma Sonoma County 42340 Savannah, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Savannah Bryan County, Chatham County , Effingham County 42540 Scranton—Wilkes-Barre, PA Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Scranton, Wilkes-Barre Lackawanna County , Luzerne County , Wyoming County 42660 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue, Everett, Kent, Renton, Auburn 42644 Seattle-Bellevue-Evere tt, WA Metropolitan Division King County , Snohomish County 45104 Tacoma, WA Metropolitan Division Pierce County 42680 Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Sebastian, Vero Beach Indian River County 43100 Sheboygan, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sheboygan Sheboygan County ### 4943300 Sherman-Denison, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Sherman, Denison Grayson County 43340 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Shreveport, Bossier City Bossier Parish , Caddo Parish , De Soto Parish 43580 Sioux City, IA-NE-SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sioux City, IA Woodbury County, IA ; Dakota County, NE ; Dixon County, NE; Union County, SD 43620 Sioux Falls, SD Metro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Sioux Falls Lincoln County , McCook County, Minnehaha County , Turner County 43780 South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-M I Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: South Bend, IN; Mishawaka, IN St. Joseph County, IN ; Cass County, MI 43900 Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Spartanburg Spartanburg County 44060 Spokane, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Spokane Spokane County 44100 Springfield, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Springfield Menard County, Sangamon County 44140 Springfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Springfield Franklin County, Hampden County , Hampshire County 44180 Springfield, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Springfield Christian County , Dallas County, Greene County , Polk County, Webster County 44220 Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Springfield Clark County 44300 State College, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: State College Centre County 44600 Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Steubenville, OH; Weirton, WV Jefferson County, OH ; Brooke County, WV ; Hancock County, WV 44700 Stockton, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Stockton San Joaquin County ### 5044940 Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sumter Sumter County 45060 Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Syracuse Madison County, Onondaga County , Oswego County 45220 Tallahassee, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tallahassee Gadsden County, Jefferson County, Leon County , Wakulla County 45300 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Tampa, S t. Petersburg, Clearwater, Largo Hernando County, Hillsborough County , Pasco County , Pinellas County 45460 Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Terre Haute Clay County, Sullivan County, Vermillion County, Vigo County 45500 Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Texarkana, TX; Texarkana, AR Miller County, AR ; Bowie County, TX 45780 Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Toledo Fulton County, Lucas County , Ottawa County, Wood County 45820 Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Topeka Jackson County, Jefferson County, Osage County, Shawnee County , Wabaunsee County 45940 Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Trenton, Ewing Mercer County 46060 Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tucson Pima County 46140 Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tulsa Creek County , Okmulgee County, Osage County , Pawnee County, Rogers County, Tulsa County , Wagoner County 46220 Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tuscaloosa Greene County, Hale County, Tuscaloosa County 46340 Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tyler Smith County 46540 Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Utica, Rome Herkimer County, Oneida County ### 5146660 Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Valdosta Brooks County, Echols County, Lanier County, Lowndes County 46700 Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Me tropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Vallejo, Fairfield Solano County 47020 Victoria, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Victoria Calhoun County, Goliad County, Victoria County 47220 Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Vineland, Millville, Bridgeton Cumberland County 47260 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Virginia Beach, VA; Norfolk, VA; Newport News, VA; Hampton, VA; Portsmouth, VA Currituck County, NC; Gloucester County, VA ; Isle of Wight County, VA; James City County, VA ; Mathews County, VA; Surry County, VA; York County , VA; Chesapeake city, VA ; Hampton city, VA ; Newport News city, VA ; Norfolk city, VA; Poquoson city, VA ; Portsmouth city, VA ; Suffolk city, VA; Virginia Beach city, VA ; Williamsburg city, VA 47300 Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Visalia, Porterville Tulare County 47380 Waco, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Waco McLennan County 47580 Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Warner Robins Houston County 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Washington, DC; Arlington, VA; Alexandria, VA; Reston, VA; Bethesda, MD; Rockville, MD; Frederick, MD; Gaithersburg, MD 13644 Bethesda-Rockville-Frederick, MD Metropolitan Division Frederick County, Montgomery County 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria , DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Division District of Columbia, DC ; Calvert County, MD; Charles County, MD; Prince George's County, MD ; Arlington County, VA ; Clarke County, VA; Fairfax County, VA ; Fauquier County, VA; Loudoun County, VA ; Prince William County, VA ; Spotsylvania County, VA; Stafford County, VA ; Warren County, VA; Alexandria city, VA ; Fairfax city, VA ; Falls Church city, VA ; Fredericksburg city, VA; Manassas city, VA ; Manassas Park city , VA; Jefferson County, WV 47940 Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Waterloo, Cedar Falls Black Hawk County , Bremer County, Grundy County 48140 Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wausau Marathon County ### 5248300 Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Wenatchee, East Wenatchee Chelan County , Douglas County 48540 Wheeling, WV-OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wheeling, WV Belmont County, OH ; Marshall County, WV ; Ohio County, WV 48620 Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area  Principal City: Wichita Butler County, Harvey County, Sedgwick County , Sumner County 48660 Wichita Falls, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wichita Falls Archer County, Clay County, Wichita County 48700 Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Williamsport Lycoming County 48900 Wilmington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wilmington Brunswick County , New Hanover County , Pender County 49020 Winchester, VA-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Winchester, VA Frederick County, VA ; Winchester city, VA ; Hampshire County, WV 49180 Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Winston-Salem Davie County, Forsyth County , Stokes County , Yadkin County 49340 Worcester, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Worcester Worcester County 49420 Yakima, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yakima Yakima County 49500 Yauco, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yauco Guánica Municipio , Guayanilla Municipio , Peñuelas Municipio , Yauco Municipio 49620 York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: York, Hanover York County 49660 Youngstown-Warren-Bo ardman, OH-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Youngstown, OH; Warren, OH; Boardman, OH Mahoning County, OH ; Trumbull County, OH ; Mercer County, PA  Pursuant to Section 526 of P.L. 99-500, Harvey County, KS was added to the Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area effective October 18, 1986. ### 5349700 Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yuba City Sutter County , Yuba County 49740 Yuma, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yuma Yuma County ### 54List 3 Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Metropolitan Divisions This list provides titles, codes, and definitions for t he 29 Metropolitan Divisions within their respective Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Centra l counties are shown in italics. 14460 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA -NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Boston, MA; Cambridge, MA; Quincy, MA; Newton, MA; Framingham, MA; Waltham, MA; Peabody, MA 14484 Boston-Quincy, MA Metropolitan Division Norfolk County, Plymouth County , Suffolk County 15764 Cambridge-Newton-Framingham, MA Metropolitan Division Middlesex County 37764 Peabody, MA Metropolitan Division Essex County 40484 Rockingham County-Strafford County, NH Metropolitan Division Rockingham County , Strafford County 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN -WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Chicago, IL; Joliet, IL; Naperv ille, IL; Elgin, IL; Gary, IN; Evanston, IL; Arlington Heights, IL; Schaumburg, IL; Skokie, IL; Des Plaines, IL; Hoffman Estates, IL 16974 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL Metropolitan Division Cook County , DeKalb County, DuPage County , Grundy County, Kane County , Kendall County , McHenry County , Will County 23844 Gary, IN Metropolitan Division Jasper County, Lake County , Newton County, Porter County 29404 Lake County-Kenosha County , IL-WI Metropolitan Division Lake County, IL ; Kenosha County, WI 19100 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlin gton, Plano, Irving, Carrollton, Denton, McKinney, Richardson 19124 Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX Metropolitan Division Collin County , Dallas County , Delta County, Denton County, Ellis County , Hunt County, Kaufman County, Rockwall County 23104 Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Division Johnson County, Parker County, Tarrant County , Wise County 19820 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Detroit, Warren, Livonia, Dear born, Troy, Farmington Hills, Southfield, Pontiac, Taylor, Novi 19804 Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Division Wayne County 47644 Warren-Troy-Farmington H ills, MI Metropolitan Division Lapeer County, Livingston County, Macomb County , Oakland County , St. Clair County ### 5531100 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Los Angeles, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Anaheim, Irvine, Glendale, Pomona, Pasadena, Torrance, Orange, Fullerton, Cost a Mesa, Burbank, Compton, Carson, Santa Monica, Newport Beach, Tustin, Montebello, Monterey Park, Gardena, Arcadia, Paramount, Fountain Valley, Cerritos 31084 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA Metropolitan Division Los Angeles County 42044 Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA Metropolitan Division Orange County 33100 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Po mpano Beach, West Palm Beach, Miami Beach, Kendall, Boca Raton, Deerfield Beach, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Homestead 22744 Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfi eld Beach, FL Metropolitan Division Broward County 33124 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL Metropolitan Division Miami-Dade County 48424 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, FL Metropolitan Division Palm Beach County 35620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isl and, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: New York, NY; Newark, NJ; Ed ison, NJ; White Plains, NY; Wayne, NJ; Union, NJ; New Brunswick, NJ 20764 Edison-New Brunswick, NJ Metropolitan Division Middlesex County , Monmouth County , Ocean County , Somerset County 35004 Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division Nassau County , Suffolk County 35084 Newark-Union, NJ-PA Metropolitan Division Essex County, NJ ; Hunterdon County, NJ ; Morris County, NJ ; Sussex County, NJ ; Union County, NJ ; Pike County, PA 35644 New York-White Plains-Way ne, NY-NJ Metropolitan Division Bergen County, NJ ; Hudson County, NJ ; Passaic County, NJ ; Bronx County, NY ; Kings County, NY ; New York County, NY ; Putnam County, NY ; Queens County, NY ; Richmond County, NY ; Rockland County, NY ; Westchester County, NY 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Philadelphia, PA; Camden, NJ; Wilmington, DE 15804 Camden, NJ Metropolitan Division Burlington County , Camden County , Gloucester County 37964 Philadelphia, PA Metropolitan Division Bucks County , Chester County , Delaware County , Montgomery County , Philadelphia County 48864 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ Metropolitan Division New Castle County, DE ; Cecil County, MD ; Salem County, NJ 41860 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: San Francisco, Oakland, Fremont, Hayward, Berkeley, San Mateo, San Leandro, Redwood City, Pleasanton, Walnut Creek, South San Fr ancisco, San Rafael 36084 Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Division Alameda County , Contra Costa County 41884 San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA Metropolitan Division Marin County , San Francisco County , San Mateo County ### 5642660 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue, Everett, Kent, Renton, Auburn 42644 Seattle-Bellevue-Evere tt, WA Metropolitan Division King County , Snohomish County 45104 Tacoma, WA Metropolitan Division Pierce County 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Washington, DC; Arlington, VA; Alexandria, VA; Reston, VA; Bethesda, MD; Rockville, MD; Frederick, MD; Gaithersburg, MD 13644 Bethesda-Rockville-Frederick, MD Metropolitan Division Frederick County, Montgomery County 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria , DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Division District of Columbia, DC ; Calvert County, MD; Charles County, MD; Prince George's County, MD ; Arlington County, VA ; Clarke County, VA; Fairfax County, VA ; Fauquier County, VA; Loudoun County, VA ; Prince William County, VA ; Spotsylvania County, VA; Stafford County, VA ; Warren County, VA; Alexandria city, VA; Fairfax city, VA ; Falls Church city, VA ; Fredericksburg city, VA; Manassas city, VA ; Manassas Park city, VA ; Jefferson County, WV ### 57List 4 Micropolitan Statistical Areas This list provides titles and codes, principal cities, and definitions in counties and equivalent entities for all 581 Micropolitan Statistical Areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. The two new Micropolitan Statistical Areas are identified on the list. Central counties are shown in italics. 10020 Abbeville, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Abbeville Vermilion Parish 10100 Aberdeen, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Aberdeen Brown County , Edmunds County 10140 Aberdeen, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Aberdeen Grays Harbor County 10220 Ada, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ada Pontotoc County 10260 Adjuntas, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Adjuntas Adjuntas Municipio 10300 Adrian, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Adrian Lenawee County 10460 Alamogordo, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alamogordo Otero County 10540 Albany-Lebanon, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Albany, Lebanon Linn County 10620 Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Albemarle Stanly County 10660 Albert Lea, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Albert Lea Freeborn County 10700 Albertville, AL Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Albertville Marshall County 10760 Alexander City, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alexander City Coosa County, Tallapoosa County ### 5810820 Alexandria, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alexandria Douglas County 10860 Alice, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alice Jim Wells County 10880 Allegan, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Holland Allegan County 10940 Alma, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alma Gratiot County 10980 Alpena, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Alpena Alpena County 11060 Altus, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Altus Jackson County 11140 Americus, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Americus Schley County, Sumter County 11220 Amsterdam, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Amsterdam Montgomery County 11380 Andrews, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Andrews Andrews County 11420 Angola, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Angola Steuben County 11580 Arcadia, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Arcadia DeSoto County 11620 Ardmore, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ardmore Carter County , Love County 11660 Arkadelphia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Arkadelphia Clark County 11740 Ashland, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ashland Ashland County ### 5911780 Ashtabula, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ashtabula Ashtabula County 11820 Astoria, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Astoria Clatsop County 11860 Atchison, KS Micropolit an Statistical Area Principal City: Atchison Atchison County 11900 Athens, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Athens Athens County 11940 Athens, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Athens McMinn County 11980 Athens, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Athens Henderson County 12140 Auburn, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Auburn DeKalb County 12180 Auburn, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Auburn Cayuga County 12300 Augusta-Waterville, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Augusta, Waterville Kennebec County 12380 Austin, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Austin Mower County 12460 Bainbridge, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bainbridge Decatur County 12660 Baraboo, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Baraboo Sauk County 12740 Barre, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Barre Washington County 12780 Bartlesville, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bartlesville Washington County ### 6012820 Bastrop, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bastrop Morehouse Parish 12860 Batavia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Batavia Genesee County 12900 Batesville, AR Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Batesville Independence County 13060 Bay City, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bay City Matagorda County 13100 Beatrice, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Beatrice Gage County 13180 Beaver Dam, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Beaver Dam Dodge County 13220 Beckley, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Beckley Raleigh County 13260 Bedford, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bedford Lawrence County 13300 Beeville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Beeville Bee County 13340 Bellefontaine, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bellefontaine Logan County 13420 Bemidji, MN Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Bemidji Beltrami County 13500 Bennettsville, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bennettsville Marlboro County 13540 Bennington, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bennington Bennington County 13620 Berlin, NH-VT Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Berlin, NH Coos County, NH ; Essex County, VT ### 6113660 Big Rapids, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Big Rapids Mecosta County 13700 Big Spring, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Big Spring Howard County 13860 Bishop, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bishop Inyo County 13940 Blackfoot, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Blackfoot Bingham County 14100 Bloomsburg-Berwick, PA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Bloomsburg, Berwick Columbia County , Montour County 14140 Bluefield, WV-VA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bluefield, WV Tazewell County, VA ; Mercer County, WV 14180 Blytheville, AR Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Blytheville Mississippi County 14220 Bogalusa, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bogalusa Washington Parish 14300 Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bonham Fannin County 14340 Boone, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Boone Boone County 14380 Boone, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Boone Watauga County 14420 Borger, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Borger Hutchinson County 14580 Bozeman, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bozeman Gallatin County 14620 Bradford, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bradford McKean County ### 6214660 Brainerd, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brainerd Cass County, Crow Wing County 14700 Branson, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Branson Stone County, Taney County 14780 Brenham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brenham Washington County 14820 Brevard, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brevard Transylvania County 14940 Brigham City, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brigham City Box Elder County 15020 Brookhaven, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brookhaven Lincoln County 15060 Brookings, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brookings Curry County 15100 Brookings, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brookings Brookings County 15140 Brownsville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brownsville Haywood County 15220 Brownwood, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Brownwood Brown County 15340 Bucyrus, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Bucyrus Crawford County 15420 Burley, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Burley Cassia County , Minidoka County 15460 Burlington, IA-IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Burlington, IA Henderson County, IL; Des Moines County, IA ### 6315580 Butte-Silver Bow, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Butte-Silver Bow (balance) * Silver Bow County 15620 Cadillac, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cadillac Missaukee County, Wexford County 15660 Calhoun, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Calhoun Gordon County 15700 Cambridge, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cambridge Dorchester County 15740 Cambridge, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cambridge Guernsey County 15780 Camden, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Camden Calhoun County, Ouachita County 15820 Campbellsville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Campbellsville Taylor County 15860 Cañon City, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cañon City Fremont County 15900 Canton, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Canton Fulton County 16060 Carbondale, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Carbondale Jackson County 16100 Carlsbad-Artesia, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Carlsbad, Artesia Eddy County 16260 Cedar City, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cedar City Iron County 16340 Cedartown, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cedartown Polk County * Butte-Silver Bow (balance) refers to the portion of th e consolidated government of Butte city and Silver Bow County minus the separately in corporated place of Walkerville within the consolidated city. ### 6416380 Celina, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Celina Mercer County 16420 Central City, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Central City Muhlenberg County 16460 Centralia, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Centralia Marion County 16500 Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Centralia Lewis County 16540 Chambersburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Chambersburg Franklin County 16660 Charleston-Mattoon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Charleston, Mattoon Coles County , Cumberland County 16900 Chester, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Chester Chester County 17060 Chillicothe, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Chillicothe Ross County 17200 Claremont, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Claremont Sullivan County 17220 Clarksburg, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clarksburg Doddridge County, Harrison County , Taylor County 17260 Clarksdale, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clarksdale Coahoma County 17340 Clearlake, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clearlake Lake County 17380 Cleveland, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cleveland Bolivar County 17500 Clewiston, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clewiston Hendry County ### 6517540 Clinton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clinton Clinton County 17580 Clovis, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Clovis Curry County 17620 Coamo, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Coamo Coamo Municipio, Salinas Municipio 17700 Coffeyville, KS Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Coffeyville Montgomery County 17740 Coldwater, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Coldwater Branch County 17940 Columbia, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbia Maury County 18060 Columbus, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbus Lowndes County 18100 Columbus, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Columbus Platte County 18180 Concord, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Concord Merrimack County 18220 Connersville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Connersville Fayette County 18260 Cookeville, TN Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Cookeville Jackson County, Overton County, Putnam County 18300 Coos Bay, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Coos Bay Coos County 18340 Corbin, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Corbin Whitley County 18380 Cordele, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cordele Crisp County ### 6618420 Corinth, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Corinth Alcorn County 18460 Cornelia, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cornelia Habersham County 18500 Corning, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Corning Steuben County 18620 Corsicana, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Corsicana Navarro County 18660 Cortland, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Cortland Cortland County 18740 Coshocton, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Coshocton Coshocton County 18820 Crawfordsville, IN Micr opolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Crawfordsville Montgomery County 18860 Crescent City, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Crescent City Del Norte County 18900 Crossville, TN Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Crossville Cumberland County 18940 Crowley, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Crowley Acadia Parish 18980 Cullman, AL Micropolit an Statistical Area Principal City: Cullman Cullman County 19020 Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Culpeper Culpeper County 19220 Danville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Danville Boyle County , Lincoln County 19300 Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Daphne, Fairhope, Foley, Gulf Shores Baldwin County ### 6719540 Decatur, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Decatur Adams County 19580 Defiance, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Defiance Defiance County 19620 Del Rio, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Del Rio Val Verde County 19700 Deming, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Deming Luna County 19760 DeRidder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: DeRidder Beauregard Parish 19860 Dickinson, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dickinson Billings County, Stark County 19900 Dillon, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dillon Dillon County 19940 Dixon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dixon Lee County 19980 Dodge City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dodge City Ford County 20060 Douglas, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Douglas Atkinson County, Coffee County 20140 Dublin, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dublin Johnson County, Laurens County 20180 DuBois, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: DuBois Clearfield County 20300 Dumas, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dumas Moore County 20340 Duncan, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Duncan Stephens County ### 6820380 Dunn, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dunn Harnett County 20420 Durango, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Durango La Plata County 20460 Durant, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Durant Bryan County 20540 Dyersburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Dyersburg Dyer County 20580 Eagle Pass, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Eagle Pass Maverick County 20620 East Liverpool-Salem, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: East Liverpool, Salem Columbiana County 20660 Easton, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Easton Talbot County 20700 East Stroudsburg, PA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: East Stroudsburg Monroe County 20780 Edwards, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Edwards Eagle County , Lake County 20820 Effingham, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Effingham Effingham County 20900 El Campo, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: El Campo Wharton County 20980 El Dorado, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: El Dorado Union County 21020 Elizabeth City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Elizabeth City Camden County, Pasquotank County , Perquimans County 21120 Elk City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Elk City Beckham County ### 6921220 Elko, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Elko Elko County , Eureka County 21260 Ellensburg, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ellensburg Kittitas County 21380 Emporia, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Emporia Chase County, Lyon County 21420 Enid, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Enid Garfield County 21460 Enterprise-Ozark, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Enterprise, Ozark Coffee County , Dale County 21540 Escanaba, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Escanaba Delta County 21580 Espanola, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Espanola Rio Arriba County 21640 Eufaula, AL-GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Eufaula, AL Barbour County, AL ; Quitman County, GA 21700 Eureka-Arcata-Fortuna, CA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Eureka, Arcata, Fortuna Humboldt County 21740 Evanston, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Evanston Uinta County 21860 Fairmont, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fairmont Martin County 21900 Fairmont, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fairmont Marion County 21980 Fallon, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fallon Churchill County 22060 Faribault-Northfield, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Faribault, Northfield Rice County ### 7022100 Farmington, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Farmington St. Francois County 22260 Fergus Falls, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fergus Falls Otter Tail County 22280 Fernley, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fernley Lyon County 22300 Findlay, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Findlay Hancock County 22340 Fitzgerald, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fitzgerald Ben Hill County , Irwin County 22580 Forest City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Forest City Rutherford County 22620 Forrest City, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Forrest City St. Francis County 22700 Fort Dodge, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Dodge Webster County 22780 Fort Leonard Wood, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Leonard Wood Pulaski County 22800 Fort Madison-Keokuk, IA-MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Fort Madison, IA; Keokuk, IA Lee County, IA ; Clark County, MO 22820 Fort Morgan, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Morgan Morgan County 22840 Fort Payne, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Payne DeKalb County 22860 Fort Polk South, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Polk South Vernon Parish 22980 Fort Valley, GA Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fort Valley Peach County ### 7123140 Frankfort, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Frankfort Clinton County 23180 Frankfort, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Frankfort Anderson County, Franklin County 23240 Fredericksburg, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fredericksburg Gillespie County 23300 Freeport, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Freeport Stephenson County 23340 Fremont, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fremont Dodge County 23380 Fremont, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Fremont Sandusky County 23500 Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gaffney Cherokee County 23620 Gainesville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gainesville Cooke County 23660 Galesburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Galesburg Knox County , Warren County 23700 Gallup, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gallup McKinley County 23780 Garden City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Garden City Finney County 23820 Gardnerville Ranchos, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gardnerville Ranchos Douglas County 23860 Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Georgetown Georgetown County 23900 Gettysburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gettysburg Adams County ### 7223940 Gillette, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gillette Campbell County 23980 Glasgow, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Glasgow Barren County , Metcalfe County 24100 Gloversville, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Gloversville Fulton County 24180 Granbury, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Granbury Hood County , Somervell County 24260 Grand Island, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grand Island Hall County , Howard County, Merrick County 24380 Grants, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grants Cibola County 24420 Grants Pass, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grants Pass Josephine County 24460 Great Bend, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Great Bend Barton County 24620 Greeneville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Greeneville Greene County 24700 Greensburg, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Greensburg Decatur County 24740 Greenville, MS Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Greenville Washington County 24820 Greenville, OH Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Greenville Darke County 24900 Greenwood, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Greenwood Carroll County, Leflore County 24940 Greenwood, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Greenwood Greenwood County ### 7324980 Grenada, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Grenada Grenada County 25100 Guymon, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Guymon Texas County 25220 Hammond, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hammond Tangipahoa Parish 25300 Hannibal, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hannibal Marion County , Ralls County 25340 Harriman, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Harriman Roane County 25380 Harrisburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Harrisburg Saline County 25460 Harrison, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Harrison Boone County , Newton County 25580 Hastings, NE Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Hastings Adams County , Clay County 25660 Havre, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Havre Hill County 25700 Hays, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hays Ellis County 25720 Heber, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Heber Wasatch County 25740 Helena, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Helena Jefferson County, Lewis and Clark County 25760 Helena-West Helena, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Helena-West Helena Phillips County 25780 Henderson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Henderson Vance County ### 7425820 Hereford, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hereford Deaf Smith County 25900 Hilo, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hilo Hawaii County 25940 Hilton Head Island-Beaufort, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Hilton Head Island, Beaufort Beaufort County , Jasper County 26020 Hobbs, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hobbs Lea County 26140 Homosassa Springs, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Homosassa Springs Citrus County 26220 Hood River, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hood River Hood River County 26260 Hope, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hope Hempstead County , Nevada County 26340 Houghton, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Houghton Houghton County , Keweenaw County 26460 Hudson, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hudson Columbia County 26480 Humboldt, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Humboldt Gibson County 26500 Huntingdon, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Huntingdon Huntingdon County 26540 Huntington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Huntington Huntington County 26660 Huntsville, TX Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Huntsville Walker County 26700 Huron, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Huron Beadle County ### 7526740 Hutchinson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hutchinson Reno County 26780 Hutchinson, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Hutchinson McLeod County 26860 Indiana, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Indiana Indiana County 26940 Indianola, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Indianola Sunflower County 27020 Iron Mountain, MI-WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Iron Mountain, MI Dickinson County, MI ; Florence County, WI 27220 Jackson, WY-ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jackson, WY Teton County, ID, Teton County, WY 27300 Jacksonville, IL Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Jacksonville Morgan County , Scott County 27380 Jacksonville, TX Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Jacksonville Cherokee County 27420 Jamestown, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jamestown Stutsman County 27460 Jamestown-Dunkirk-Fredonia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Jamestown, Dunkirk, Fredonia Chautauqua County 27540 Jasper, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jasper Dubois County , Pike County 27580 Jayuya, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jayuya Jayuya Municipio 27660 Jennings, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jennings Jefferson Davis Parish 27700 Jesup, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Jesup Wayne County ### 7627940 Juneau, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Juneau Juneau City and Borough 27980 Kahului-Wailuku, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Kahului, Wailuku Maui County 28060 Kalispell, MT Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Kalispell Flathead County 28180 Kapaa, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kapaa Kauai County 28260 Kearney, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kearney Buffalo County , Kearney County 28300 Keene, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Keene Cheshire County 28340 Kendallville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kendallville Noble County 28380 Kennett, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kennett Dunklin County 28500 Kerrville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kerrville Kerr County 28540 Ketchikan, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ketchikan Ketchikan Gateway Borough 28580 Key West, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Key West Monroe County 28620 Kill Devil Hills, NC Micr opolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kill Devil Hills Dare County 28780 Kingsville, TX Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Kingsville Kenedy County, Kleberg County 28820 Kinston, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kinston Lenoir County ### 7728860 Kirksville, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kirksville Adair County , Schuyler County 28900 Klamath Falls, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Klamath Falls Klamath County 28980 Kodiak, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Kodiak Kodiak Island Borough 29060 Laconia, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Laconia Belknap County 29220 La Follette, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: La Follette Campbell County 29260 La Grande, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: La Grande Union County 29300 LaGrange, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: LaGrange Troup County 29380 Lake City, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lake City Columbia County 29500 Lamesa, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lamesa Dawson County 29580 Lancaster, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lancaster Lancaster County 29660 Laramie, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Laramie Albany County 29780 Las Vegas, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Las Vegas San Miguel County 29860 Laurel, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Laurel Jasper County, Jones County 29900 Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Laurinburg Scotland County ### 7829980 Lawrenceburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lawrenceburg Lawrence County 30060 Lebanon, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lebanon Laclede County 30100 Lebanon, NH-VT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lebanon, NH Grafton County, NH ; Orange County, VT; Windsor County, VT 30220 Levelland, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Levelland Hockley County 30260 Lewisburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lewisburg Union County 30280 Lewisburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lewisburg Marshall County 30380 Lewistown, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lewistown Mifflin County 30420 Lexington, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lexington Dawson County , Gosper County 30500 Lexington Park, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lexington Park St. Mary's County 30580 Liberal, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Liberal Seward County 30660 Lincoln, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lincoln Logan County 30740 Lincolnton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lincolnton Lincoln County 30820 Lock Haven, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lock Haven Clinton County 30900 Logansport, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Logansport Cass County ### 7930940 London, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: London Laurel County 31060 Los Alamos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Los Alamos Los Alamos County 31260 Lufkin, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lufkin Angelina County 31300 Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Lumberton Robeson County 31380 Macomb, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Macomb McDonough County 31500 Madison, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Madison Jefferson County 31580 Madisonville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Madisonville Hopkins County 31620 Magnolia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Magnolia Columbia County 31660 Malone, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Malone Franklin County 31820 Manitowoc, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Manitowoc Manitowoc County 31920 Marble Falls, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area (New) Principal City: Marble Falls Burnet County, TX 31940 Marinette, WI-MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marinette, WI Menominee County, MI ; Marinette County, WI 31980 Marion, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marion Grant County 32020 Marion, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marion Marion County ### 8032060 Marion-Herrin, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Marion, Herrin Williamson County 32100 Marquette, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marquette Marquette County 32140 Marshall, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marshall Lyon County 32180 Marshall, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marshall Saline County 32220 Marshall, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marshall Harrison County 32260 Marshalltown, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Marshalltown Marshall County 32270 Marshfield-Wisconsin Rapids, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Marshfield, Wisconsin Rapids Wood County 32280 Martin, TN Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Martin Weakley County 32300 Martinsville, VA Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Martinsville Henry County , Martinsville city 32340 Maryville, MO Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Maryville Nodaway County 32380 Mason City, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mason City Cerro Gordo County , Worth County 32460 Mayfield, KY Micropolit an Statistical Area Principal City: Mayfield Graves County 32500 Maysville, KY Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Maysville Lewis County, Mason County 32540 McAlester, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: McAlester Pittsburg County ### 8132620 McComb, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: McComb Amite County, Pike County 32660 McMinnville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: McMinnville Warren County 32700 McPherson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: McPherson McPherson County 32740 Meadville, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Meadville Crawford County 32860 Menomonie, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Menomonie Dunn County 32940 Meridian, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Meridian Clarke County, Kemper County, Lauderdale County 32980 Merrill, WI Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Merrill Lincoln County 33020 Mexico, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mexico Audrain County 33060 Miami, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Miami Ottawa County 33180 Middlesborough, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Middlesborough Bell County 33220 Midland, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Midland Midland County 33300 Milledgeville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Milledgeville Baldwin County , Hancock County 33380 Minden, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Minden Webster Parish 33420 Mineral Wells, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mineral Wells Palo Pinto County ### 8233500 Minot, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Minot McHenry County , Renville County, Ward County 33580 Mitchell, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mitchell Davison County , Hanson County 33620 Moberly, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Moberly Randolph County 33820 Monroe, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Monroe Green County 33940 Montrose, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Montrose Montrose County 33980 Morehead City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Morehead City Carteret County 34020 Morgan City, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Morgan City St. Mary Parish 34140 Moscow, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Moscow Latah County 34180 Moses Lake, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Moses Lake Grant County 34220 Moultrie, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Moultrie Colquitt County 34260 Mountain Home, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mountain Home Baxter County 34300 Mountain Home, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mountain Home Elmore County 34340 Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Airy Surry County 34380 Mount Pleasant, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Pleasant Isabella County ### 8334420 Mount Pleasant, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Pleasant Titus County 34460 Mount Sterling, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Sterling Bath County, Menifee County, Montgomery County 34500 Mount Vernon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Vernon Hamilton County, Jefferson County 34540 Mount Vernon, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Mount Vernon Knox County 34660 Murray, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Murray Calloway County 34700 Muscatine, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Muscatine Louisa County, Muscatine County 34780 Muskogee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Muskogee Muskogee County 34860 Nacogdoches, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Nacogdoches Nacogdoches County 35020 Natchez, MS-LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Natchez, MS Concordia Parish, LA ; Adams County, MS 35060 Natchitoches, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Natchitoches Natchitoches Parish 35100 New Bern, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: New Bern Craven County , Jones County, Pamlico County 35140 Newberry, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Newberry Newberry County 35220 New Castle, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: New Castle Henry County 35260 New Castle, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: New Castle Lawrence County ### 8435340 New Iberia, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: New Iberia Iberia Parish 35420 New Philadelphia-Dover, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: New Philadelphia, Dover Tuscarawas County 35460 Newport, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Newport Cocke County 35500 Newton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Newton Jasper County 35580 New Ulm, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: New Ulm Brown County 35700 Nogales, AZ Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Nogales Santa Cruz County 35740 Norfolk, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Norfolk Madison County , Pierce County, Stanton County 35820 North Platte, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: North Platte Lincoln County , Logan County, McPherson County 35860 North Vernon, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: North Vernon Jennings County 35900 North Wilkesboro, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: North Wilkesboro Wilkes County 35940 Norwalk, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Norwalk Huron County 36020 Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oak Harbor Island County 36060 Oak Hill, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oak Hill Fayette County 36180 Ocean Pines, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ocean Pines Worcester County ### 8536300 Ogdensburg-Massena, NY Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Ogdensburg, Massena St. Lawrence County 36340 Oil City, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oil City Venango County 36380 Okeechobee, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Okeechobee Okeechobee County 36460 Olean, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Olean Cattaraugus County 36580 Oneonta, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oneonta Otsego County 36620 Ontario, OR-ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ontario, OR Payette County, ID ; Malheur County, OR 36660 Opelousas-Eunice, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Opelousas, Eunice St. Landry Parish 36700 Orangeburg, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Orangeburg Orangeburg County 36820 Oskaloosa, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oskaloosa Mahaska County 36860 Ottawa-Streator, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Ottawa, Streator Bureau County , La Salle County , Putnam County 36900 Ottumwa, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ottumwa Wapello County 36940 Owatonna, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Owatonna Steele County 37020 Owosso, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Owosso Shiawassee County 37060 Oxford, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Oxford Lafayette County ### 8637140 Paducah, KY-IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Paducah, KY Massac County, IL; Ballard County, KY; Livingston County, KY; McCracken County, KY 37220 Pahrump, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pahrump Nye County 37260 Palatka, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Palatka Putnam County 37300 Palestine, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Palestine Anderson County 37420 Pampa, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pampa Gray County , Roberts County 37500 Paragould, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Paragould Greene County 37540 Paris, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Paris Henry County 37580 Paris, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Paris Lamar County 37660 Parsons, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Parsons Labette County 37740 Payson, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Payson Gila County 37780 Pecos, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pecos Reeves County 37800 Pella, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pella Marion County 37820 Pendleton-Hermiston, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Pendleton, Hermiston Morrow County, Umatilla County 37940 Peru, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Peru Miami County ### 8738020 Phoenix Lake-Cedar Ridge, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Phoenix Lake-Cedar Ridge Tuolumne County 38100 Picayune, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Picayune Pearl River County 38180 Pierre, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pierre Hughes County , Stanley County 38200 Pierre Part, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pierre Part Assumption Parish 38260 Pittsburg, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pittsburg Crawford County 38380 Plainview, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Plainview Hale County 38420 Platteville, WI Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Platteville Grant County 38460 Plattsburgh, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Plattsburgh Clinton County 38500 Plymouth, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Plymouth Marshall County 38580 Point Pleasant, WV-OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Point Pleasant, WV Gallia County, OH ; Mason County, WV 38620 Ponca City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ponca City Kay County 38700 Pontiac, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pontiac Livingston County 38740 Poplar Bluff, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Poplar Bluff Butler County 38780 Portales, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Portales Roosevelt County ### 8838820 Port Angeles, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Port Angeles Clallam County 39020 Portsmouth, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Portsmouth Scioto County 39060 Pottsville, PA Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Pottsville Schuylkill County 39220 Price, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Price Carbon County 39260 Prineville, OR Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Prineville Crook County 39420 Pullman, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Pullman Whitman County 39500 Quincy, IL-MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Quincy, IL Adams County, IL ; Lewis County, MO 39700 Raymondville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Raymondville Willacy County 39780 Red Bluff, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Red Bluff Tehama County 39860 Red Wing, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Red Wing Goodhue County 39940 Rexburg, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rexburg Fremont County, Madison County 39980 Richmond, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Richmond Wayne County 40080 Richmond-Berea, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Richmond, Berea Madison County , Rockcastle County 40100 Rio Grande City-Roma, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Rio Grande City, Roma Starr County ### 8940180 Riverton, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Riverton Fremont County 40260 Roanoke Rapids, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Roanoke Rapids Halifax County , Northampton County 40300 Rochelle, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rochelle Ogle County 40460 Rockingham, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rockingham Richmond County 40500 Rockland, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rockland Knox County 40540 Rock Springs, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rock Springs Sweetwater County 40620 Rolla, MO Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Rolla Phelps County 40700 Roseburg, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Roseburg Douglas County 40740 Roswell, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Roswell Chaves County 40760 Ruidoso, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ruidoso Lincoln County 40780 Russellville, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Russellville Pope County , Yell County 40820 Ruston, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ruston Jackson Parish, Lincoln Parish 40860 Rutland, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Rutland Rutland County 40940 Safford, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Safford Graham County , Greenlee County ### 9041220 St. Marys, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: St. Marys Camden County 41260 St. Marys, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: St. Marys Elk County 41460 Salina, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salina Ottawa County, Saline County 41580 Salisbury, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Salisbury Rowan County 41820 Sanford, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sanford Lee County 42180 Santa Isabel, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Santa Isabel Santa Isabel Municipio 42300 Sault Ste. Marie, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa County 42380 Sayre, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sayre Bradford County 42420 Scottsbluff, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Scottsbluff Banner County, Scotts Bluff County 42460 Scottsboro, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Scottsboro Jackson County 42500 Scottsburg, IN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Scottsburg Scott County 42580 Seaford, DE Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Seaford Sussex County 42620 Searcy, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Searcy White County 42700 Sebring, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sebring Highlands County ### 9142740 Sedalia, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sedalia Pettis County 42780 Selinsgrove, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Selinsgrove Snyder County 42820 Selma, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Selma Dallas County 42860 Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Seneca Oconee County 42900 Seneca Falls, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Seneca Falls Seneca County 42940 Sevierville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sevierville Sevier County 42980 Seymour, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Seymour Jackson County 43060 Shawnee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Shawnee Pottawatomie County 43140 Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Shelby Cleveland County 43180 Shelbyville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area Principal City: Shelbyville Bedford County 43220 Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Shelton Mason County 43260 Sheridan, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sheridan Sheridan County 43320 Show Low, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Show Low Navajo County, AZ 43380 Sidney, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sidney Shelby County ### 9243420 Sierra Vista-Douglas, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Sierra Vista, Douglas Cochise County 43460 Sikeston, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sikeston Scott County 43500 Silver City, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Silver City Grant County 43540 Silverthorne, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Silverthorne Summit County 43660 Snyder, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Snyder Scurry County 43700 Somerset, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Somerset Pulaski County 43740 Somerset, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Somerset Somerset County 43860 Southern Pines-Pinehurst, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Southern Pines, Pinehurst Moore County 43940 Spearfish, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Spearfish Lawrence County 43980 Spencer, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Spencer Clay County 44020 Spirit Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Spirit Lake Dickinson County 44260 Starkville, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Starkville Oktibbeha County 44340 Statesboro, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Statesboro Bulloch County 44380 Statesville-Mooresville, NC Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Statesville, Mooresville Iredell County ### 9344420 Staunton-Waynesboro, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Staunton, Waynesboro Augusta County , Staunton city , Waynesboro city 44500 Stephenville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Stephenville Erath County 44540 Sterling, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sterling Logan County 44580 Sterling, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sterling Whiteside County 44620 Stevens Point, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Stevens Point Portage County 44660 Stillwater, OK Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Stillwater Payne County 44740 Storm Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Storm Lake Buena Vista County 44780 Sturgis, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sturgis St. Joseph County 44860 Sulphur Springs, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sulphur Springs Hopkins County 44900 Summerville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Summerville Chattooga County 44980 Sunbury, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sunbury Northumberland County 45000 Susanville, CA Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Susanville Lassen County 45020 Sweetwater, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Sweetwater Nolan County 45140 Tahlequah, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tahlequah Cherokee County ### 9445180 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Talladega, Sylacauga Talladega County 45260 Tallulah, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tallulah Madison Parish 45340 Taos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Taos Taos County 45380 Taylorville, IL Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Taylorville Christian County 45520 The Dalles, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: The Dalles Wasco County 45540 The Villages, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: The Villages Sumter County 45580 Thomaston, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Thomaston Upson County 45620 Thomasville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Thomasville Thomas County 45640 Thomasville-Lexington, NC Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Thomasville, Lexington Davidson County 45660 Tiffin, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tiffin Seneca County 45700 Tifton, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tifton Tift County 45740 Toccoa, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Toccoa Stephens County 45860 Torrington, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Torrington Litchfield County 45900 Traverse City, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Traverse City Benzie County, Grand Traverse County , Kalkaska County, Leelanau County ### 9545980 Troy, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Troy Pike County 46020 Truckee-Grass Valley, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Truckee, Grass Valley Nevada County 46100 Tullahoma, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tullahoma Coffee County , Franklin County, Moore County 46180 Tupelo, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tupelo Itawamba County, Lee County , Pontotoc County 46260 Tuskegee, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Tuskegee Macon County 46300 Twin Falls, ID Micr opolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Twin Falls Jerome County, Twin Falls County 46380 Ukiah, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Ukiah Mendocino County 46420 Union, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Union Union County 46460 Union City, TN-KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Union City, TN Fulton County, KY; Obion County, TN 46500 Urbana, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Urbana Champaign County 46580 Utuado, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Utuado Utuado Municipio 46620 Uvalde, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Uvalde Uvalde County 46740 Valley, AL Micro politan Statistical Area Principal City: Valley Chambers County 46780 Van Wert, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Van Wert Van Wert County ### 9646820 Vermillion, SD Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Vermillion Clay County 46860 Vernal, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Vernal Uintah County 46900 Vernon, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Vernon Wilbarger County 46980 Vicksburg, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Vicksburg Warren County 47080 Vidalia, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Vidalia Montgomery County, Toombs County 47180 Vincennes, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Vincennes Knox County 47340 Wabash, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wabash Wabash County 47420 Wahpeton, ND-MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wahpeton, ND Wilkin County, MN; Richland County, ND 47460 Walla Walla, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Walla Walla Walla Walla County 47500 Walterboro, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Walterboro Colleton County 47540 Wapakoneta, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wapakoneta Auglaize County 47620 Warren, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Warren Warren County 47660 Warrensburg, MO Micr opolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Warrensburg Johnson County 47700 Warsaw, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Warsaw Kosciusko County ### 9747780 Washington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Washington Daviess County 47820 Washington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Washington Beaufort County 47920 Washington Court House, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Washington Court House Fayette County 47980 Watertown, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Watertown Codington County , Hamlin County 48020 Watertown-Fort Atkinson, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Watertown, Fort Atkinson Jefferson County 48060 Watertown-Fort Drum, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal Cities: Watertown, Fort Drum Jefferson County 48100 Wauchula, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wauchula Hardee County 48180 Waycross, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Waycross Pierce County, Ware County 48220 Weatherford, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area (New) Principal City: Weatherford Custer County, OK 48460 West Plains, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: West Plains Howell County 48500 West Point, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: West Point Clay County 48580 Whitewater, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Whitewater Walworth County 48740 Willimantic, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Willimantic Windham County 48780 Williston, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Williston Williams County ### 9848820 Willmar, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Willmar Kandiyohi County 48940 Wilmington, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wilmington Clinton County 48980 Wilson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wilson Wilson County 49060 Winfield, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Winfield Cowley County 49100 Winona, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Winona Winona County 49260 Woodward, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Woodward Woodward County 49300 Wooster, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Wooster Wayne County 49380 Worthington, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Worthington Nobles County 49460 Yankton, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yankton Yankton County 49540 Yazoo City, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Principal City: Yazoo City Yazoo County 49780 Zanesville, OH Micropo litan Statistical Area Principal City: Zanesville Muskingum County ### 99List 5 Combined Statistical Areas This list provides titles, codes, and definitions in metropolitan statistical areas and/or micropolitan statistical areas for the 128 Combined Statistical Areas with 358 component areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. One new Combined Statistical Area is identified in the list. 102 Albany-Corvallis-Lebanon, OR Combined Statistical Area Albany-Lebanon, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area Corvallis, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 104 Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam, NY Combined Statistical Area Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Amsterdam, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Gloversville, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Hudson, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 112 Ames-Boone, IA Combined Statistical Area Ames, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Boone, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 118 Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Combined Statistical Area Appleton, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Oshkosh-Neenah, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 120 Asheville-Brevard, NC Combined Statistical Area Asheville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Brevard, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 122 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL Combined Statistical Area Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cedartown, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, GA Metrop olitan Statistical Area LaGrange, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Thomaston, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Valley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 126 Austin-Round Rock-Marble Falls, TX Combined Statistical Area (New) Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos , TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Marble Falls, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 132 Baton Rouge-Pierre Part, LA Combined Statistical Area Baton Rouge, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area Pierre Part, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 138 Beckley-Oak Hill, WV Combined Statistical Area Beckley, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Oak Hill, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 100140 Bend-Prineville, OR Combined Statistical Area Bend, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area Prineville, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 142 Birmingham-Hoover-Cullman, AL Combined Statistical Area Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Cullman, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 148 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA -RI-NH Combined Statistical Area Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA -NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Concord, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Laconia, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Manchester-Nashua, NH Metropolitan Statistical Area Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Worcester, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 154 Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville , TX Combined Statistical Area Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Raymondville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 160 Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY Combined Statistical Area Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Olean, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 164 Cape Girardeau-Sikeston-Jackson, MO-IL Combined Statistical Area Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-I L Metropolitan Statistical Area Sikeston, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 166 Carbondale-Marion-Herrin, IL Combined Statistical Area Carbondale, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Marion-Herrin, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 172 Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC-SC Combined Statistical Area Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Charlotte-Gastonia-Ro ck Hill, NC-SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Chester, SC Micropo litan Statistical Area Lancaster, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Lincolnton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Salisbury, NC Micro politan Statistical Area Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Statesville-Mooresville, NC Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 174 Chattanooga-Cleveland-Athens, TN-GA Combined Statistical Area Athens, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Chattanooga, TN-GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 176 Chicago-Naperville-Michi gan City, IL-IN-WI Combined Statistical Area Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN -WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 178 Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN Combined Statistical Area Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Wilmington, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 101180 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT Combined Statistical Area Claremont, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area Lebanon, NH-VT Micropolitan Statistical Area 184 Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH Combined Statistical Area Akron, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Ashtabula, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 188 Clovis-Portales, NM Combined Statistical Area Clovis, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Portales, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 192 Columbia-Newberry, SC Co mbined Statistical Area Columbia, SC Metropo litan Statistical Area Newberry, SC Micropo litan Statistical Area 194 Columbus-Auburn-Opelika, GA-AL Combined Statistical Area Auburn-Opelika, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, GA-AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Tuskegee, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 198 Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH Combined Statistical Area Chillicothe, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, OH Metropo litan Statistical Area Marion, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Mount Vernon, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Washington Court House, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 200 Columbus-West Point, MS Combined Statistical Area Columbus, MS Micropo litan Statistical Area West Point, MS Micro politan Statistical Area 202 Corbin-London, KY Combined Statistical Area Corbin, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area London, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 204 Corpus Christi-Kingsville, TX Combined Statistical Area Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Kingsville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 206 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Combined Statistical Area Athens, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Gainesville, TX Microp olitan Statistical Area Granbury, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Mineral Wells, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Sherman-Denison, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 212 Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH Combined Statistical Area Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Greenville, OH Micropo litan Statistical Area Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Urbana, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 102216 Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO Combined Statistical Area Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 218 Des Moines-Newton-Pella, IA Combined Statistical Area Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Newton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area Pella, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 220 Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI Combined Statistical Area Ann Arbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Monroe, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 222 Dothan-Enterprise-Ozark, AL Combined Statistical Area Dothan, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Enterprise-Ozark, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 232 Eau Claire-Menomonie, WI Combined Statistical Area Eau Claire, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Menomonie, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 242 Fairmont-Clarksburg, WV Combined Statistical Area Clarksburg, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area Fairmont, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 244 Fargo-Wahpeton, ND-MN Combined Statistical Area Fargo, ND-MN Metropolitan Statistical Area Wahpeton, ND-MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 248 Findlay-Tiffin, OH Combined Statistical Area Findlay, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Tiffin, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 252 Fond du Lac-Beaver Dam, WI Combined Statistical Area Beaver Dam, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Fond du Lac, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 256 Fort Polk South-DeRidder, LA Combined Statistical Area DeRidder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Fort Polk South, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 258 Fort Wayne-Huntington-Auburn, IN Combined Statistical Area Angola, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Auburn, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Decatur, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Huntington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Kendallville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 260 Fresno-Madera, CA Combined Statistical Area Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 103266 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI Combined Statistical Area Allegan, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Holland-Grand Haven, MI Me tropolitan Statistical Area Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 268 Greensboro--Winston-Salem--High Point, NC Combined Statistical Area Burlington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Greensboro-High Point, NC Me tropolitan Statistical Area Thomasville-Lexington, NC Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 273 Greenville-Spartanbur g-Anderson, SC Combined Statistical Area Anderson, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area Union, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 274 Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula, MS Combined Statistical Area Gulfport-Biloxi, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 276 Harrisburg-Carlisle-Lebanon, PA Combined Statistical Area Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 278 Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic , CT Combined Statistical Area Hartford-West Hartford -East Hartford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Willimantic, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area 288 Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX Combined Statistical Area Bay City, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Huntsville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 290 Huntsville-Decatur, AL Combined Statistical Area Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area Huntsville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 292 Idaho Falls-Blackfoot, ID Combined Statistical Area Blackfoot, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Idaho Falls, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 294 Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN Combined Statistical Area Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Columbus, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Crawfordsville, IN Micr opolitan Statistical Area Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area New Castle, IN Microp olitan Statistical Area North Vernon, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 104296 Ithaca-Cortland, NY Combined Statistical Area Cortland, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Ithaca, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 297 Jackson-Humboldt, TN Combined Statistical Area Humboldt, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Jackson, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 298 Jackson-Yazoo City, MS Combined Statistical Area Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area Yazoo City, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 304 Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol (Tri-C ities), TN-VA Combined Statistical Area Johnson City, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN -VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 308 Jonesboro-Paragould, AR Combined Statistical Area Jonesboro, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Paragould, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 312 Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS Combined Statistical Area Atchison, KS Micropolit an Statistical Area Kansas City, MO-KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Warrensburg, MO Micr opolitan Statistical Area 314 Knoxville-Sevierville-La Follette , TN Combined Statistical Area Harriman, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area La Follette, TN Micropo litan Statistical Area Morristown, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area Newport, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Sevierville, TN Microp olitan Statistical Area 316 Kokomo-Peru, IN Comb ined Statistical Area Kokomo, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Peru, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 318 Lafayette-Acadiana, LA Co mbined Statistical Area Abbeville, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Crowley, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Lafayette, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area New Iberia, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Opelousas-Eunice, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 320 Lafayette-Frankfort, IN Combined Statistical Area Frankfort, IN Micropo litan Statistical Area Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 324 Lake Charles-Jennings, LA Combined Statistical Area Jennings, LA Micropo litan Statistical Area Lake Charles, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 330 Lansing-East Lansing-Owosso, MI Combined Statistical Area Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Owosso, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 105332 Las Vegas-Paradise-Pahrump, NV Combined Statistical Area Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area Pahrump, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 336 Lexington-Fayette—Frankfort—Richmond, KY Combined Statistical Area Frankfort, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Mount Sterling, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Richmond-Berea, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 338 Lima-Van Wert-Wapakoneta, OH Combined Statistical Area Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area Van Wert, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Wapakoneta, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 340 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Pine Bl uff, AR Combined Statistical Area Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conwa y, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Pine Bluff, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area Searcy, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 346 Longview-Marshall, TX Combined Statistical Area Longview, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Marshall, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 348 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA Combined Statistical Area Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario , CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 350 Louisville/Jefferson County—Eliz abethtown—Scottsburg, KY-IN Combined Statistical Area Elizabethtown, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Scottsburg, IN Microp olitan Statistical Area 352 Lubbock-Levelland, TX Combined Statistical Area Levelland, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area Lubbock, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 354 Lumberton-Laurinburg, NC Combined Statistical Area Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 356 Macon-Warner Robins-Fort Valley, GA Combined Statistical Area Fort Valley, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Macon, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 358 Madison-Baraboo, WI Combined Statistical Area Baraboo, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Madison, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 360 Mansfield-Bucyrus, OH Combined Statistical Area Bucyrus, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Mansfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 106364 Mayagüez-San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Combined Statistical Area Mayagüez, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 372 Midland-Odessa, TX Combined Statistical Area Midland, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area Odessa, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 376 Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI Combined Statistical Area Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Racine, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 378 Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI Combined Statistical Area Faribault-Northfield, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Hutchinson, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN—WI Metropolitan Statistical Area Red Wing, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 380 Mobile-Daphne-Fairhope, AL Combined Statistical Area Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Mobile, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 384 Monroe-Bastrop, LA Combined Statistical Area Bastrop, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Monroe, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 388 Montgomery-Alexander City, AL Combined Statistical Area Alexander City, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Montgomery, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 396 Myrtle Beach-Conway-Georgetown, SC Combined Statistical Area Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach-Co nway, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 400 Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—Colum bia, TN Combined Statistical Area Columbia, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—Frank lin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 406 New Orleans-Metairie-Bogalusa, LA Combined Statistical Area Bogalusa, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 408 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ- CT-PA Combined Statistical Area Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area Kingston, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isl and, NY-NJ-PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Torrington, CT Micropolitan Statistical Area Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 416 Oklahoma City-Shawnee, OK Combined Statistical Area Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area Shawnee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 107420 Omaha-Council Bluffs-Fremont, NE—IA Combined Statistical Area Fremont, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 422 Orlando-Deltona-Daytona Beach, FL Combined Statistical Area Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Palm Coast, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area The Villages, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 424 Paducah-Mayfield, KY-IL Combined Statistical Area Mayfield, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area Paducah, KY-IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 426 Peoria-Canton, IL Combined Statistical Area Canton, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Peoria, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 428 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ -DE-MD Combined Statistical Area Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Reading, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 430 Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA Combined Statistical Area New Castle, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Pittsburgh, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 434 Ponce-Yauco-Coamo, PR Combined Statistical Area Coamo, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Ponce, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Isabel, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area Yauco, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 438 Portland-Lewiston-South Portland, ME Combined Statistical Area Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 442 Port St. Lucie-Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Combined Statistical Area Port St. Lucie, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 450 Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC Combined Statistical Area Dunn, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area Raleigh-Cary, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 456 Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV Combined Statistical Area Fernley, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Reno-Sparks, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 464 Rochester-Batavia-Seneca Falls, NY Combined Statistical Area Batavia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Rochester, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area Seneca Falls, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 108466 Rockford-Freeport-Rochelle, IL Combined Statistical Area Freeport, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Rochelle, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Rockford, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 472 Sacramento—Arden-Arcade—Yuba City , CA-NV Combined Statistical Area Gardnerville Ranchos, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area Sacramento—Arden-Arca de—Roseville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Truckee-Grass Valley, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 474 Saginaw-Bay City-Saginaw Township No rth, MI Combined Statistical Area Bay City, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 476 St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL Combined Statistical Area Farmington, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area St. Louis, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 480 Salisbury-Ocean Pines, MD Combined Statistical Area Ocean Pines, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Salisbury, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 482 Salt Lake City-Ogden-Clearfield, UT Combined Statistical Area Brigham City, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Heber, UT Micropolitan Statistical Area Ogden-Clearfield, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area Salt Lake City, UT Metropolitan Statistical Area 488 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area Napa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Me tropolitan Statistical Area 490 San Juan-Caguas-Fajardo, PR Combined Statistical Area Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area Utuado, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 492 Santa Fe-Espanola, NM Combined Statistical Area Espanola, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 494 Sarasota-Bradenton-Punta Gorda, FL Combined Statistical Area North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area Punta Gorda, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 496 Savannah-Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA Combined Statistical Area Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Savannah, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 109500 Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA Combined Statistical Area Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area Olympia, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 508 Shreveport-Bossier City-Minden, LA Combined Statistical Area Minden, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 512 Sioux City-Vermillion, IA-NE- SD Combined Statistical Area Sioux City, IA-NE-SD Metropolitan Statistical Area Vermillion, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 515 South Bend-Elkhart-Mishawaka, IN-MI Combined Statistical Area Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area Plymouth, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 526 Sunbury-Lewisburg-Selinsgrove, PA Combined Statistical Area Lewisburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Selinsgrove, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Sunbury, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 532 Syracuse-Auburn, NY Co mbined Statistical Area Auburn, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 534 Toledo-Fremont, OH Combined Statistical Area Fremont, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 538 Tulsa-Bartlesville, OK Combined Statistical Area Bartlesville, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 540 Tyler-Jacksonville, TX Co mbined Statistical Area Jacksonville, TX Micro politan Statistical Area Tyler, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 542 Union City-Martin, TN-KY Combined Statistical Area Martin, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area Union City, TN-KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 548 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia , DC-MD-VA-WV Combined Statistical Area Baltimore-Towson, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area Lexington Park, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area Winchester, VA-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 554 Wausau-Merrill, WI Combined Statistical Area Merrill, WI Micropolitan Statistical Area Wausau, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 110556 Wichita-Winfield, KS Combined Statistical Area Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area Winfield, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 558 Williamsport-Lock Haven, PA Combined Statistical Area Lock Haven, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 564 York-Hanover-Gettysburg, PA Combined Statistical Area Gettysburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 566 Youngstown-Warren-East Liverpool, OH-PA Combined Statistical Area East Liverpool-Salem, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-P A Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 111List 6 Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisi ons, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas by State Alabama 10700 Albertville, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 10760 Alexander City, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 11500 Anniston-Oxford, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 122 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL (part) Combined Statistical Area 12220 Auburn-Opelika, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 13820 Birmingham-Hoover, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 142 Birmingham-Hoover-Cullman, AL Combined Statistical Area 17980 Columbus, GA-AL (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 194 Columbus-Auburn-Opelika, GA-A L (part) Combined Statistical Area 18980 Cullman, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 19300 Daphne-Fairhope-Foley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 19460 Decatur, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 20020 Dothan, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 222 Dothan-Enterprise-Ozark, AL Combined Statistical Area 21460 Enterprise-Ozark, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 21640 Eufaula, AL-GA (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 22520 Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 22840 Fort Payne, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 23460 Gadsden, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 26620 Huntsville, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 290 Huntsville-Decatur, AL Combined Statistical Area 33660 Mobile, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 380 Mobile-Daphne-Fairhope, AL Combined Statistical Area 33860 Montgomery, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 388 Montgomery-Alexander City, AL Combined Statistical Area 42460 Scottsboro, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 42820 Selma, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 45180 Talladega-Sylacauga, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 45980 Troy, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 46220 Tuscaloosa, AL Metropolitan Statistical Area 46260 Tuskegee, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area 46740 Valley, AL Micropolitan Statistical Area Alaska 11260 Anchorage, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area 21820 Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area 27940 Juneau, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area 28540 Ketchikan, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area 28980 Kodiak, AK Micropolitan Statistical Area Arizona 22380 Flagstaff, AZ Me tropolitan Statistical Area 29420 Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 35700 Nogales, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 37740 Payson, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 38060 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 39140 Prescott, AZ Me tropolitan Statistical Area 40940 Safford, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 43320 Show Low, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 43420 Sierra Vista-Douglas, AZ Micropolitan Statistical Area 46060 Tucson, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 49740 Yuma, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 112Arkansas 11660 Arkadelphia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 12900 Batesville, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 14180 Blytheville, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 15780 Camden, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 20980 El Dorado, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 22220 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR -MO (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 22620 Forrest City, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 22900 Fort Smith, AR-OK (par t) Metropolitan Statistical Area 25460 Harrison, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 25760 Helena-West Helena, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 26260 Hope, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 26300 Hot Springs, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 27860 Jonesboro, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 308 Jonesboro-Paragould, AR Combined Statistical Area 30780 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area 340 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Pine Bl uff, AR Combined Statistical Area 31620 Magnolia, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 32820 Memphis, TN-MS-AR (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 34260 Mountain Home, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 37500 Paragould, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 38220 Pine Bluff, AR Me tropolitan Statistical Area 40780 Russellville, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 42620 Searcy, AR Micropolitan Statistical Area 45500 Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area California 12540 Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 13860 Bishop, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 17020 Chico, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 17340 Clearlake, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 18860 Crescent City, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20940 El Centro, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 21700 Eureka-Arcata-Fortuna, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 23420 Fresno, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 260 Fresno-Madera, CA Combined Statistical Area 25260 Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 348 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA Combined Statistical Area 31100 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa A na, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 31084 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA Metropolitan Division 42044 Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irv ine, CA Metropolitan Division 31460 Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 32900 Merced, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 33700 Modesto, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 34900 Napa, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 37100 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 38020 Phoenix Lake-Cedar Ridge, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 39780 Red Bluff, CA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 39820 Redding, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40140 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontar io, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40900 Sacramento—Arden-Arcade—Rosevil le, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 472 Sacramento—Arden-Arcade—Yuba City, CA-NV (part) Combined Statistical Area 41500 Salinas, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 41740 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 41860 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 36084 Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Division 41884 San Francisco-San Mateo-Redw ood City, CA Metropolitan Division 488 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area 41940 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42020 San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42060 Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Gole ta, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42100 Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 113California (continued) 42220 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44700 Stockton, CA Me tropolitan Statistical Area 45000 Susanville, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46020 Truckee-Grass Valley, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46380 Ukiah, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46700 Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47300 Visalia-Porterville, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49700 Yuba City, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Colorado 14500 Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 15860 Cañon City, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 17820 Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 19740 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 216 Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO Combined Statistical Area 20420 Durango, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 20780 Edwards, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22660 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 22820 Fort Morgan, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 24300 Grand Junction, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 24540 Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 33940 Montrose, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 39380 Pueblo, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area 43540 Silverthorne, CO Micropolitan Statistical Area 44540 Sterling, CO Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Connecticut 14860 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk , CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 25540 Hartford-West Hartford-East Har tford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 278 Hartford-West Hartford-Willimant ic, CT Combined Statistical Area 35300 New Haven-Milford, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 408 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area 35980 Norwich-New London, CT Metropolitan Statistical Area 45860 Torrington, CT Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 48740 Willimantic, CT Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Delaware 20100 Dover, DE Metropolitan Statistical Area 428 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-D E-MD (part) Combined Statistical Area 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 48864 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ (part) Metropolitan Division 42580 Seaford, DE Mi cropolitan Statistical Area District of Columbia 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Division 548 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (part) Combined Statistical Area Florida 11580 Arcadia, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 15980 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 17500 Clewiston, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 18880 Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-De stin, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19660 Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Be ach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 23540 Gainesville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 26140 Homosassa Springs, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 27260 Jacksonville, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area 28580 Key West, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 29380 Lake City, FL Micropolitan Statistical Area 29460 Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 114Florida (continued) 33100 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Be ach, FL 22744 Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deer field Beach, FL 33124 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL 48424 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, FL 34940 Naples-Marco Island, FL 35840 North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL 36100 Ocala, FL 36380 Okeechobee, FL 36740 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 422 Orlando-Deltona-Daytona Beach, FL 37260 Palatka, FL 37340 Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL 37380 Palm Coast, FL 37460 Panama City-Lynn Haven-Panama City Beach, FL 37860 Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL 38940 Port St. Lucie, FL 442 Port St. Lucie-Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL 39460 Punta Gorda, FL 494 Sarasota-Bradenton-Punta Gorda, FL 42680 Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL 42700 Sebring, FL 45220 Tallahassee, FL 45300 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwate r, FL 45540 The Villages, FL 48100 Wauchula, FL Georgia 10500 Albany, GA 11140 Americus, GA 12020 Athens-Clarke County, GA 12060 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marie tta, GA 122 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL (part) 12260 Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC (part) 12460 Bainbridge, GA 15260 Brunswick, GA 15660 Calhoun, GA 16340 Cedartown, GA 16860 Chattanooga, TN-GA (par t) 174 Chattanooga-Cleveland-Athens, TN-G A (part) 17980 Columbus, GA-AL (part) 194 Columbus-Auburn-Opelika, GA-A L (part) 18380 Cordele, GA 18460 Cornelia, GA 19140 Dalton, GA 20060 Douglas, GA 20140 Dublin, GA 21640 Eufaula, AL-GA (part) 22340 Fitzgerald, GA 22980 Fort Valley, GA 23580 Gainesville, GA 25980 Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 27700 Jesup, GA 29300 LaGrange, GA 31420 Macon, GA 356 Macon-Warner Robins-Fort Valley, GA 33300 Milledgeville, GA 34220 Moultrie, GA 40660 Rome, GA 42340 Savannah, GA 496 Savannah-Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 41220 St. Marys, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Division Metropolitan Division Metropolitan Division Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 115Georgia (continued) 44340 Statesboro, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44900 Summerville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45580 Thomaston, GA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 45620 Thomasville, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 45700 Tifton, GA Micr opolitan Statistical Area 45740 Toccoa, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 46660 Valdosta, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47080 Vidalia, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47580 Warner Robins, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 48180 Waycross, GA Micropolitan Statistical Area Hawaii 25900 Hilo, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area 26180 Honolulu, HI Metropolitan Statistical Area 27980 Kahului-Wailuku, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area 28180 Kapaa, HI Micropolitan Statistical Area Idaho 13940 Blackfoot, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 14260 Boise City-Nampa, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 15420 Burley, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 17660 Coeur d'Alene, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 26820 Idaho Falls, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 292 Idaho Falls-Blackfoot, ID Combined Statistical Area 27220 Jackson, WY-ID (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 30300 Lewiston, ID-WA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 30860 Logan, UT-ID (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 34140 Moscow, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 34300 Mountain Home, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 36620 Ontario, OR-ID (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 38540 Pocatello, ID Metropolitan Statistical Area 39940 Rexburg, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area 46300 Twin Falls, ID Micropolitan Statistical Area Illinois 14060 Bloomington-Normal, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 15460 Burlington, IA-IL (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 15900 Canton, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 16020 Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-I L (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 164 Cape Girardeau-Sikeston-Jackson, MO-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 16060 Carbondale, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 166 Carbondale-Marion -Herrin, IL Combin ed Statistical Area 16460 Centralia, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 16580 Champaign-Urbana, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 16660 Charleston-Mattoon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-I N-WI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 16974 Chicago-Joliet-Naperv ille, IL Metropolitan Division 29404 Lake County-Kenosha County, IL-WI (part) Metropolitan Division 176 Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-I N-WI (part) Combined Statistical Area 19180 Danville, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19340 Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-I L (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 19500 Decatur, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 19940 Dixon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 20820 Effingham, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 23300 Freeport, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 23660 Galesburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 25380 Harrisburg, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 27300 Jacksonville, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 28100 Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 30660 Lincoln, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 31380 Macomb, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 116Illinois (continued) 32060 Marion-Herrin, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 34500 Mount Vernon, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 36860 Ottawa-Streator, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 37140 Paducah, KY-IL (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 424 Paducah-Mayfield, KY-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 37900 Peoria, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 426 Peoria-Canton, IL Combined Statistical Area 38700 Pontiac, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 39500 Quincy, IL-MO (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 40300 Rochelle, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 40420 Rockford, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 466 Rockford-Freeport-Rochelle, IL Combined Statistical Area 44100 Springfield, IL Metropolitan Statistical Area 41180 St. Louis, MO-IL (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 476 St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 44580 Sterling, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area 45380 Taylorville, IL Micropolitan Statistical Area Indiana 11300 Anderson, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 11420 Angola, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 12140 Auburn, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 13260 Bedford, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 14020 Bloomington, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-I N-WI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 23844 Gary, IN Metropolitan Division 176 Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-I N-WI (part) Combined Statistical Area 17140 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 178 Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH- KY-IN (part) Combined Statistical Area 18020 Columbus, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 18220 Connersville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 18820 Crawfordsville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 19540 Decatur, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 21140 Elkhart-Goshen, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 21780 Evansville, IN-KY (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 23060 Fort Wayne, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 258 Fort Wayne-Huntington-Auburn, IN Combined Statistical Area 23140 Frankfort, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 24700 Greensburg, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26540 Huntington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26900 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 294 Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN Combined Statistical Area 27540 Jasper, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 28340 Kendallville, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 29020 Kokomo, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 316 Kokomo-Peru, IN Combined Statistical Area 29140 Lafayette, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 320 Lafayette-Frankfort, IN Combined Statistical Area 30900 Logansport, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 31140 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-I N (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 350 Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Sco ttsburg, KY-IN (part) Combined Statistical Area 31500 Madison, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 31980 Marion, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 33140 Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 34620 Muncie, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 35220 New Castle, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 35860 North Vernon, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 37940 Peru, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 38500 Plymouth, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 39980 Richmond, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 42500 Scottsburg, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 117Indiana (continued) 42980 Seymour, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 43780 South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 515 South Bend-Elkhart-Mishawaka, IN-MI (part) Combined Statistical Area 45460 Terre Haute, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area 47180 Vincennes, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47340 Wabash, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47700 Warsaw, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area 47780 Washington, IN Micropolitan Statistical Area Iowa 11180 Ames, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 112 Ames-Boone, IA Combined Statistical Area 14340 Boone, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 15460 Burlington, IA-IL (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 16300 Cedar Rapids, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 17540 Clinton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 19340 Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-I L (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 19780 Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 20220 Dubuque, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 218 Des Moines-Newton-Pella, IA Combined Statistical Area 22700 Fort Dodge, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 22800 Fort Madison-Keokuk, IA-MO (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 26980 Iowa City, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area 32260 Marshalltown, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 32380 Mason City, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34700 Muscatine, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35500 Newton, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36540 Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 420 Omaha-Council Bluffs-Fremont, NE-I A (part) Combined Statistical Area 36820 Oskaloosa, IA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 36900 Ottumwa, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 37800 Pella, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 43580 Sioux City, IA-NE-SD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 512 Sioux City-Vermillion, IA-NE-SD (part) Combined Statistical Area 43980 Spencer, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44020 Spirit Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44740 Storm Lake, IA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47940 Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA Metropolitan Statistical Area Kansas 11860 Atchison, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17700 Coffeyville, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 19980 Dodge City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 21380 Emporia, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 23780 Garden City, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24460 Great Bend, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 25700 Hays, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 26740 Hutchinson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 28140 Kansas City, MO-KS (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 312 Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS (part) Combined Statistical Area 29940 Lawrence, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 30580 Liberal, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 31740 Manhattan, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 32700 McPherson, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 37660 Parsons, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 38260 Pittsburg, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 41460 Salina, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area 41140 St. Joseph, MO-KS (par t) Metropolitan Statistical Area 45820 Topeka, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 48620 Wichita, KS Metropolitan Statistical Area 556 Wichita-Winfield, KS Combined Statistical Area ### 118Kansas (continued) 49060 Winfield, KS Micropolitan Statistical Area Kentucky 14540 Bowling Green, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 15820 Campbellsville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 16420 Central City, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 17140 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 178 Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH- KY-IN (part) Combined Statistical Area 17300 Clarksville, TN-KY (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 18340 Corbin, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 202 Corbin-London, KY Combined Statistical Area 19220 Danville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 21060 Elizabethtown, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 21780 Evansville, IN-KY (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 23180 Frankfort, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 23980 Glasgow, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 26580 Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 30460 Lexington-Fayette, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 336 Lexington-Fayette—Frankfort—Richm ond, KY Combined Statistical Area 30940 London, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 31140 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-I N (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 350 Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Sco ttsburg, KY-IN (part) Combined Statistical Area 31580 Madisonville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 32460 Mayfield, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 32500 Maysville, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 33180 Middlesborough, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 34460 Mount Sterling, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 34660 Murray, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36980 Owensboro, KY Metropolitan Statistical Area 37140 Paducah, KY-IL (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 424 Paducah-Mayfield, KY-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 40080 Richmond-Berea, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 43700 Somerset, KY Micropolitan Statistical Area 46460 Union City, TN-KY (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 542 Union City-Martin, TN-KY (part) Combined Statistical Area Louisiana 10020 Abbeville, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 10780 Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 12820 Bastrop, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 12940 Baton Rouge, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 132 Baton Rouge-Pierre Part, LA Combined Statistical Area 14220 Bogalusa, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 18940 Crowley, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 19760 DeRidder, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 22860 Fort Polk South, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 256 Fort Polk South-DeRidder, LA Combined Statistical Area 25220 Hammond, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 26380 Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 27660 Jennings, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 29180 Lafayette, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 318 Lafayette-Acadiana, LA Combined Statistical Area 29340 Lake Charles, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 324 Lake Charles-Jennings, LA Combined Statistical Area 33380 Minden, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 33740 Monroe, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 384 Monroe-Bastrop, LA Combined Statistical Area 34020 Morgan City, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35020 Natchez, MS-LA (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 35060 Natchitoches, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35340 New Iberia, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 119Louisiana (continued) 406 New Orleans-Metairie-Bogalusa, LA Combined Statistical Area 35380 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner , LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 36660 Opelousas-Eunice, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 38200 Pierre Part, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area 40820 Ruston, LA Micr opolitan Statistical Area 43340 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area 508 Shreveport-Bossier City-Minden, LA Combined Statistical Area 45260 Tallulah, LA Micropolitan Statistical Area Maine 12300 Augusta-Waterville, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area 12620 Bangor, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 30340 Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 438 Portland-Lewiston-South Portl and, ME Combined Statistical Area 38860 Portland-South Portland-Biddef ord, ME Metropolitan Statistical Area 40500 Rockland, ME Micropolitan Statistical Area Maryland 12580 Baltimore-Towson, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 15700 Cambridge, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 19060 Cumberland, MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 20660 Easton, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 25180 Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 30500 Lexington Park, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 36180 Ocean Pines, MD Micropolitan Statistical Area 428 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-D E-MD (part) Combined Statistical Area 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 48864 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ (part) Metropolitan Division 41540 Salisbury, MD Metropolitan Statistical Area 480 Salisbury-Ocean Pines, MD Combined Statistical Area 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 13644 Bethesda-Rockville-Frederick, MD Metropolitan Division 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Division 548 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (part) Combined Statistical Area Massachusetts 12700 Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 14460 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 14484 Boston-Quincy, MA Metropolitan Division 15764 Cambridge-Ne wton-Framingham, MA Metropolitan Division 37764 Peabody, MA Metropolitan Division 148 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI- NH (part) Combined Statistical Area 38340 Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 39300 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 44140 Springfield, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49340 Worcester, MA Metropolitan Statistical Area Michigan 10300 Adrian, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10880 Allegan, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10940 Alma, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 10980 Alpena, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 11460 Ann Arbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 12980 Battle Creek, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 13020 Bay City, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 13660 Big Rapids, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 15620 Cadillac, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 17740 Coldwater, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 220 Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI Combined Statistical Area 19820 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 120Michigan (continued) 19804 Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Division 47644 Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI Metropolitan Division 21540 Escanaba, MI Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 22420 Flint, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 24340 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 266 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI Combined Statistical Area 26100 Holland-Grand Haven, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 26340 Houghton, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 27020 Iron Mountain, MI-WI Micropolitan Statistical Area 27100 Jackson, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 28020 Kalamazoo-Portage, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 29620 Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 330 Lansing-East Lansing-Owosso, MI Combined Statistical Area 31940 Marinette, WI-MI (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 32100 Marquette, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 33220 Midland, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 33780 Monroe, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 34380 Mount Pleasant, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 34740 Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 35660 Niles-Benton Harbor, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 37020 Owosso, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 474 Saginaw-Bay City-Saginaw Township North, MI Combined Statistical Area 40980 Saginaw-Saginaw Township Nort h, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 42300 Sault Ste. Marie, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area 43780 South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 515 South Bend-Elkhart-Mishawaka, IN-MI (part) Combined Statistical Area 44780 Sturgis, MI Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 45900 Traverse City, MI Micropolitan Statistical Area Minnesota 10660 Albert Lea, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 10820 Alexandria, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 12380 Austin, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 13420 Bemidji, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 14660 Brainerd, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 20260 Duluth, MN-WI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 21860 Fairmont, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 22020 Fargo, ND-MN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 244 Fargo-Wahpeton, ND-MN (part) Combined Statistical Area 22060 Faribault-Northfield, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 22260 Fergus Falls, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 24220 Grand Forks, ND-MN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 26780 Hutchinson, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 29100 La Crosse, WI-MN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 31860 Mankato-North Mankato, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 32140 Marshall, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 33460 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 378 Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI (part) Combined Statistical Area 35580 New Ulm, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 36940 Owatonna, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 39860 Red Wing, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 40340 Rochester, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 41060 St. Cloud, MN Metropolitan Statistical Area 47420 Wahpeton, ND-MN (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 48820 Willmar, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 49100 Winona, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area 49380 Worthington, MN Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 121Mississippi 15020 Brookhaven, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17260 Clarksdale, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 17380 Cleveland, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 18060 Columbus, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 200 Columbus-West Point, MS Combined Statistical Area 18420 Corinth, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24740 Greenville, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24900 Greenwood, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 24980 Grenada, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 25060 Gulfport-Biloxi, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 274 Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula, MS Combined Statistical Area 25620 Hattiesburg, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 26940 Indianola, MS Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 27140 Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 298 Jackson-Yazoo City, MS Combined Statistical Area 29860 Laurel, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 32620 McComb, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 32820 Memphis, TN-MS-AR (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 32940 Meridian, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 35020 Natchez, MS-LA (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 37060 Oxford, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 37700 Pascagoula, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area 38100 Picayune, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 44260 Starkville, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 46180 Tupelo, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 46980 Vicksburg, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 48500 West Point, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area 49540 Yazoo City, MS Micropolitan Statistical Area Missouri 14700 Branson, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 16020 Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-I L (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 164 Cape Girardeau-Sikeston-Jackson, MO-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 17860 Columbia, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 22100 Farmington, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22220 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR -MO (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 22780 Fort Leonard Wood, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 22800 Fort Madison-Keokuk, IA-MO (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 25300 Hannibal, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 27620 Jefferson City, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 27900 Joplin, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 28140 Kansas City, MO-KS (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 312 Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS (part) Combined Statistical Area 28380 Kennett, MO Micr opolitan Statistical Area 28860 Kirksville, MO Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 30060 Lebanon, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 32180 Marshall, MO Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 32340 Maryville, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 33020 Mexico, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 33620 Moberly, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 38740 Poplar Bluff, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 39500 Quincy, IL-MO (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 40620 Rolla, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 42740 Sedalia, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 43460 Sikeston, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 44180 Springfield, MO Metropolitan Statistical Area 41140 St. Joseph, MO-KS (par t) Metropolitan Statistical Area 41180 St. Louis, MO-IL (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 476 St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL (part) Combined Statistical Area 47660 Warrensburg, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area 48460 West Plains, MO Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 122Montana 13740 Billings, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area 14580 Bozeman, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 15580 Butte-Silver Bow, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 24500 Great Falls, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area 25660 Havre, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 25740 Helena, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 28060 Kalispell, MT Micropolitan Statistical Area 33540 Missoula, MT Metropolitan Statistical Area Nebraska 13100 Beatrice, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 18100 Columbus, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 23340 Fremont, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 24260 Grand Island, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 25580 Hastings, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 28260 Kearney, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 30420 Lexington, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 30700 Lincoln, NE Metropolitan Statistical Area 35740 Norfolk, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 35820 North Platte, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 36540 Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 420 Omaha-Council Bluffs-Fremont, NE-I A (part) Combined Statistical Area 42420 Scottsbluff, NE Micropolitan Statistical Area 43580 Sioux City, IA-NE-SD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 512 Sioux City-Vermillion, IA-NE-SD (part) Combined Statistical Area Nevada 16180 Carson City, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 21220 Elko, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 21980 Fallon, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 22280 Fernley, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 23820 Gardnerville Ranchos, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 29820 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 332 Las Vegas-Paradise-Pahrump, NV Combined Statistical Area 37220 Pahrump, NV Micropolitan Statistical Area 39900 Reno-Sparks, NV Metropolitan Statistical Area 456 Reno-Sparks-Fernley, NV Combined Statistical Area 472 Sacramento—Arden-Arcade—Yuba City, CA-NV (part) Combined Statistical Area New Hampshire 13620 Berlin, NH-VT (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 14460 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 40484 Rockingham County-Strafford County, NH Metropolitan Division 148 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI- NH (part) Combined Statistical Area 17200 Claremont, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 180 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Combined Statistical Area 18180 Concord, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 28300 Keene, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 29060 Laconia, NH Micropolitan Statistical Area 30100 Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 31700 Manchester-Nashua, NH Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 123New Jersey 10900 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA- NJ (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 12100 Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 408 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area 35620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isla nd, NY-NJ-PA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 20764 Edison-New Brunswick, NJ Metropolitan Division 35084 Newark-Union, NJ-PA (part) Metropolitan Division 35644 New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ (part) Metropolitan Division 36140 Ocean City, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 428 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-D E-MD (part) Combined Statistical Area 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 15804 Camden, NJ Metropolitan Division 48864 Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ (part) Metropolitan Division 45940 Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area 47220 Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area New Mexico 10460 Alamogordo, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 10740 Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 16100 Carlsbad-Artesia, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 17580 Clovis, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 188 Clovis-Portales, NM Combined Statistical Area 19700 Deming, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 21580 Espanola, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 22140 Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 23700 Gallup, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 24380 Grants, NM Micr opolitan Statistical Area 26020 Hobbs, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 29740 Las Cruces, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 29780 Las Vegas, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 31060 Los Alamos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 38780 Portales, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 40740 Roswell, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 40760 Ruidoso, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 42140 Santa Fe, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area 492 Santa Fe-Espanola, NM Combined Statistical Area 43500 Silver City, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area 45340 Taos, NM Micropolitan Statistical Area New York 104 Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam, NY Combined Statistical Area 10580 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 11220 Amsterdam, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 12180 Auburn, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 12860 Batavia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 13780 Binghamton, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 160 Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY Combined Statistical Area 15380 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 18500 Corning, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 18660 Cortland, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 21300 Elmira, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 24020 Glens Falls, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 24100 Gloversville, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 26460 Hudson, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 27060 Ithaca, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 296 Ithaca-Cortland, NY Combined Statistical Area 27460 Jamestown-Dunkirk-Fredonia, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 28740 Kingston, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 31660 Malone, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 408 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area 35620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isla nd, NY-NJ-PA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 35004 Nassau-Suffolk, NY Metropolitan Division ### 124New York (continued) 35644 New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ (part) Metropolitan Division 36300 Ogdensburg-Massena, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36460 Olean, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 36580 Oneonta, NY Micr opolitan Statistical Area 38460 Plattsburgh, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 39100 Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 40380 Rochester, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 464 Rochester-Batavia-Seneca Falls, NY Combined Statistical Area 42900 Seneca Falls, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area 45060 Syracuse, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 532 Syracuse-Auburn, NY Combined Statistical Area 46540 Utica-Rome, NY Metropolitan Statistical Area 48060 Watertown-Fort Drum, NY Micropolitan Statistical Area North Carolina 10620 Albemarle, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 11700 Asheville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 120 Asheville-Brevard, NC Combined Statistical Area 14380 Boone, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 14820 Brevard, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 15500 Burlington, NC Me tropolitan Statistical Area 16740 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC- SC (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 172 Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC- SC (part) Combined Statistical Area 20380 Dunn, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 20500 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 21020 Elizabeth City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 22180 Fayetteville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 22580 Forest City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 24140 Goldsboro, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 24660 Greensboro-High Point, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 268 Greensboro—Winston-Salem—High Point, NC Combined Statistical Area 24780 Greenville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 25780 Henderson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 25860 Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 27340 Jacksonville, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 28620 Kill Devil Hills, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 28820 Kinston, NC Micr opolitan Statistical Area 29900 Laurinburg, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 30740 Lincolnton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 31300 Lumberton, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 354 Lumberton-Laurinburg, NC Combined Statistical Area 33980 Morehead City, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 34340 Mount Airy, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 35100 New Bern, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 35900 North Wilkesboro, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 39580 Raleigh-Cary, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 450 Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC Combined Statistical Area 40260 Roanoke Rapids, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 40460 Rockingham, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 40580 Rocky Mount, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 41580 Salisbury, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 41820 Sanford, NC Micr opolitan Statistical Area 43140 Shelby, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 43860 Southern Pines-Pinehurst, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 44380 Statesville-Mooresville, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 45640 Thomasville-Lexington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 47260 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 47820 Washington, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 48900 Wilmington, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area 48980 Wilson, NC Micropolitan Statistical Area 49180 Winston-Salem, NC Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 125North Dakota 13900 Bismarck, ND Metropolitan Statistical Area 19860 Dickinson, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 22020 Fargo, ND-MN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 244 Fargo-Wahpeton, ND-MN (part) Combined Statistical Area 24220 Grand Forks, ND-MN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 27420 Jamestown, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 33500 Minot, ND Micropolitan Statistical Area 47420 Wahpeton, ND-MN (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 48780 Williston, ND Micr opolitan Statistical Area Ohio 10420 Akron, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 11740 Ashland, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 11780 Ashtabula, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 11900 Athens, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 13340 Bellefontaine, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 15340 Bucyrus, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 15740 Cambridge, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 15940 Canton-Massillon, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 16380 Celina, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 17060 Chillicothe, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 17140 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 178 Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH- KY-IN (part) Combined Statistical Area 184 Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH Combined Statistical Area 17460 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 18140 Columbus, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 198 Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH Combined Statistical Area 18740 Coshocton, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 19380 Dayton, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 212 Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH Combined Statistical Area 19580 Defiance, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 20620 East Liverpool-Salem, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 22300 Findlay, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 248 Findlay-Tiffin, OH Combined Statistical Area 23380 Fremont, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 24820 Greenville, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 26580 Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 30620 Lima, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 338 Lima-Van Wert-Wapakoneta, OH Combined Statistical Area 31900 Mansfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 360 Mansfield-Bucyrus, OH Combined Statistical Area 32020 Marion, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 34540 Mount Vernon, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 35420 New Philadelphia-Dover, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 35940 Norwalk, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 37620 Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV -OH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 38580 Point Pleasant, WV-OH (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 39020 Portsmouth, OH Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 41780 Sandusky, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 43380 Sidney, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 44220 Springfield, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 44600 Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV ( part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 45660 Tiffin, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 45780 Toledo, OH Metropolitan Statistical Area 534 Toledo-Fremont, OH Combined Statistical Area 46500 Urbana, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 46780 Van Wert, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 47540 Wapakoneta, OH Mi cropolitan Statistical Area ### 126Ohio (continued) 47920 Washington Court House, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 48540 Wheeling, WV-OH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 48940 Wilmington, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 49300 Wooster, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area 49660 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH -PA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 566 Youngstown-Warren-East Liverpool, OH-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area 49780 Zanesville, OH Micropolitan Statistical Area Oklahoma 10220 Ada, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 11060 Altus, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 11620 Ardmore, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 12780 Bartlesville, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 20340 Duncan, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 20460 Durant, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 21120 Elk City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 21420 Enid, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 22900 Fort Smith, AR-OK (par t) Metropolitan Statistical Area 25100 Guymon, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 30020 Lawton, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 32540 McAlester, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 33060 Miami, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 34780 Muskogee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 36420 Oklahoma City, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 416 Oklahoma City-Shawnee, OK Combined Statistical Area 38620 Ponca City, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 43060 Shawnee, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 44660 Stillwater, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 45140 Tahlequah, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 46140 Tulsa, OK Metropolitan Statistical Area 538 Tulsa-Bartlesville, OK Combined Statistical Area 48220 Weatherford, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area 49260 Woodward, OK Micropolitan Statistical Area Oregon 102 Albany-Corvallis-Lebanon, OR Combined Statistical Area 10540 Albany-Lebanon, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 11820 Astoria, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 13460 Bend, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 140 Bend-Prineville, OR Combined Statistical Area 15060 Brookings, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 18300 Coos Bay, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 18700 Corvallis, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 21660 Eugene-Springfield, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 24420 Grants Pass, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 26220 Hood River, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 28900 Klamath Falls, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 29260 La Grande, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 32780 Medford, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 36620 Ontario, OR-ID (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 37820 Pendleton-Hermiston, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 38900 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR -WA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 39260 Prineville, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 40700 Roseburg, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area 41420 Salem, OR Metropolitan Statistical Area 45520 The Dalles, OR Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 127Pennsylvania 10900 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA- NJ (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 11020 Altoona, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 14100 Bloomsburg-Berwick, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 14620 Bradford, PA Micr opolitan Statistical Area 16540 Chambersburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20180 DuBois, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 20700 East Stroudsburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 21500 Erie, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 23900 Gettysburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 25420 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 276 Harrisburg-Carlisle-Lebanon, PA Combined Statistical Area 26500 Huntingdon, PA Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 26860 Indiana, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 27780 Johnstown, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 29540 Lancaster, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 30140 Lebanon, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 30260 Lewisburg, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 30380 Lewistown, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 30820 Lock Haven, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 32740 Meadville, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 35260 New Castle, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 408 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area 35620 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Isla nd, NY-NJ-PA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 35084 Newark-Union, NJ-PA (part) Metropolitan Division 36340 Oil City, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 428 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-D E-MD (part) Combined Statistical Area 37980 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ -DE-MD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 37964 Philadelphia, PA Metropolitan Division 38300 Pittsburgh, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 430 Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA Combined Statistical Area 39060 Pottsville, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 39740 Reading, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42380 Sayre, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 42540 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42780 Selinsgrove, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 43740 Somerset, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 41260 St. Marys, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44300 State College, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44980 Sunbury, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 526 Sunbury-Lewisburg-Selinsgrov e, PA Combined Statistical Area 47620 Warren, PA Micropolitan Statistical Area 48700 Williamsport, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 558 Williamsport-Lock Haven, PA Combined Statistical Area 49620 York-Hanover, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area 564 York-Hanover-Gettysburg, PA Combined Statistical Area 49660 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH -PA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 566 Youngstown-Warren-East Liverpool, OH-PA (part) Combined Statistical Area Rhode Island 148 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI- NH (part) Combined Statistical Area 39300 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 128South Carolina 11340 Anderson, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 12260 Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 13500 Bennettsville, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 16700 Charleston-North Charleston-Summerv ille, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 16740 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC- SC (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 172 Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC- SC (part) Combined Statistical Area 16900 Chester, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 17900 Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 192 Columbia-Newberry, SC Combined Statistical Area 19900 Dillon, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 22500 Florence, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 23500 Gaffney, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 23860 Georgetown, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 24860 Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 273 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC Combined Statistical Area 24940 Greenwood, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 25940 Hilton Head Island-Beaufort, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 29580 Lancaster, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 396 Myrtle Beach-Conway-Georgetown, SC Combined Statistical Area 34820 Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach- Conway, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 35140 Newberry, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 36700 Orangeburg, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 42860 Seneca, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 43900 Spartanburg, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 44940 Sumter, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area 46420 Union, SC Micropolitan Statistical Area 47500 Walterboro, SC Mi cropolitan Statistical Area South Dakota 10100 Aberdeen, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 15100 Brookings, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 26700 Huron, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 33580 Mitchell, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 38180 Pierre, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 39660 Rapid City, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area 43580 Sioux City, IA-NE-SD (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 512 Sioux City-Vermillion, IA-NE-SD (part) Combined Statistical Area 43620 Sioux Falls, SD Metropolitan Statistical Area 43940 Spearfish, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 46820 Vermillion, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 47980 Watertown, SD Micropolitan Statistical Area 49460 Yankton, SD Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Tennessee 11940 Athens, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 15140 Brownsville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 16860 Chattanooga, TN-GA (par t) Metropolitan Statistical Area 174 Chattanooga-Cleveland-Athens, TN -GA (part) Combined Statistical Area 17300 Clarksville, TN-KY (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 17420 Cleveland, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 17940 Columbia, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 18260 Cookeville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 18900 Crossville, TN Mi cropolitan Statistical Area 20540 Dyersburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 24620 Greeneville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 25340 Harriman, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 26480 Humboldt, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 27180 Jackson, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 297 Jackson-Humboldt, TN Combined Statistical Area 27740 Johnson City, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 129Tennessee (continued) 304 Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol (Tri-Cities) , TN-VA (part) Combined Statistical Area 28700 Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN- VA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 28940 Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 314 Knoxville-Sevierville-La Follette, TN Combined Statistical Area 29220 La Follette, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 29980 Lawrenceburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 30280 Lewisburg, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 32280 Martin, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 32660 McMinnville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 32820 Memphis, TN-MS-AR (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 34100 Morristown, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 34980 Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro--Fra nklin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area 400 Nashville-Davidson—Murfreesboro—Columbia, TN Combined Statistical Area 35460 Newport, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 37540 Paris, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 42940 Sevierville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 43180 Shelbyville, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 46100 Tullahoma, TN Micropolitan Statistical Area 46460 Union City, TN-KY (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 542 Union City-Martin, TN-KY (part) Combined Statistical Area Texas 10180 Abilene, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 10860 Alice, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 11100 Amarillo, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 11380 Andrews, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 11980 Athens, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 12420 Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 126 Austin-Round Rock-Marble Falls, TX Combined Statistical Area 13060 Bay City, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 13140 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 13300 Beeville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 13700 Big Spring, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14300 Bonham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14420 Borger, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 14780 Brenham, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 15180 Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 154 Brownsville-Harlingen-Raymondville, TX Combined Statistical Area 15220 Brownwood, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 17780 College Station-Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 18580 Corpus Christi, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 204 Corpus Christi-Kingsville, TX Combined Statistical Area 18620 Corsicana, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 206 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Combined Statistical Area 19100 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 19124 Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX Metropolitan Division 23104 Fort Worth-Arlingt on, TX Metropolitan Division 19620 Del Rio, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20300 Dumas, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20580 Eagle Pass, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 20900 El Campo, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 21340 El Paso, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 23240 Fredericksburg, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 23620 Gainesville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 24180 Granbury, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 25820 Hereford, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 288 Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX Combined Statistical Area 26420 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area 26660 Huntsville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 27380 Jacksonville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area 28500 Kerrville, TX Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 130Texas (continued) 28660 Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX 28780 Kingsville, TX 29500 Lamesa, TX 29700 Laredo, TX 30220 Levelland, TX 30980 Longview, TX 346 Longview-Marshall, TX 31180 Lubbock, TX 352 Lubbock-Levelland, TX 31260 Lufkin, TX 31920 Marble Falls, TX 32220 Marshall, TX 32580 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX 33260 Midland, TX 372 Midland-Odessa, TX 33420 Mineral Wells, TX 34420 Mount Pleasant, TX 34860 Nacogdoches, TX 36220 Odessa, TX 37300 Palestine, TX 37420 Pampa, TX 37580 Paris, TX 37780 Pecos, TX 38380 Plainview, TX 39700 Raymondville, TX 40100 Rio Grande City-Roma, TX 41660 San Angelo, TX 41700 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX 43300 Sherman-Denison, TX 43660 Snyder, TX 44500 Stephenville, TX 44860 Sulphur Springs, TX 45020 Sweetwater, TX 45500 Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR (part) 46340 Tyler, TX 540 Tyler-Jacksonville, TX 46620 Uvalde, TX 46900 Vernon, TX 47020 Victoria, TX 47380 Waco, TX 48660 Wichita Falls, TX Utah 14940 Brigham City, UT 16260 Cedar City, UT 25720 Heber, UT 30860 Logan, UT-ID (part) 36260 Ogden-Clearfield, UT 39220 Price, UT 39340 Provo-Orem, UT 41620 Salt Lake City, UT 482 Salt Lake City-Ogden-Clearfield, UT 41100 St. George, UT 46860 Vernal, UT Vermont 12740 Barre, VT 13540 Bennington, VT 13620 Berlin, NH-VT (part) 15540 Burlington-South Burlington, VT 180 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area ### 131Vermont (continued) 30100 Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 40860 Rutland, VT Micropolitan Statistical Area Virginia 13980 Blacksburg-Christ iansburg-Radford, VA Me tropolitan Statistical Area 14140 Bluefield, WV-VA (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 16820 Charlottesville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 19020 Culpeper, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 19260 Danville, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 25500 Harrisonburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 304 Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol (Tri-Cities) , TN-VA (part) Combined Statistical Area 28700 Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN- VA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 31340 Lynchburg, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 32300 Martinsville, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 40060 Richmond, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 40220 Roanoke, VA Metropolitan Statistical Area 44420 Staunton-Waynesboro, VA Micropolitan Statistical Area 47260 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News , VA-NC (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Division 548 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (part) Combined Statistical Area 49020 Winchester, VA-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area Washington 10140 Aberdeen, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 13380 Bellingham, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 14740 Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 16500 Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 21260 Ellensburg, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 28420 Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 30300 Lewiston, ID-WA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 31020 Longview, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 34180 Moses Lake, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 34580 Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 36020 Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 36500 Olympia, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 38820 Port Angeles, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 38900 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR -WA (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 39420 Pullman, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 42660 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 42644 Seattle-Bellevue-Ever ett, WA Metropolitan Division 45104 Tacoma, WA Metropolitan Division 500 Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA Combined Statistical Area 43220 Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 44060 Spokane, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 47460 Walla Walla, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area 48300 Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 49420 Yakima, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area West Virginia 13220 Beckley, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 138 Beckley-Oak Hill, WV Combined Statistical Area 14140 Bluefield, WV-VA (part) Micropolitan Statistical Area 16620 Charleston, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area 17220 Clarksburg, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 19060 Cumberland, MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 21900 Fairmont, WV Micropolitan Statistical Area 242 Fairmont-Clarksburg, WV Combined Statistical Area 25180 Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 26580 Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH (part) Metropolitan Statistical Area 34060 Morgantown, WV Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 132West Viginia (continued) 36060 Oak Hill, WV 37620 Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV -OH (part) 38580 Point Pleasant, WV-OH (part) 44600 Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV (part) 47900 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA- MD-WV (part) 47894 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (part) 548 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV (part) 48540 Wheeling, WV-OH (part) 49020 Winchester, VA-WV (part) Wisconsin 11540 Appleton, WI 118 Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, WI 12660 Baraboo, WI 13180 Beaver Dam, WI 16980 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-I N-WI (part) 29404 Lake County-Kenosha County, IL-WI (part) 176 Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-I N-WI (part) 20260 Duluth, MN-WI (part) 20740 Eau Claire, WI 232 Eau Claire-Menomonie, WI 22540 Fond du Lac, WI 252 Fond du Lac-Beaver Dam, WI 24580 Green Bay, WI 27020 Iron Mountain, MI-WI (par t) 27500 Janesville, WI 29100 La Crosse, WI-MN (part) 31540 Madison, WI 358 Madison-Baraboo, WI 31820 Manitowoc, WI 31940 Marinette, WI-MI (part) 32270 Marshfield-Wisconsin Rapids , WI 32860 Menomonie, WI 32980 Merrill, WI 376 Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI 33340 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis , WI 33460 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI (part) 378 Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI (part) 33820 Monroe, WI 36780 Oshkosh-Neenah, WI 38420 Platteville, WI 39540 Racine, WI 43100 Sheboygan, WI 44620 Stevens Point, WI 48020 Watertown-Fort Atkinson, WI 48140 Wausau, WI 554 Wausau-Merrill, WI 48580 Whitewater, WI Wyoming 16220 Casper, WY 16940 Cheyenne, WY 21740 Evanston, WY 23940 Gillette, WY 27220 Jackson, WY-ID (part) 29660 Laramie, WY 40180 Riverton, WY 40540 Rock Springs, WY 43260 Sheridan, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Division Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Me tropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Division Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Mi cropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Combined Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area Micropolitan Statistical Area ### 133Puerto Rico 10260 Adjuntas, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 10380 Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastián, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 17620 Coamo, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 21940 Fajardo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 25020 Guayama, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 27580 Jayuya, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 32420 Mayagüez, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 364 Mayagüez-San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Combined Statistical Area 38660 Ponce, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 434 Ponce-Yauco-Coamo, PR Combined Statistical Area 41900 San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 490 San Juan-Caguas-Fajardo, PR Combined Statistical Area 41980 San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area 42180 Santa Isabel, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 46580 Utuado, PR Micropolitan Statistical Area 49500 Yauco, PR Metropolitan Statistical Area ### 134List 7 New England City and Town Areas and New England City and Town Area Divisions This list provides titles and codes, principal citi es, New England City and Town Area Division titles and codes (where applicable), and definitions in ci ties, towns, and equivalent entities for all 43 Metropolitan and Micropolitan New England City and Town Areas in the United States. 70300 Amherst Center, MA Micropolit an New England City and Town Area Principal City: Amherst Center Franklin County, MA (part) Leverett town, Shutesbury town, Sunderland town Hampshire County, MA (part) Amherst town, Pelham town 70450 Athol, MA Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Athol Franklin County, MA (part) New Salem town, Orange to wn, Warwick town, Wendell town Worcester County, MA (part) Athol town 70600 Augusta, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Augusta Kennebec County, ME (part) Augusta city, Belgrade town, Chelsea town, China town, Farmingdale town, Gardiner city, Hallowell city, Litchfield town, Manchester town, Mount Vernon town, Pittston town, Randolph town, Readfield town, Rome town, Sidney town, Vassalboro town, Wayne town, We st Gardiner town, Windsor town, Winthrop town, Lincoln County, ME (part) Somerville town, Whitefield town Waldo County, ME (part) Palermo town 70750 Bangor, ME Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Bangor Hancock County, ME (part) Amherst town, Aurora town, Dedham town Penobscot County, ME (part) Alton town, Argyle unorganized terr itory, Bangor city, Bradford town, Bradley town, Brewer city, Carmel town, Charle ston town, Clifton town, Corinth town, Dixmont town, East Central Penobscot unorganized territory, Eddington town, Edinburg town, Enfield town, Et na town, Exeter town, Garland town, Glenburn town, Greenbush town, Hampden town, Hermon town, Holden town, Howland town, Hudson town, Kenduskeag town, Lagrange town, Levant town, Lowell town, Maxfield town, Milford town, Newburgh town, Newport town, Old Town city, Orono town, Orrington town, Passadumkeag town, Penobscot Indian Island Reservation, Plymouth town, Stetson town, Veazie town, Waldo County, ME (part) Frankfort town, Winterport town ### 13570900 Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Barnstable Town Barnstable County, MA (part) Barnstable Town city, Bourne town, Brewster town, Chatham town, Dennis town, Eastham town, Falmouth town, Harwich town, Mashpee town, Orleans town, Sandwich town, Truro town, Wellfleet town, Yarmouth town Plymouth County, MA (part) Marion town, Wareham town 71050 Barre, VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Barre Orange County, VT (part) Orange town, Washingt on town, Williamstown town Washington County, VT (part) Barre city, Barre town, Berlin town , Cabot town, Calais town, East Montpelier town, Marshfield town, Middlesex town , Montpelier city, Northfield town, Plainfield town, Woodbur y town, Worcester town 71350 Bennington, VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Bennington Bennington County, VT (part) Bennington town, Glastenbury town, Pownal town, Searsburg town, Shaftsbury town, Woodford town 71500 Berlin, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Berlin Coos County, NH (part) Berlin city, Dummer town, Gorh am town, Milan town, Randolph town, Shelburne town, Stark town, Success township ### 13671650 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Boston, MA; Cambri dge, MA; Quincy, MA; Nashua, NH; Newton, MA; Framingham, MA; Waltham, MA; Peabody, MA 71654 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA New England City and Town Area Division Bristol County, MA (part) Mansfield town Essex County, MA (part) Andover town, Beverly city, Boxford town, Essex town, Gloucester city, Hamilton town, Ipswich town, Lynnfield town, Manchester-by-the-Sea town, Middleton town, Newbury town, Newbur yport city, Rockport town, Rowley town, Saugus town, Topsfield town, Wenham town Middlesex County, MA (part) Acton town, Arlington town, Ayer town, Bedford town, Belmont town, Boxborough town, Burlington town, Cambridge city, Carlisle town, Concord town, Everett city, Groton town, Lexingt on town, Lincoln town, Littleton town, Malden city, Maynard town, Medford ci ty, Melrose city, Newton city, North Reading town, Reading town, Sherborn town, Shirley town, Somerville city, Stoneham town, Stow town, Sudbury town, Wakefield town, Waltham city, Watertown city, Wayland town, Weston town, Wilmington town, Winchester town, Woburn city Norfolk County, MA (part) Braintree town, Brookline town, Canton town, Cohasset town, Dedham town, Dover town, Foxborough town, Frank lin city, Holbrook town, Medfield town, Medway town, Millis town, Milton town, Needham town, Norfolk town, Norwood town, Quincy city, Randolph town, Sharon town, Stoughton town, Walpole town, Wellesley town, West wood town, Weymouth town, Wrentham town Plymouth County, MA (part) Carver town, Duxbury town, Hanover town, Hingham town, Hull town, Kingston town, Marshfield town, Norw ell town, Pembroke town, Plymouth town, Rockland town, Scituate town Suffolk County, MA (part) Boston city, Chelsea city, Revere city, Winthrop town Worcester County, MA (part) Bolton town, Harvard town 72104 Brockton-Bridgewater -Easton, MA New England City and Town Area Division Bristol County, MA (part) Easton town Norfolk County, MA (part) Avon town Plymouth County, MA (part) Abington town, Bridgewater town, Brockton city, East Bridgewater town, Halifax town, Hanson town, Middleborough town, Plympton town, West Bridgewater town, Whitman town 73104 Framingham, MA New England City and Town Area Division Middlesex County, MA (part) Ashland town, Framingham town, Holliston town, Hopkinton town, Hudson town, Marlborough city, Natick town Worcester County, MA (part) Berlin town, Hopedale town, Mendon town, Milford town, Southborough town, Upton town ### 13771650 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area (continued) 73604 Haverhill-North Andover-Amesbury, MA-NH New England City and Town Area Division Essex County, MA (part) Amesbury town, Georgetown town, Groveland town, Haverhill city, Merrimac town, North Andover town, Salisbury town, West Newbury town Rockingham County, NH (part) Atkinson town, Brentwood town, Danville town, East Kingston town, Epping town, Exeter town, Fremont town, Hampstead town, Hampton Falls town, Kensington town, Kingston town, Newfields town, Newton town, Plaistow town, Sandown town, Seabrook town, South Hampton town 74204 Lawrence-Methuen-Salem, MA-NH Ne w England City and Town Area Division Essex County, MA (part) Lawrence city, Methuen city Rockingham County, NH (part) Salem town 74804 Lowell-Billerica-Chelmsford, MA-NH New England City and Town Area Division Middlesex County, MA (part) Billerica town, Chelmsford town, Dracut town, Dunstable town, Lowell city, Tewksbury town, Tyngsborough town, Westford town Hillsborough County, NH (part) Pelham town 75404 Nashua, NH-MA New England City and Town Area Division Middlesex County, MA (part) Pepperell town, Townsend town Hillsborough County, NH (part) Amherst town, Brookline town, Greenf ield town, Greenville town, Hollis town, Hudson town, Litchfield town, Lyndeborough town, Mason town, Merrimack town, Milford town, Mont Vernon town, Nashua city, Wilton town Rockingham County, NH (part) Chester town, Derry town, Londonderry town, Raymond town, Windham town 76524 Peabody, MA New England City and Town Area Division Essex County, MA (part) Danvers town, Lynn city, Marblehead town, Nahant town, Peabody city, Salem city, Swampscott town 78254 Taunton-Norton-Raynham, MA New England City and Town Area Division Bristol County, MA (part) Berkley town, Dighton town, Norton town, Raynham town, Taunton city Plymouth County, MA (part) Lakeville town 71950 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Bridgeport, Stamford, Norwalk, Milford (balance)  , Stratford Fairfield County, CT (part) Bridgeport city, Darien town, East on town, Fairfield town, Greenwich town, Monroe town, New Canaan town, Newtown town, Norwalk city, Redding town, Ridgefield town, Shelton city, St amford city, Stratford town, Trumbull town, Weston town, Westport town, Wilton town New Haven County, CT (part) Ansonia city, Derby city, Milford ci ty, Oxford town, Seymour town, Southbury town, Woodbridge town  Milford (balance) refers to the portion of the co nsolidated government of Milford city and Milford town minus the separately incorporated place of Woodmont within the consolidated city. ### 13872250 Brunswick, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Brunswick Cumberland County, ME (part) Brunswick town, Harpswell town Lincoln County, ME (part) Dresden town, Westpo rt town, Wiscasset town Sagadahoc County, ME (part) Arrowsic town, Bath city, Bow doin town, Bowdoinham town, Georgetown town, Perkins unorganized territory, Phippsburg town, Richmond town, Topsham town, West Bath town, Woolwich town 72400 Burlington-South Burlington, VT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Burlington, South Burlington Addison County, VT (part) Ferrisburgh town, Monkton town , Starksboro town, Vergennes city Chittenden County, VT (part) Bolton town, Buels gore, Burlington city, Charlotte town , Colchester town, Essex town, Hinesburg town, Huntingt on town, Jericho town, Milton town, Richmond town, St. George town, S helburne town, South Burlington city, Underhill town, Westford town, Williston town, Winooski city Franklin County, VT (part) Fairfax town, Fletcher town, Geor gia town, St. Albans city, St. Albans town Grand Isle County, VT (part) Grand Isle town, Isle La Motte to wn, North Hero town, South Hero town Lamoille County, VT (part) Cambridge town Washington County, VT (part) Duxbury town 72500 Claremont, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Claremont Sullivan County, NH (part) Claremont city, Unity town 72700 Concord, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Concord Belknap County, NH (part) Barnstead town Merrimack County, NH (part) Allenstown town, Boscawen town, Bow town, Canterbury town, Chichester town, Concord city, Epsom town, Hopkinton town, Loudon town, Pembroke town, Pittsfield town, Salisbury to wn, Warner town, Webster town 72850 Danbury, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Danbury Fairfield County, CT (part) Bethel town, Brookfield town, Da nbury city, New Fairfield town, Sherman town Litchfield County, CT (part) Bridgewater town, New Milford town 73000 Danielson, CT Micropolitan Ne w England City and Town Area Principal City: Danielson Windham County, CT (part) Brooklyn town, Killingly town, Plai nfield town, Pomfret town, Sterling town ### 13973150 Franklin, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Franklin Belknap County, NH (part) Tilton town Merrimack County, NH (part) Franklin city, Northfield town 73300 Greenfield, MA Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Greenfield Franklin County, MA (part) Bernardston town, Buckland town , Colrain town, Erving town, Gill town, Greenfield town, Heath town, Leyden town, Montague town, Northfield town, Shelburne town 73450 Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Hartford, West Hartford, East Hartford, Middletown Hartford County, CT (part) Avon town, Berlin town, Bloomfield town, Bristol city, Burlington town, Canton town, East Granby town, East Hartford town, Farmington town, Glastonbury town, Granby town, Hartford city, Hartland town, Manchester town, Marlborough town, New Britain city, Newington town, Plainville town, Rocky Hill town, Simsbury town, Southington town, South Windsor town, West Hartford town, Wethersfie ld town, Windsor town Litchfield County, CT (part) Barkhamsted town, Harwinton to wn, New Hartford town, Plymouth town, Thomaston town Middlesex County, CT (part) Cromwell town, East Haddam town, East Hampton town, Haddam town, Middlefield town, Middletown city, Portland town New London County, CT (part) Colchester town, Lebanon town Tolland County, CT (part) Andover town, Bolton town, Columbia town, Coventry town, Ellington town, Hebron town, Mansfield town, Stafford town, Tolland town, Union town, Vernon town, Willington town Windham County, CT (part) Ashford town 73750 Keene, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Keene Cheshire County, NH (part) Alstead town, Chesterfield town, Fi tzwilliam town, Gilsum town, Harrisville town, Keene city, Marlborough town, Marlow town, Nelson town, Richmond town, Roxbury town, Stoddard town, Sullivan town, Surry town, Swanzey town, Troy town, Walpole town, West moreland town, Winchester town 73900 Laconia, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Laconia Belknap County, NH (part) Belmont town, Gilford town, Gilm anton town, Laconia city, Meredith town ### 14074350 Lebanon, NH-VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Lebanon, NH Grafton County, NH (part) Canaan town, Enfield town, Grafton town, Hanover town, Lebanon city, Lyme town, Orange town, Orford town, Piermont town, Sullivan County, NH (part) Cornish town, Grantham town, Plainfield town, Springfield town Orange County, VT (part) Fairlee town, Strafford town, Thetford town, Vershire town, West Fairlee town Windsor County, VT (part) Hartford town, Hartland town, Norwich town, Pomfret town, Royalton town, Sharon town, Windsor town 74500 Leominster-Fitchburg-Gardner, MA Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Leominster, Fitchburg, Gardner Middlesex County, MA (part) Ashby town Worcester County, MA (part) Ashburnham town, Fitchburg city, Gardner city, Leominster city, Lunenburg town, Phillipston town, Templeton town, Westminster town, Winchendon town 74650 Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Lewiston, Auburn Androscoggin County, ME (part) Auburn city, Greene town, Leeds town, Lewiston city, Lisbon town, Livermore town, Mechanic Falls town, Minot town, Poland town, Sabattus town, Turner town, Wales town Oxford County, ME (part) Buckfield town, Hartford town, Hebron town, Sumner town 74950 Manchester, NH Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Manchester Hillsborough County, NH (part) Bedford town, Goffstown town, Manchester city, New Boston town, Weare town Merrimack County, NH (part) Dunbarton town, Hooksett town Rockingham County, NH (part) Auburn town, Candia town 75550 New Bedford, MA Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: New Bedford Bristol County, MA (part) Acushnet town, Dartmouth town, Fairhaven town, Freetown town, New Bedford city Dukes County, MA (part) Gosnold town Plymouth County, MA (part) Mattapoisett town, Rochester town ### 14175700 New Haven, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: New Haven Middlesex County, CT (part) Chester town, Clinton town, Deep River town, Durham town, Essex town, Killingworth town, Old Saybro ok town, Westbrook town New Haven County, CT (part) Bethany town, Branford town, Cheshire town, East Haven town, Guilford town, Hamden town, Madison town, Meriden city, New Haven city, North Branford town, North Haven town, Orange town, Wallingford town, West Haven city 76150 North Adams, MA-VT Micropolit an New England City and Town Area Principal City: North Adams, MA Berkshire County, MA (part) Adams town, Clarksburg town, Flor ida town, North Adam s city, Williamstown town Franklin County, MA (part) Monroe town Bennington County, VT (part) Stamford town 76450 Norwich-New London, CT-RI Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Norwich, CT; New London, CT New London County, CT (part) Bozrah town, East Lyme town, Fran klin town, Griswold town, Groton town, Ledyard town, Lisbon town, Lyme town, Montville town, New London city, North Stonington town, Norwich city, Old Lyme town, Preston town, Salem town, Sprague town, Stonington town, Voluntown town, Waterford town Windham County, CT (part) Canterbury town Washington County, RI (part) Westerly town 76600 Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Pittsfield Berkshire County (part) Becket town, Cheshire town, Da lton town, Hancock town, Hinsdale town, Lanesborough town, Lenox town, New Ashford town, Peru town, Pittsfield city, Richmond town, Savoy town , Washington town, Windsor town 76750 Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Portland, South Portland, Biddeford Cumberland County, ME (part) Baldwin town, Cape Elizabeth town, Casco town, Cumberland town, Falmouth town, Freeport town, Frye Island town, Gorham town, Gray town, Long Island town, Naples town, New Gloucester town, North Yarmouth town, Portland city, Pownal town, Raymond town, Scarborough town, Sebago town, South Portland city, Standish town, Westbrook city, Windham town, Yarmouth town Oxford County, ME (part) Hiram town, Porter town York County, ME (part) Alfred town, Arundel town, Biddeford city, Buxton town, Cornish town, Dayton town, Hollis town, Kennebunk town, Kennebunkport town, Limerick town, Limington town, Lyman town, Old Orchard Beach town, Parsonsfield town, Saco city, Waterboro town ### 14276900 Portsmouth, NH-ME Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Portsmouth, NH York County, ME (part) Eliot town, Kittery town Rockingham County, NH (part) Greenland town, Hampton town, New Castle town, North Hampton town, Portsmouth city, Rye town, Stratham town 77200 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Providence, RI; Fall River, MA; Warwick, RI; Cranston, RI Bristol County, MA (part) Attleboro city, Fall River city, North Attleborough town, Rehoboth town, Seekonk town, Somerset town, Swansea town, Westport town Norfolk County, MA (part) Bellingham town, Plainville town Worcester County, MA (part) Blackstone town, Millville town Bristol County, RI (part) Barrington town, Br istol town, Warren town Kent County, RI (part) Coventry town, East Greenwich to wn, Warwick city, West Greenwich town, West Warwick town Newport County, RI Jamestown town, Little Compton town, Middletown town, Newport city, Portsmouth town, Tiverton town Providence County, RI Burrillville town, Central Falls city , Cranston city, Cumberland town, East Providence city, Foster town, Gloceste r town, Johnston town, Lincoln town, North Providence town, North Smithfie ld town, Pawtucket city, Providence city, Scituate town, Smithfield town, Woonsocket city Washington County, RI (part) Charlestown town, Exeter town, Hopkinton town, Narragansett town, North Kingstown town, Richmond town, South Kingstown town 77350 Rochester-Dover, NH-ME Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal Cities: Rochester, NH; Dover, NH York County, ME (part) Berwick town, Lebanon town, South Berwick town Carroll County, NH (part) Wakefield town Rockingham County, NH (part) Newington town Strafford County, NH (part) Barrington town, Dover city, Du rham town, Farmington town, Lee town, Madbury town, Middleton town, Milton town, New Durham town, Rochester city, Rollinsford town, Somersworth city, Strafford town 77500 Rockland, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Rockland Knox County, ME (part) Cushing town, Owls Head town, Rockland city, Rockport town, South Thomaston town, Thomaston town, Warren town ### 14377650 Rutland, VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Rutland city Rutland County, VT (part) Castleton town, Chittenden town, Clarendon town, Fair Haven town, Hubbardton town, Ira to wn, Killington town, Mendon town, Middletown Springs town, Pittsford town, Procto r town, Rutland city, Rutland town, Shrewsbury town, Sudbury town, Tinmouth town, Wallingford town, West Haven town, West Rutland town 77950 Sanford, ME Micropolitan Ne w England City and Town Area Principal City: Sanford York County, ME (part) Sanford town, Shapleigh town 78100 Springfield, MA-CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Springfield, MA Hartford County, CT (part) East Windsor town, Enfield to wn, Suffield town, Windsor Locks town Tolland County, CT (part) Somers town Franklin County, MA (part) Ashfield town, Deerfield town, Whately town Hampden County, MA (part) Agawam city, Blandford town, Brim field town, Chester town, Chicopee city, East Longmeadow town, Granville town, Hampden town, Holyoke city, Longmeadow town, Ludlow town, Monson town, Montgomery town, Palmer town, Russell town, Southwick town, Springfield city, Tolland town, Wales town, Westfield city, West Spri ngfield city, Wilbraham town Hampshire County, MA (part) Belchertown town, Chesterfield town, Cummington town, Easthampton city, Goshen town, Granby town, Hadley town, Hatfield town, Huntington town, Middlefield town, Northampton city, Plainfield town, Southampton town, South Hadley town, Ware town, We sthampton town, Williamsburg town, Worthington town 78400 Torrington, CT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Torrington Litchfield County, CT (part) Torrington city 78700 Waterbury, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Waterbury Litchfield County, CT (part) Watertown town New Haven County, CT (part) Beacon Falls town, Middlebury town, Naugatuck borough, Prospect town, Waterbury city, Wolcott town 78850 Waterville, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Waterville Kennebec County, ME (part) Albion town, Benton town, Clinton town, Oakland town, Unity unorganized territory, Waterville city, Winslow town Somerset County, ME (part) Fairfield town ### 14479300 Willimantic, CT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Willimantic Windham County, CT (part) Windham town 79600 Worcester, MA-CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Principal City: Worcester, CT Windham County, CT (part) Putnam town, Thompson town, Woodstock town Hampden County, MA (part) Holland town Worcester County, MA (part) Auburn town, Barre town, Boylston town, Brookfield town, Charlton town, Clinton town, Douglas town, Dudley town, East Brookfield town, Grafton town, Holden town, Hubbardston town, Lancaster town, Leicester town, Millbury town, New Braintree town, Northborough town, Northbridge town, North Brookfield town, Oakham town, Oxford town, Paxton town, Princeton town, Rutland town, Shrewsbury town, Southbridge town, Spencer town, Sterling town, Sturbridge town, Sutt on town, Uxbridge town, Webster town, Westborough town, West Boylston town , West Brookfield town, Worcester city ### 145List 8 Combined New England City and Town Areas This list provides titles, codes, and definitions in metropolitan and/or micr opolitan New England City and Town Areas for the 10 Combined New England City and Town Areas with 27 component areas in the United States. 710 Augusta-Waterville, ME Combined New England City and Town Area Augusta, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Waterville, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area 715 Boston-Worcester-Manches ter, MA-NH-CT-ME Combined New England City and Town Area Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Danielson, CT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Leominster-Fitchburg-Gardner, MA Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Manchester, NH Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Portsmouth, NH-ME Metropolit an New England City and Town Area Worcester, MA-CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area 720 Bridgeport-New Haven-Stamford, CT Combined New England City and Town Area Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metr opolitan New England City and Town Area Danbury, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area New Haven, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Waterbury, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area 725 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT Combined New England City and Town Area Claremont, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Lebanon, NH-VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area 735 Hartford-West Hartford-Torrington, CT Combined New England City and Town Area Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Torrington, CT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area 740 Laconia-Franklin, NH Combined New England City and Town Area Franklin, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Laconia, NH Micropolitan New England City and Town Area 770 Pittsfield-North Adams, MA-VT Combined New England City and Town Area North Adams, MA-VT Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan New England City and Town Area 775 Portland-South Portland-Sanford, ME Combined New England City and Town Area Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area Sanford, ME Micropolitan New England City and Town Area 780 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-M A Combined New England City and Town Area New Bedford, MA Metropolitan New England City and Town Area Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA Me tropolitan New England City and Town Area 790 Springfield-Amherst Center-Greenfield, MA-CT Combined New England City and Town Area Amherst Center, MA Micropolit an New England City and Town Area Greenfield, MA Micropolitan New England City and Town Area Springfield, MA-CT Metropolitan New England City and Town Area ### 146List 9 Metropolitan New England City and Town Areas (NECTAs), NECTA Divisions, Micropolitan NECTAs, and Combined NECTAs by State Connecticut 715 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA -NH-CT-ME (part) Combined NECTA 720 Bridgeport-New Haven-Stamford, CT Combined NECTA 71950 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metropolitan NECTA 72850 Danbury, CT Metropolitan NECTA 73000 Danielson, CT Micropolitan NECTA 73450 Hartford-West Hartford-Eas t Hartford, CT Metropolitan NECTA 735 Hartford-West Hartford-To rrington, CT Combined NECTA 75700 New Haven, CT Metropolitan NECTA 76450 Norwich-New London, CT-RI (part) Metropolitan NECTA 78100 Springfield, MA-CT (part) Metropolitan NECTA 790 Springfield-Amherst Center-Greenfield, MA-CT (part) Combined NECTA 78400 Torrington, CT Micropolitan NECTA 78700 Waterbury, CT Metropolitan NECTA 79300 Willimantic, CT Micropolitan NECTA 79600 Worcester, MA-CT (part) Metropolitan NECTA Maine 70600 Augusta, ME Micropolitan NECTA 710 Augusta-Waterville, ME Combined NECTA 70750 Bangor, ME Metropolitan NECTA 715 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA -NH-CT-ME (part) Combined NECTA 72250 Brunswick, ME Micropolitan NECTA 74650 Lewiston-Auburn, ME Metropolitan NECTA 775 Portland- South Portland-Sanford, ME Combined NECTA 76750 Portland-South Portland-Bi ddeford, ME Metropolitan NECTA 76900 Portsmouth, NH-ME (part) Metropolitan NECTA 77350 Rochester-Dover, NH-ME (part) Metropolitan NECTA 77500 Rockland, ME Micropolitan NECTA 77950 Sanford, ME Micropolitan NECTA 78850 Waterville, ME Micropolitan NECTA Massachusetts 70300 Amherst Center, MA Micropolitan NECTA 70450 Athol, MA Micropolitan NECTA 70900 Barnstable Town, MA Metropolitan NECTA 71650 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH (part) Metropolitan NECTA 71654 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA NECTA Division 72104 Brockton-Bridgewater-Easton, MA NECTA Division 73104 Framingham, MA NECTA Division 73604 Haverhill-North Andover-Amesbury, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 74204 Lawrence-Methuen-Salem, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 74804 Lowell-Billerica-Chelmsford, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 75404 Nashua, NH-MA (part) NECTA Division 76524 Peabody, MA NECTA Division 78254 Taunton-Norton-Raynham, MA NECTA Division 715 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA- NH-CT-ME (part) Combined NECTA 73300 Greenfield, MA Micropolitan NECTA 74500 Leominster-Fitchburg-Gardner, MA Metropolitan NECTA 75550 New Bedford, MA Metropolitan NECTA 76150 North Adams, MA-VT (part) Micropolitan NECTA 76600 Pittsfield, MA Metropolitan NECTA 770 Pittsfield-North Adams, MA-VT (part) Combined NECTA 77200 Providence-Fall River-Warwi ck, RI-MA (part) Metropolitan NECTA 780 Providence-New Bedford-Fall Riv er, RI-MA (part) Combined NECTA 78100 Springfield, MA-CT (part) Metropolitan NECTA 790 Springfield-Amherst Center-Greenfield, MA-CT (part) Combined NECTA ### 147Massachusetts (continued) 79600 Worcester, MA-CT (part) Metropolitan NECTA New Hampshire 71500 Berlin, NH Micropolitan NECTA 71650 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH (part) Metropolitan NECTA 73604 Haverhill-North Andover-Amesbury, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 74204 Lawrence-Methuen-Salem, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 74804 Lowell-Billerica-Chelmsford, MA-NH (part) NECTA Division 75404 Nashua, NH-MA (part) NECTA Division 715 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA -NH-CT-ME (part) Combined NECTA 72500 Claremont, NH Micropolitan NECTA 725 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Combined NECTA 72700 Concord, NH Micropolitan NECTA 73150 Franklin, NH Micropolitan NECTA 73750 Keene, NH Micropolitan NECTA 73900 Laconia, NH Micropolitan NECTA 740 Laconia-Franklin, NH Combined NECTA 74350 Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Micropolitan NECTA 74950 Manchester, NH Metropolitan NECTA 76900 Portsmouth, NH-ME (part) Metropolitan NECTA 77350 Rochester-Dover, NH-ME (part) Metropolitan NECTA Rhode Island 76450 Norwich-New London, CT-RI (part) Metropolitan NECTA 77200 Providence-Fall River-Warwi ck, RI-MA (part) Metropolitan NECTA 780 Providence-New Bedford-Fall Riv er, RI-MA (part) Combined NECTA Vermont 71050 Barre, VT Micropolitan NECTA 71350 Bennington, VT Micropolitan NECTA 72400 Burlington-South Burlin gton, VT Metropolitan NECTA 725 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Combined NECTA 74350 Lebanon, NH-VT (part) Micropolitan NECTA 76150 North Adams, MA-VT (part) Micropolitan NECTA 770 Pittsfield-North Adams, MA-VT (part) Combined NECTA 77650 Rutland, VT Micropolitan NECTA ### 148
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/power/resource-program/2020-resource-program-cover-letter-signed.pdf.json	Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, Oregon 97208 - 3621 POWER SERVICES In reply refer to: Power Forecasting and Planning (PSRF) Bonneville Power is pleased to release the 2020 Resource Program. It builds off of the 2018 Resource Program accomplishments, such as the development of a frozen e nergy efficiency load forecast and a more robust resource selection methodology using modern resource optimization techniques, to include sensitivity analysis and a new section on t ransmission planning. Th e latter is an important step in moving toward coordinated planning at Bonneville, which will better consider the interplay – and potentially mutually beneficial coordination – between t ransmission and power resource planning to make cost savin g decisions on the behalf of Bonneville’s ratepayers and the region. This year’s section on transmission was designed to have a light touch, due to timing considerations, but for the next Resource Program in 2022 it is anti cipated there will be improved t ran smission analytics tied to the p ower assessment. Some of the key findings of the 2020 Resource Program include: 1. The second half of April is when Bonneville, per the Ne eds Assessment metrics, sees its largest heavy load hour energy needs, where large deficits are observed under low water conditions. These are in addition to the long- standing winter deficits carried over from the 2018 results. 2. Bonneville has surplus capacity in the winter and the summer. This is a change from the 2018 Resource Program, which identified a growing deficit in the summer 18-hour capacity metric. 3. The expected market price at the Mid -Columbia trading hub declined from an average of $36.50/MWh in the 2018 Resource Program to $23.60/MWh in the 2020 Resource Program. 4. Similar to previous Resource Program findings, the least- cost mix of resources that will meet Bonneville’s expected energy needs consists of conservation and energy purchased from the m arket. 5. Demand response is not a part of the least- cost portfolio selected to meet Bonneville’s needs at this time, which differs from recommendations in the 2018 Resource Program. This new finding reflects the lack of a capacity need and a cost calculation correction. With the onset of COVID-19, a lot has changed in the world. Under the current pandemic, utilities continue to grapple with as yet unknown impacts to the economy as a whole, and the power industry in particular. Macroeconomic effects are lik ely to persist well into the future, and those impacts on the demand, supply, and cost of power are only starting to unfold. At the time of the analysis performed for the 2020 Resource Program, the pandemic was not foreseen,2 and therefore it is important to caveat these results and recommendations in light of recent changes. In particular, Bonneville’s near - term outlook on gas and electricity market prices has changed substantially due to recent market developments. Bonneville’s current expectations for higher market prices would likely lead to different Resource Program results, yielding higher amounts of conservation in the optimized resource portfolios. However, changes to the regional load forecast are also expected as a result of the pandemic, and l oads are generally expected to be lower than assumed in this analysis. This would have the effect of reducing energy needs found in the 2020 Resource Program, and lowering the recommended amounts of conservation . The combined effects are yet unknown. No netheless , Bonneville believes the results from the 2020 Resource Program represent good estimates of its near term needs and suggest a plan for meeting those needs for the next two years. Further questions can be directed to C ommunications (Communications@bpa.gov) , James Vanden Bos (Jhvandenbos@bpa.gov) and /or Ravi Aggarwal (Rkaggarwal@bpa.gov) . Sincerely, Kim Thompson Jeff Cook Vice President, Vice President NW Requirements Marketing Planning and Asset Management
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2016-211.json	<!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en" dir="ltr"> <head> <meta charset="utf-8" /><script type="text/javascript">(window.NREUM\|\|(NREUM={})).init={ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}};(window.NREUM\|\|(NREUM={})).loader_config={licenseKey:"32edb8f179",applicationID:"436723953"};;/! For license information please see nr-loader-rum-1.256.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt / (()=>{var e,t,r={234:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{P_:()=>v,Mt:()=>b,C5:()=>s,OP:()=>k,lF:()=>N,Yu:()=>_,Dg:()=>m,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>w,sU:()=>R});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o);const r=(0,n.ek)(e);r&&(r.info=a[e])}const u=e=>{if(!e\|\|"string"!=typeof e)return!1;try{document.createDocumentFragment().querySelector(e)}catch{return!1}return!0};var d=r(7056),l=r(50);const f="[data-nr-mask]",g=()=>{const e={mask_selector:"",block_selector:"[data-nr-block]",mask_input_options:{color:!1,date:!1,"datetime-local":!1,email:!1,month:!1,number:!1,range:!1,search:!1,tel:!1,text:!1,time:!1,url:!1,week:!1,textarea:!1,select:!1,password:!0}};return{feature_flags:[],proxy:{assets:void 0,beacon:void 0},privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,block_internal:!0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10,autoStart:!0},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:d.oD,inactiveMs:d.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10,autoStart:!0},metrics:{enabled:!0,autoStart:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,autoStart:!0},page_view_event:{enabled:!0,autoStart:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1,autoStart:!0},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10,autoStart:!0},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{autoStart:!0,enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,preload:!1,sampling_rate:10,error_sampling_rate:100,collect_fonts:!1,inline_images:!1,inline_stylesheet:!0,mask_all_inputs:!0,get mask_text_selector(){return e.mask_selector},set mask_text_selector(t){u(t)?e.mask_selector="".concat(t,",").concat(f):""===t\|\|null===t?e.mask_selector=f:(0,l.Z)("An invalid session_replay.mask_selector was provided. '' will be used.",t)},get block_class(){return"nr-block"},get ignore_class(){return"nr-ignore"},get mask_text_class(){return"nr-mask"},get block_selector(){return e.block_selector},set block_selector(t){u(t)?e.block_selector+=",".concat(t):""!==t&&(0,l.Z)("An invalid session_replay.block_selector was provided and will not be used",t)},get mask_input_options(){return e.mask_input_options},set mask_input_options(t){t&&"object"==typeof t?e.mask_input_options={...t,password:!0}:(0,l.Z)("An invalid session_replay.mask_input_option was provided and will not be used",t)}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10,autoStart:!0},soft_navigations:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10,autoStart:!0}}},p={},h="All configuration objects require an agent identifier!";function v(e){if(!e)throw new Error(h);if(!p[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return p[e]}function m(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error(h);p[e]=(0,i.D)(t,g());const r=(0,n.ek)(e);r&&(r.init=p[e])}function b(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error(h);var r=v(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i<n.length-1;i++)if("object"!=typeof(r=r[n[i]]))return;r=r[n[n.length-1]]}return r}const y={accountID:void 0,trustKey:void 0,agentID:void 0,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,xpid:void 0},A={};function w(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All loader-config objects require an agent identifier!");A[e]=(0,i.D)(t,y);const r=(0,n.ek)(e);r&&(r.loader_config=A[e])}const _=(0,n.mF)().o;var E=r(385),x=r(6818);const D={buildEnv:x.Re,customTransaction:void 0,disabled:!1,distMethod:x.gF,isolatedBacklog:!1,loaderType:void 0,maxBytes:3e4,offset:Math.floor(E._A?.performance?.timeOrigin\|\|E._A?.performance?.timing?.navigationStart\|\|Date.now()),onerror:void 0,origin:""+E._A.location,ptid:void 0,releaseIds:{},appMetadata:{},session:void 0,xhrWrappable:"function"==typeof E._A.XMLHttpRequest?.prototype?.addEventListener,version:x.q4,denyList:void 0,harvestCount:0,timeKeeper:void 0},S={};function k(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All runtime objects require an agent identifier!");if(!S[e])throw new Error("Runtime for ".concat(e," was never set"));return S[e]}function R(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All runtime objects require an agent identifier!");S[e]=(0,i.D)(t,D);const r=(0,n.ek)(e);r&&(r.runtime=S[e])}function N(e){return function(e){try{const t=s(e);return!!t.licenseKey&&!!t.errorBeacon&&!!t.applicationID}catch(e){return!1}}(e)}},9567:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e\|\|"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t\|\|"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{Array.isArray(e[a])&&Array.isArray(t[a])?r[a]=Array.from(new Set([...e[a],...t[a]])):"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.256.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{Nk:()=>d,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,cv:()=>l,iS:()=>a,il:()=>n,ux:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>u});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator\|\|"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self\|\|"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=Boolean("hidden"===o?.document?.visibilityState),s=/iPad\|iPhone\|iPod/.test(o.navigator?.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=((()=>{const e=o.navigator?.userAgent?.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2&&e[1]})(),Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode)),d=!!o.navigator?.sendBeacon,l=Math.floor(Date.now()-performance.now())},1117:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{LP:()=>l,RP:()=>c,o5:()=>u});var n=r(8325),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]\|\|0};d(e),s[e].get(t)\|\|s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e,t){d(e),s[e].get(t)&&s[e].delete(t),s[e].size&&f(e)}function d(e){if(!e)throw new Error("agentIdentifier required");s[e]\|\|(s[e]=new Map)}function l(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature",r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if(d(e),!e\|\|!s[e].get(t)\|\|r)return g(e,t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0,f(e)}function f(e){const t=[...s[e]];t.every((e=>{let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(t.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),t.forEach((t=>{let[r]=t;s[e].delete(r),g(e,r)})))}function g(e,t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u<s.length;++u)p(s[u],c);(0,i.D)(c,(function(e,t){(0,i.D)(t,(function(t,r){r[0].on(e,r[1])}))}))}r.isolatedBacklog\|\|delete a[t],r.backlog[t]=null,r.emit("drain-"+t,[])}}function p(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},8325:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{A:()=>c,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(234);class a{constructor(e){this.contextId=e}}var s=r(3117);const c="nr@context:".concat(s.a),u=function e(t,r){var n={},s={},d={},l=!1;try{l=16===r.length&&(0,o.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var f={on:p,addEventListener:p,removeEventListener:function(e,t){var r=n[e];if(!r)return;for(var i=0;i<r.length;i++)r[i]===t&&r.splice(i,1)},emit:function(e,r,n,i,o){!1!==o&&(o=!0);if(u.aborted&&!i)return;t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=g(n),c=h(e),d=c.length,l=0;l<d;l++)c[l].apply(a,r);var p=m()[s[e]];p&&p.push([f,e,r,a]);return a},get:v,listeners:h,context:g,buffer:function(e,t){const r=m();if(t=t\|\|"feature",f.aborted)return;Object.entries(e\|\|{}).forEach((e=>{let[n,i]=e;s[i]=t,t in r\|\|(r[t]=[])}))},abort:function(){f._aborted=!0,Object.keys(f.backlog).forEach((e=>{delete f.backlog[e]}))},isBuffering:function(e){return!!m()[s[e]]},debugId:r,backlog:l?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{},isolatedBacklog:l};return Object.defineProperty(f,"aborted",{get:()=>{let e=f._aborted\|\|!1;return e\|\|(t&&(e=t.aborted),e)}}),f;function g(e){return e&&e instanceof a?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,c,(()=>new a(c))):new a(c)}function p(e,t){n[e]=h(e).concat(t)}function h(e){return n[e]\|\|[]}function v(t){return d[t]=d[t]\|\|e(f,t)}function m(){return f.backlog}}(void 0,"globalEE"),d=(0,n.fP)();d.ee\|\|(d.ee=u)},5546:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{E:()=>n,p:()=>i});var n=r(8325).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o\|\|n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o\|\|(o="feature"),e\|\|(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]\|\|{};(a[r]=a[r]\|\|[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i\|\|o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},3117:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{a:()=>n});const n=(0,r(4402).Rl)()},4402:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16Math.random()\|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto\|\|n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(30))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,r++).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()\|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto\|\|n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(e)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s<e;s++)a.push(o(r,i++).toString(16));return a.join("")}},7056:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>a,IK:()=>u,K4:()=>i,oD:()=>o,uT:()=>c,wO:()=>s});const n="NRBA",i="SESSION",o=144e5,a=18e5,s={PAUSE:"session-pause",RESET:"session-reset",RESUME:"session-resume",UPDATE:"session-update"},c={SAME_TAB:"same-tab",CROSS_TAB:"cross-tab"},u={OFF:0,FULL:1,ERROR:2}},7894:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";function n(){return Math.floor(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},50:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2825:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>s});var n=r(8325),i=r(385);const o="newrelic";const a=new Set,s={};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);s[t]??={},e&&"object"==typeof e&&(a.has(t)\|\|(r.emit("rumresp",[e]),s[t]=e,a.add(t),function(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};try{i._A.dispatchEvent(new CustomEvent(o,{detail:e}))}catch(e){}}({loaded:!0})))}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e\|\|{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(8325);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{KB:()=>a,b2:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document\|\|"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{EZ:()=>d,ce:()=>o,ek:()=>u,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>l,h5:()=>c,mF:()=>s});var n=r(385),i=r(7894);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return n._A.NREUM\|\|(n._A.NREUM={}),void 0===n._A.newrelic&&(n._A.newrelic=n._A.NREUM),n._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o\|\|(e.o={ST:n._A.setTimeout,SI:n._A.setImmediate,CT:n._A.clearTimeout,XHR:n._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:n._A.Request,EV:n._A.Event,PR:n._A.Promise,MO:n._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:n._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t){let r=a();r.initializedAgents??={},t.initializedAt={ms:(0,i.z)(),date:new Date},r.initializedAgents[e]=t}function u(e){let t=a();return t.initializedAgents?.[e]}function d(e,t){a()[e]=t}function l(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info\|\|{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init\|\|{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config\|\|{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"===document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},3081:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},7633:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent},9251:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},7144:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{Ef:()=>i});var n=r(7056);r(3325).D.sessionReplay;const i={RECORD:"recordReplay",PAUSE:"pauseReplay",REPLAY_RUNNING:"replayRunning"};n.IK.ERROR,n.IK.FULL,n.IK.OFF},5938:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{W:()=>i});var n=r(8325);class i{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=n.ee.get(e),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},2758:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{j:()=>E});var n=r(3325),i=r(234),o=r(5546),a=r(8325),s=r(8e3),c=r(3960),u=r(385),d=r(50),l=r(3081),f=r(8632),g=r(7144);const p=["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId","setApplicationVersion","start","recordReplay","pauseReplay",g.Ef.RECORD,g.Ef.PAUSE],h=["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","addRelease"];var v=r(7894),m=r(7056);function b(){const e=(0,f.gG)();p.forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i<r;i++)n[i]=arguments[i];return function(t){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r>1?r-1:0),i=1;i<r;i++)n[i-1]=arguments[i];let o=[];return Object.values(e.initializedAgents).forEach((e=>{e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}const y={};var A=r(2825);const w=e=>{const t=e.startsWith("http");e+="/",r.p=t?e:"https://"+e};let _=!1;function E(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},p=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,E=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:x,info:D,loader_config:S,runtime:k={loaderType:p},exposed:R=!0}=t;const N=(0,f.gG)();D\|\|(x=N.init,D=N.info,S=N.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e.agentIdentifier,x\|\|{}),(0,i.GE)(e.agentIdentifier,S\|\|{}),D.jsAttributes??={},u.v6&&(D.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e.agentIdentifier,D);const P=(0,i.P_)(e.agentIdentifier),j=[D.beacon,D.errorBeacon];_\|\|(P.proxy.assets&&(w(P.proxy.assets),j.push(P.proxy.assets)),P.proxy.beacon&&j.push(P.proxy.beacon),b(),(0,f.EZ)("activatedFeatures",A.T),e.runSoftNavOverSpa&&=!0===P.soft_navigations.enabled&&P.feature_flags.includes("soft_nav")),k.denyList=[...P.ajax.deny_list\|\|[],...P.ajax.block_internal?j:[]],k.ptid=e.agentIdentifier,(0,i.sU)(e.agentIdentifier,k),void 0===e.api&&(e.api=function(e,t){let f=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];t\|\|(0,s.RP)(e,"api");const p={};var b=a.ee.get(e),A=b.get("tracer");y[e]=m.IK.OFF,b.on(g.Ef.REPLAY_RUNNING,(t=>{y[e]=t}));var w="api-",_=w+"ixn-";function E(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),S(w,n,!0,o\|\|null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function x(){}h.forEach((e=>{p[e]=S(w,e,!0,"api")})),p.addPageAction=S(w,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),p.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r\|\|"http://custom.transaction")+t,S(w,"setPageViewName",!0)()},p.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number","boolean"].includes(typeof t)\|\|null===t)return E(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,d.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string, number or boolean type, but a type of <".concat(typeof t,"> was provided."))}else(0,d.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of <".concat(typeof e,"> was provided."))},p.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e\|\|null===e)return E("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,d.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of <".concat(typeof e,"> was provided."))},p.setApplicationVersion=function(e){if("string"==typeof e\|\|null===e)return E("application.version",e,"setApplicationVersion",!1);(0,d.Z)("Failed to execute setApplicationVersion. Expected <String \| null>, but got <".concat(typeof e,">."))},p.start=e=>{try{const t=e?"defined":"undefined";(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/start/".concat(t,"/called")],void 0,n.D.metrics,b);const r=Object.values(n.D);if(void 0===e)e=r;else{if((e=Array.isArray(e)&&e.length?e:[e]).some((e=>!r.includes(e))))return(0,d.Z)("Invalid feature name supplied. Acceptable feature names are: ".concat(r));e.includes(n.D.pageViewEvent)\|\|e.push(n.D.pageViewEvent)}e.forEach((e=>{b.emit("".concat(e,"-opt-in"))}))}catch(e){(0,d.Z)("An unexpected issue occurred",e)}},p[g.Ef.RECORD]=function(){(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/recordReplay/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,b),(0,o.p)(g.Ef.RECORD,[],void 0,n.D.sessionReplay,b)},p[g.Ef.PAUSE]=function(){(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/pauseReplay/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,b),(0,o.p)(g.Ef.PAUSE,[],void 0,n.D.sessionReplay,b)},p.interaction=function(e){return(new x).get("object"==typeof e?e:{})};const D=x.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/createTracer/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,b),f\|\|(0,o.p)(_+"tracer",[(0,v.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,b),function(){if(A.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,v.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw A.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,e],r),e}finally{A.emit("fn-end",[(0,v.z)()],r)}}}};function S(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,b),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,v.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,b),r?void 0:this}}function k(){r.e(75).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,s.LP)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>{(0,d.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed..."),b.abort()}))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{D[e]=S(_,e,void 0,f?n.D.softNav:n.D.spa)})),p.setCurrentRouteName=f?S(_,"routeName",void 0,n.D.softNav):S(w,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),p.noticeError=function(t,r){"string"==typeof t&&(t=new Error(t)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,b),(0,o.p)("err",[t,(0,v.z)(),!1,r,!!y[e]],void 0,n.D.jserrors,b)},u.il?(0,c.b2)((()=>k()),!0):k(),p}(e.agentIdentifier,E,e.runSoftNavOverSpa)),void 0===e.exposed&&(e.exposed=R),_=!0}},8993:(e,t,r)=>{r.nc=(()=>{try{return document?.currentScript?.nonce}catch(e){}return""})()},3325:(e,t,r)=>{"use strict";r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",softNav:"soft_navigations",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.softNav]:9,[n.sessionReplay]:10}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>"nr-rum-1.256.0.min.js",i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA-1.256.0.PROD:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d<u.length;d++){var l=u[d];if(l.getAttribute("src")==r\|\|l.getAttribute("data-webpack")==t+o){s=l;break}}if(!s){c=!0;var f={75:"sha512-VqhskOJRfbcFG9m19QquamS1EY5lDYVUmAr9WEHghoYMBmoPSmX+wRWDluhmTyJ76y949VbwjczMC7zuJGPp/Q=="};(s=document.createElement("script")).charset="utf-8",s.timeout=120,i.nc&&s.setAttribute("nonce",i.nc),s.setAttribute("data-webpack",t+o),s.src=r,0!==s.src.indexOf(window.location.origin+"/")&&(s.crossOrigin="anonymous"),f[a]&&(s.integrity=f[a])}e[r]=[n];var g=(t,n)=>{s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(p);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},p=setTimeout(g.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=g.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=g.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={50:0,832:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u<a.length;u++)o=a[u],i.o(e,o)&&e[o]&&e[o][0](),e[o]=0},r=self["webpackChunk:NRBA-1.256.0.PROD"]=self["webpackChunk:NRBA-1.256.0.PROD"]\|\|[];r.forEach(t.bind(null,0)),r.push=t.bind(null,r.push.bind(r))})(),(()=>{"use strict";i(8993);var e=i(50),t=i(7144),r=i(4402);class n{agentIdentifier;constructor(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:(0,r.ky)(16);this.agentIdentifier=e}#e(t){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r>1?r-1:0),i=1;i<r;i++)n[i-1]=arguments[i];if("function"==typeof this.api?.[t])return this.api[t](...n);(0,e.Z)("Call to agent api ".concat(t," failed. The API is not currently initialized."))}addPageAction(e,t){return this.#e("addPageAction",e,t)}setPageViewName(e,t){return this.#e("setPageViewName",e,t)}setCustomAttribute(e,t,r){return this.#e("setCustomAttribute",e,t,r)}noticeError(e,t){return this.#e("noticeError",e,t)}setUserId(e){return this.#e("setUserId",e)}setApplicationVersion(e){return this.#e("setApplicationVersion",e)}setErrorHandler(e){return this.#e("setErrorHandler",e)}finished(e){return this.#e("finished",e)}addRelease(e,t){return this.#e("addRelease",e,t)}start(e){return this.#e("start",e)}recordReplay(){return this.#e(t.Ef.RECORD)}pauseReplay(){return this.#e(t.Ef.PAUSE)}addToTrace(e){return this.#e("addToTrace",e)}setCurrentRouteName(e){return this.#e("setCurrentRouteName",e)}interaction(){return this.#e("interaction")}}var o=i(3325),a=i(234);const s=Object.values(o.D);function c(e){const t={};return s.forEach((r=>{t[r]=function(e,t){return!0===(0,a.Mt)(t,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),t}var u=i(2758);var d=i(8e3),l=i(5938),f=i(3960),g=i(385);const p=e=>g.il&&!0===(0,a.Mt)(e,"privacy.cookies_enabled");function h(e){return a.Yu.MO&&p&&!0===(0,a.Mt)(e,"session_trace.enabled")}class v extends l.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])\|\|arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler=void 0,this.featAggregate=void 0,this.onAggregateImported=void 0,!1===(0,a.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"".concat(this.featureName,".autoStart"))&&(this.auto=!1),this.auto&&(0,d.RP)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let t,r=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate)return;if(!this.auto)return void this.ee.on("".concat(this.featureName,"-opt-in"),(()=>{(0,d.RP)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName),this.auto=!0,this.importAggregator()}));this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{t=e}));const n=async()=>{let n;try{if(p(this.agentIdentifier)){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await i.e(75).then(i.bind(i,3108));n=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(t){(0,e.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",t),this.featureName===o.D.sessionReplay&&this.abortHandler?.()}try{if(!this.#t(this.featureName,n))return(0,d.LP)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName),void t(!1);const{lazyFeatureLoader:e}=await i.e(75).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await e(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,r),t(!0)}catch(r){(0,e.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),r),this.abortHandler?.(),(0,d.LP)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName,!0),t(!1),this.ee&&this.ee.abort()}};g.il?(0,f.b2)((()=>n()),!0):n()}#t(e,t){return e!==o.D.sessionReplay\|\|(r=this.agentIdentifier,n=t,!(!h(r)\|\|!n?.isNew&&!n?.state.sessionReplayMode));var r,n}}var m=i(7633);class b extends v{static featureName=m.t;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])\|\|arguments[2];super(e,t,m.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}var y=i(1117),A=i(1284);class w extends y.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t\|\|(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,A.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=_(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,A.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=_(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c\|\|(t=E(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=_(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]\|\|(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i\|\|(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r\|\|{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i<e.length;i++)t[r=e[i]]=Object.values(this.aggregatedData[r]\|\|{}),t[r].length&&(n=!0),delete this.aggregatedData[r];return n?t:null}}function _(e,t){return null==e?function(e){e?e.c++:e={c:1};return e}(t):t?(t.c\|\|(t=E(t.t)),t.c+=1,t.t+=e,t.sos+=ee,e>t.max&&(t.max=e),e<t.min&&(t.min=e),t):{t:e}}function E(e){return{t:e,min:e,max:e,sos:ee,c:1}}var x=i(8632),D=i(4351);var S=i(5546),k=i(7956),R=i(3239),N=i(9251),P=i(7894);class j extends v{static featureName=N.t;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])\|\|arguments[2];super(e,t,N.t,r),g.il&&((0,k.N)((()=>(0,S.p)("docHidden",[(0,P.z)()],void 0,N.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,R.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,S.p)("winPagehide",[(0,P.z)()],void 0,N.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var I=i(3081);class T extends v{static featureName=I.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])\|\|arguments[2];super(e,t,I.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class extends n{constructor(t,r){super(r),g._A?(this.sharedAggregator=new w({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},(0,x.h5)(this.agentIdentifier,this),this.desiredFeatures=new Set(t.features\|\|[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(b),this.runSoftNavOverSpa=[...this.desiredFeatures].some((e=>e.featureName===o.D.softNav)),(0,u.j)(this,t,t.loaderType\|\|"agent"),this.run()):(0,e.Z)("Failed to initialize the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:this.info,init:this.init,loader_config:this.loader_config,runtime:this.runtime}}run(){try{const t=c(this.agentIdentifier),r=[...this.desiredFeatures];r.sort(((e,t)=>o.p[e.featureName]-o.p[t.featureName])),r.forEach((r=>{if(!t[r.featureName]&&r.featureName!==o.D.pageViewEvent)return;if(this.runSoftNavOverSpa&&r.featureName===o.D.spa)return;if(!this.runSoftNavOverSpa&&r.featureName===o.D.softNav)return;const n=function(e){switch(e){case o.D.ajax:return[o.D.jserrors];case o.D.sessionTrace:return[o.D.ajax,o.D.pageViewEvent];case o.D.sessionReplay:return[o.D.sessionTrace];case o.D.pageViewTiming:return[o.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(r.featureName);n.every((e=>e in this.features))\|\|(0,e.Z)("".concat(r.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has not been initialized (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[r.featureName]=new r(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}))}catch(t){(0,e.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",t);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,x.fP)();delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.features,delete this.sharedAggregator;return r.ee.get(this.agentIdentifier).abort(),!1}}}({features:[b,j,T],loaderType:"lite"})})()})();</script> <meta name="description" content="The SEC announces it has named David Saltiel as head of the Office of Analytics and Research in the Division of Trading and Markets." /> <meta name="abstract" content="The SEC announces it has named David Saltiel as head of the Office of Analytics and Research in the Division of Trading and Markets." /> <meta name="keywords" content="Office of Analytics and Research, Saltiel, SEC, Trading and Markets" /> <meta name="MobileOptimized" content="width" /> <meta name="HandheldFriendly" content="true" /> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" /> <meta name="id" content="85226" /> <meta name="date" content="2016-10-06T17:45:00" /> <link rel="icon" href="/themes/custom/secgov/favicon.ico" type="image/vnd.microsoft.icon" /> <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2016-211" /> <link rel="shortlink" href="https://www.sec.gov/node/85226" /> <script src="/files/google_tag/primary/google_tag.script.js?sbtj1z" defer></script> <meta name="origin" content="Drupal" /> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width initial-scale=1.0 maximum-scale=3.0" /> <title>SEC.gov \| David Saltiel Named to Head Office of Analytics and Research in the Division of Trading and Markets</title> <script>window.env = "production";</script> <link rel="stylesheet" media="all" href="/files/css/css_tfNepv0rWw_c5H8WWKeqJaLJVBFlDeH_Ay586EnV6qU.css?delta=0&language=en&theme=secgov&include=eJxtjksOgzAMRC8UyJEiEywaMDG1HdT09A0CNm2X8-ajIahcLAwl0YgSYlHjNb1R_EQ8AHVqlVKenGIMgoSgqP6OgSXO6rSq4eqH5h25ife7HVXd_CwoNZTkUzaUDNTvKNqa_6wFa-Txe2fW7oHQHv7wG_B2fDlRZEE_StmAHL6s_V8u2V_yA2_TYNY" /> <link rel="stylesheet" media="all" href="/files/css/css_IEpP4-8073DiF9Ukzr0IlbO4ziwwMJ4jGm6MsHSC0fQ.css?delta=1&language=en&theme=secgov&include=eJxtjksOgzAMRC8UyJEiEywaMDG1HdT09A0CNm2X8-ajIahcLAwl0YgSYlHjNb1R_EQ8AHVqlVKenGIMgoSgqP6OgSXO6rSq4eqH5h25ife7HVXd_CwoNZTkUzaUDNTvKNqa_6wFa-Txe2fW7oHQHv7wG_B2fDlRZEE_StmAHL6s_V8u2V_yA2_TYNY" /> <script src="/files/js/js_S0KS_Q2pwsMKHeZIAuhFwC8IlMNcks0IXz3mEMZhWv0.js?scope=header&delta=0&language=en&theme=secgov&include=eJxtjksOgzAMRC8UyJEiEywaMDG1HdT09A0CNm2X8-ajIahcLAwl0YgSYlHjNb1R_EQ8AHVqlVKenGIMgoSgqP6OgSXO6rSq4eqH5h25ife7HVXd_CwoNZTkUzaUDNTvKNqa_6wFa-Txe2fW7oHQHv7wG_B2fDlRZEE_StmAHL6s_V8u2V_yA2_TYNY"></script> <script >bazadebezolkohpepadr="661965948"</script><script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.sec.gov/akam/13/2774cd83" defer></script></head> <body class="mac-view path-node node--type-news"> <a href="#main-content" class="visually-hidden focusable" tabindex="1"> Skip to main content </a> <noscript><iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-TD3BKV" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"></iframe></noscript> <div class="dialog-off-canvas-main-canvas" data-off-canvas-main-canvas> <div class="page-container"> <div id="page-wrapper"> <div id="page" > <div class="page-header" role="banner"> <div class="header-content"> <div id="global-header" class="region region-header"> <div id="block-digitalgovsearch" class="block global-header-digitalgov-search"> <div class="body"><!--<div class="hide-for-small" id="global-search"> <form accept-charset="UTF-8" action="//secsearch.sec.gov/search" class="clearfix" id="global-search-form" method="get" name="form_iQueryForm"> <fieldset><legend></legend> <label class="overlabel" for="global-search-box">Search SEC.gov</label> <input name="utf8" type="hidden" value="?" /> <input class="affiliate" name="affiliate" type="hidden" value="secsearch" /> <input aria-autocomplete="list" aria-haspopup="true" autocomplete="off" class="usagov-search-autocomplete ui-autocomplete-input" id="global-search-box" name="query" role="textbox" tabindex="4" title="Search for" type="text" /> <span aria-hidden="true" class="button-label fa fa-search"> </span><input class="global-search-button" tabindex="5" title="Go" type="submit" value="" /></fieldset> </form> <p class="options"><a class="option-link" href="http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html" tabindex="6">Company Filings</a> \| <a class="option-link" href="http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm" tabindex="7">More Search Options</a></p> </div>--> <div class="block block--search block--search-form" id="global-search" role="search"> <form accept-charset="UTF-8" action="//secsearch.sec.gov/search" class="clearfix" id="global-search-form" method="get" name="form_iQueryForm"> <fieldset><legend></legend> <div class="search-box-container"><label class="overlabel" for="global-search-box">Search SEC.gov</label> <input name="utf8" type="hidden" value="?" /> <input class="affiliate" name="affiliate" type="hidden" value="secsearch" /> <input aria-autocomplete="list" aria-haspopup="true" autocomplete="off" class="usagov-search-autocomplete ui-autocomplete-input" id="global-search-box" name="query" role="textbox" title="Search for" type="text" /> <span aria-hidden="true" class="button-label fa fa-search"> </span> <input class="global-search-button" title="Go" type="submit" value="" /></div> </fieldset> </form> <div class="menu-name-menu-utility-menu"> <p class="options"><span><a class="option-link" href="/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch">Company Filings</a></span> <!--<span><a class="option-link" href="http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm">More Search Options</a></span>--></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div id="block-secgov-branding" class="site-branding block region__inner system_branding_block"> <div class="block--menu-block"> <div class="menu-block-wrapper menu-name-main-menu"> <div class="banner-seal"> <a href="/" title="SEC Emblem" rel="home" tabindex="2"> <img src="/files/sec-logo.png" alt="SEC Emblem" /> </a> </div> <div class="banner-org-name"> <a href="/" title="U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission" rel="home" tabindex="3">U.S. Securities and <br>Exchange Commission</a> </div> <button id="mobile-menu-toggle" class="is-closed" aria-label="Menu Toggle"> <span class="svg-icon svg-icon-sm" aria-hidden="true">q</span> </button> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="global-navigation" id="global-navigation"> <div class="desktop-menu"> <div class="navigation-wrapper region region-global-navigation"> <div id="block-secgov-main-menu" class="block region__inner main"> <div class="block--menu-block"> <div class="menu-block-wrapper menu-name-main-menu"> <ul id="home-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/about" title="About" class="menu__link">About</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/about/careers" title="Careers" class="menu__link">Careers</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/about/commissioners" title="Commissioners" class="menu__link">Commissioners</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/contact-information/sec-directory" title="Contact" class="menu__link">Contact</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/reports" title="Reports and Publications" class="menu__link">Reports and Publications</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/about/about-securities-laws" title="Securities Laws" class="menu__link">Securities Laws</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/about/mission" title="Mission" class="menu__link">Mission</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/about/commission-votes" title="Commission Votes" class="menu__link">Commission Votes</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/about/divisions" title="Divisions & Offices" class="menu__link">Divisions & Offices</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/page/corpfin-section-landing" title="Corporation Finance" class="menu__link">Corporation Finance</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/page/enforcement-section-landing" title="Enforcement" class="menu__link">Enforcement</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/investment-management" title="Investment Management" class="menu__link">Investment Management</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/dera" title="Economic and Risk Analysis" class="menu__link">Economic and Risk Analysis</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/divisions/trading-markets" title="Trading and Markets" class="menu__link">Trading and Markets</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/page/aljsectionlanding" title="Office of Administrative Law Judges" class="menu__link">Office of Administrative Law Judges</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/exams" title="Examinations" class="menu__link">Examinations</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/page/litigation" title="Enforcement" class="menu__link">Enforcement</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/litigation/litreleases" title="Litigation Releases" class="menu__link">Litigation Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/litigation/admin" title="Administrative Proceedings" class="menu__link">Administrative Proceedings</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/litigation/opinions" title="Opinions and Adjudicatory Orders" class="menu__link">Opinions and Adjudicatory Orders</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/divisions/enforce/friactions" title="Accounting and Auditing" class="menu__link">Accounting and Auditing</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/litigation/suspensions" title="Trading Suspensions" class="menu__link">Trading Suspensions</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/enforcement/how-investigations-work" title="How Investigations Work" class="menu__link">How Investigations Work</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/divisions/enforce/receiverships" title="Receiverships" class="menu__link">Receiverships</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/enforce/information-for-harmed-investors" title="Information for Harmed Investors" class="menu__link">Information for Harmed Investors</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/page/regulation" title="Regulation" class="menu__link">Regulation</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/rulemaking-activity" title="Rulemaking Activity" class="menu__link">Rulemaking Activity</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/rulemaking-activity?aId=&search=&rulemaking_status=178631&division_office=All&regulation_year=" title="Proposed Rules" class="menu__link">Proposed Rules</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/rulemaking-activity?aId=&search=&rulemaking_status=177456&division_office=All&regulation_year=" title="Final Rules" class="menu__link">Final Rules</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/rulemaking-activity?aId=&search=&rulemaking_status=178151&division_office=All&regulation_year=" title="Interim Final Temporary Rules" class="menu__link">Interim Final Temporary Rules</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/other" title="Other Orders and Notices" class="menu__link">Other Orders and Notices</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/rules/sro" title="Self-Regulatory Organizations" class="menu__link">Self-Regulatory Organizations</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/regulation/staff-interpretations" title="Staff Interpretations" class="menu__link">Staff Interpretations</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/education" title="Education" class="menu__link">Education</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/education/investor-education" title="Investor Education" class="menu__link">Investor Education</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/education/glossary" title="Glossaries" class="menu__link">Glossaries</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/education/smallbusiness" title="Small Business Capital Raising " class="menu__link">Small Business Capital Raising </a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/edgar" title="Filings" class="menu__link">Filings</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/edgar/search-and-access" title="EDGAR – Search & Access" class="menu__link">EDGAR – Search & Access</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/edgar/filer-information" title="EDGAR – Information for Filers" class="menu__link">EDGAR – Information for Filers</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch" title="Company Filing Search" class="menu__link">Company Filing Search</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/filings/edgar-guide" title="How to Search EDGAR" class="menu__link">How to Search EDGAR</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/forms" title="Forms List" class="menu__link">Forms List</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/edgar/about" title="About EDGAR" class="menu__link">About EDGAR</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded" > <a href="/newsroom" title="News" class="menu__link">News</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/pressreleases" title="Press Releases" class="menu__link">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/speeches-statements" title="Speeches and Statements" class="menu__link">Speeches and Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/securities-topics" title="Securities Topics" class="menu__link">Securities Topics</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/upcoming-events" title="Upcoming Events" class="menu__link">Upcoming Events</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/sec-webcasts" title="Webcasts" class="menu__link">Webcasts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/sec-videos" title="SEC Videos" class="menu__link">SEC Videos</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf "> <a href="/news/media-gallery" title="Media Gallery" class="menu__link">Media Gallery</a> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="mobile-menu" style="display: none;"> <ul id="main-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded"> <a href="" class="menu__link">U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/about/divisions" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/91856">Divisions & Offices</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/litigation.shtml" class="menu__link">Enforcement</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/rules.shtml" class="menu__link">Regulation</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/education" title="Education" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/261726">Education</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/edgar" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/91901">Filings</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news" class="menu__link">Newsroom</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded"> <a href="/news" class="menu__link">Newsroom</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/pressreleases" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/testimony" class="menu__link">Testimony</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-expanded expanded"> <a href="/about/sec-rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111801">RSS Feeds</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/pressreleases.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases.rss">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/statements.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/statements.rss">Public Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/speeches.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/speeches.rss">Speeches</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf"> <a href="/news/testimony.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/testimony.rss">Testimony</a> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> <div id="local-nav"> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-newsroomleftnav-menu" id="block-newsroomleftnav"> <h2 class="visually-hidden" id="block-newsroomleftnav-menu">Newsroom Left Nav</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-newsroom"> <a href="/newsroom" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/676">Newsroom</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-releases"> <a href="/news/pressreleases" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-speeches-and-statements"> <a href="/news/speeches-statements" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/speeches-statements">Speeches and Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-sec-stories-"> <a href="/newsroom/sec-stories" title="SEC Stories " class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/153476">SEC Stories </a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-securities-topics"> <a href="/securities-topics" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/96191">Securities Topics</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-media-kit"> <a href="/newsroom/media-kit" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/85656">Media Kit</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-contacts"> <a href="/opa" class="menu__link">Press Contacts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-events"> <a href="/news/upcoming-events" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/40730">Events</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-webcasts"> <a href="/news/sec-webcasts" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/311136">Webcasts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-media-gallery"> <a href="/news/media-gallery" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/41986">Media Gallery</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-rss-feeds"> <a href="" class="menu__link">RSS Feeds</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-releases"> <a href="/news/pressreleases.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases.rss">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-speeches-and-statements"> <a href="/news/speeches-statements.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/speeches-statements.rss">Speeches and Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-litigation-releases"> <a href="/rss/litigation/litreleases.xml" class="menu__link">Litigation Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-investor-alerts"> <a href="/rss/investor/alerts" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="rss/investor/alerts">Investor Alerts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-more-rss-feeds"> <a href="/about/sec-rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111801">More RSS Feeds</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-social-media"> <a href="" class="menu__link">Social Media</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-@secgov"> <a href="https://twitter.com/SECGov" class="menu__link">@SECGov</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-sec-channel"> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/SECViews" class="menu__link">SEC Channel</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-view-all-social-media"> <a href="/opa/socialmedia" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/92821">View All Social Media</a> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> </nav> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="highlighted"> <aside role="complementary" class="message section clearfix"> <div class="region region-highlighted"> <div data-drupal-messages-fallback class="hidden"></div> </div> </aside> </div> <div class="page-content"> <div id="main-wrapper" class="layout-main-wrapper layout-container clearfix"> <div id="sidebar-first" class="sidebar"> <aside role="complementary" class="local-nav"> <nav role="navigation"> <div id="local-nav"> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-newsroomleftnav-menu" id="block-newsroomleftnav"> <h2 class="visually-hidden" id="block-newsroomleftnav-menu">Newsroom Left Nav</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-newsroom"> <a href="/newsroom" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/676">Newsroom</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-releases"> <a href="/news/pressreleases" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-speeches-and-statements"> <a href="/news/speeches-statements" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/speeches-statements">Speeches and Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-sec-stories-"> <a href="/newsroom/sec-stories" title="SEC Stories " class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/153476">SEC Stories </a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-securities-topics"> <a href="/securities-topics" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/96191">Securities Topics</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-media-kit"> <a href="/newsroom/media-kit" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/85656">Media Kit</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-contacts"> <a href="/opa" class="menu__link">Press Contacts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-events"> <a href="/news/upcoming-events" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/40730">Events</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-webcasts"> <a href="/news/sec-webcasts" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/311136">Webcasts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-media-gallery"> <a href="/news/media-gallery" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/41986">Media Gallery</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-rss-feeds"> <a href="" class="menu__link">RSS Feeds</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-press-releases"> <a href="/news/pressreleases.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/pressreleases.rss">Press Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-speeches-and-statements"> <a href="/news/speeches-statements.rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="news/speeches-statements.rss">Speeches and Statements</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-litigation-releases"> <a href="/rss/litigation/litreleases.xml" class="menu__link">Litigation Releases</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-investor-alerts"> <a href="/rss/investor/alerts" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="rss/investor/alerts">Investor Alerts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-more-rss-feeds"> <a href="/about/sec-rss" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111801">More RSS Feeds</a> </li> </ul> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-social-media"> <a href="" class="menu__link">Social Media</a> <ul class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-@secgov"> <a href="https://twitter.com/SECGov" class="menu__link">@SECGov</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-sec-channel"> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/SECViews" class="menu__link">SEC Channel</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-view-all-social-media"> <a href="/opa/socialmedia" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/92821">View All Social Media</a> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> </nav> </div> </nav> </aside> </div> <div id="content-wrapper" class="layout-main"> <a id="main-content" tabindex="-1"></a> <div id="content" class="content"> <div class="main-content region region-content"> <div id="block-secgov-content"> <article class="news" role="article"> <div class="article-content news"> <div id="page-title"> <h1 class="news-page-title"> <div> <a href="/news/pressreleases"> Press Release </a> </div> </h1> <!-- Subscribe link, RSS, Email --> <div id="addthis-icons"> <div class="addthis-wrapper"> <div class="hide-for-print appIconsDetail" style="visibility: visible;"> <div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style hide-for-small" data-ui-click="true"> <a class="addthis_button_print at300b" title="Print Page" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-print"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Share on Facebook" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-facebook"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet Page" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-twitter"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_mailto at300b" target="_blank" title="Email Page" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-envelope"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_compact at300m" href="#" title="More Sharing Options" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-plus"></span> </a> <div class="atclear"></div> </div> <div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_32x32_style hide-for-medium-up show-for-small addthis_mobile"> <a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Share on Facebook" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-facebook"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet Page" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-twitter"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_mailto at300b" target="_blank" title="Email Page" href="#" tabindex="0"> <span class="fa fa-envelope"></span> </a> </div> <div class="atclear"></div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="content aside press-release"> <h1 class="article-title">David Saltiel Named to Head Office of Analytics and Research in the Division of Trading and Markets</h1> <p class="release-number">FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br> 2016-211 </p> <p class="article-location-publishdate"> Washington D.C., Oct. 6, 2016 — </p> <div class="article-body">The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that it has named David H. Saltiel to head the Office of Analytics and Research in the Division of Trading and Markets.  He joined the SEC in September. <div> </div> <div>“We are very fortunate to have David’s expertise at the Commission,” said Stephen Luparello, Director of the Division of Trading and Markets.  “His knowledge and experience across the breadth of our areas of responsibility, especially in the fixed income markets, will allow us to make significant progress on our very ambitious agenda.” </div> <div> </div> <div>The Office of Analytics and Research provides expertise in quantitative data analysis, trading, portfolio management, and risk management, and examines topics such as market structure, new products, and rule filings by exchanges.</div> <div> </div> <div>“I am honored to take on this new role as Associate Director of the Office of Analytics and Research,” said Mr. Saltiel.  The work of the office is critical to understanding the most important questions facing capital markets today.  I look forward to contributing to this work and to the mission of the Commission.”</div> <div> </div> <div>Before coming to the SEC, Mr. Saltiel was Chief Economist at the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, a role he assumed in September 2014.  Prior to that, he was Chief Financial Economist and Director of Data Management and Analytics at the U.S. Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service, where he also served as Acting Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Debt Management. </div> <div> </div> <div>Mr. Saltiel received his undergraduate degree from Williams College and holds a master’s degree in economics from St. Antony’s College at the University of Oxford.  He began his career as a deputy director at the Atlantic Council of the United States and later worked at Sandia National Laboratories, the U.S. Department of Energy, and at AREVA Inc., where he was manager of federal affairs and analysis and later director of North American strategy and economic analysis. </div> </div> <p class="end-of-pr">###</p> <div class="article-more-topics"> </div> </div> <div id="sidebar-second"> <div class="block related-materials"> </div> </div> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <footer class="page-footer"> <div class="page-footer-top"> <div class="region region-footer-top"> <div id="block-globalfooterstayconnectedfooter" class="block stay-connected-footer"> <div class="body"><p class="data-exempt" id="stay-connected-footer"><a href="/news/socialmedia.shtml"><span>SOCIAL MEDIA</span></a><br class="new-line" /> <a href="https://twitter.com/SECGov"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-twitter"><span class="visually-hidden">1</span></span> <span class="hide-for-small">Twitter </span></a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/SECgov"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-facebook"><span class="visually-hidden">2</span></span> <span class="hide-for-small">Facebook</span></a> <a href="https://www.instagram.com/secgov"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-instagram"><span class="visually-hidden">2</span></span> <span class="hide-for-small">Instagram</span></a> <a href="/about/secrss.shtml"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-rss"><span class="visually-hidden">3</span></span><span class="hide-for-small">RSS</span></a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/SECViews"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-youtube-play"><span class="visually-hidden">4</span></span><span class="hide-for-small">YouTube</span></a><br class="hide-for-medium-up" /> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/us-securities-and-exchange-commission?trk=company_name"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-linkedin"><span class="visually-hidden">6</span></span><span class="hide-for-small">LinkedIn</span></a> <!--<a href="//www.pinterest.com/secgov"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-pinterest-p"><span class="visually-hidden">7</span></span> <span class="hide-for-small">Pinterest</span></a>--> <a href="//public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USSEC/subscriber/new"><span class="fa fa-lg fa-envelope"><span class="visually-hidden">8</span></span> <span class="hide-for-small">Email Updates</span> </a></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="page-footer-cols"> <div> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-aboutthesec-menu" id="block-aboutthesec"> <h2 id="block-aboutthesec-menu">About The SEC</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-budget-&-performance"> <a href="/about/offices/ofm/ofm-documents" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111606">Budget & Performance</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-careers"> <a href="/about/careers" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/41311">Careers</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-commission-votes"> <a href="/about/commission-votes" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111231">Commission Votes</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-contact"> <a href="/contact-information/sec-directory" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/102846">Contact</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-contracts"> <a href="/page/oacqsectionlanding" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/3841">Contracts</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-data-resources"> <a href="/sec-data-resources" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/191566">Data Resources</a> </li> </ul> </nav> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-governmenttransparency-menu" id="block-governmenttransparency"> <h2 id="block-governmenttransparency-menu">Transparency</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-accessibility-&-disability"> <a href="/disability/sec_access" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111766">Accessibility & Disability</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-foia"> <a href="/foia-services" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/946556">FOIA</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-inspector-general"> <a href="/oig" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/41456">Inspector General</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-no-fear-act-&-eeo-data"> <a href="/page/eeosectionlanding" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/3781">No FEAR Act & EEO Data</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-ombuds"> <a href="/ombuds" title="Ombuds" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/96081">Ombuds</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-whistleblower-protection"> <a href="/whistleblower" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/99851">Whistleblower Protection</a> </li> </ul> </nav> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-otherwebsites-menu" id="block-otherwebsites"> <h2 id="block-otherwebsites-menu">Websites</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-investor.gov"> <a href="https://www.investor.gov" class="menu__link">Investor.gov</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-related-sites"> <a href="/links" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/100276">Related Sites</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-usa.gov"> <a href="https://www.usa.gov" class="menu__link">USA.gov</a> </li> </ul> </nav> <nav role="navigation" aria-labelledby="block-siteinformation-menu" id="block-siteinformation"> <h2 id="block-siteinformation-menu">Site Information</h2> <ul id="section-menu" class="menu"> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-plain-writing"> <a href="/plainwriting" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111701">Plain Writing</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-privacy-&-security"> <a href="/privacy" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111706">Privacy & Security</a> </li> <li class="menu__item is-active is-leaf leaf item-site-map"> <a href="/sitemap" class="menu__link" data-drupal-link-system-path="node/111831">Site Map</a> </li> </ul> </nav> </div> </div> </footer> <script> if (typeof dataLayer != "undefined") dataLayer.push({"pageType": "2016-211"}); </script> </div> </div> </div> </div> <a href="#" class="back-to-top"><i class="fa fa-chevron-circle-up" aria-hidden="true"></i>Return to Top</a> <div class="overlap"> <!-- Subscribe link, RSS, Email --> <div id="addthis-icons-508" class="visibly-hidden"> <div class="addthis-wrapper"> <div class="appIconsDetail hide"> <div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style hide-for-small"> <a class="addthis_button_print at300b" title="Print Page" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-print"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Share on Facebook" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-facebook"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet Page" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-twitter"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_mailto at300b" target="_blank" title="Email Page" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-envelope"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_compact at300m" href="#" title="More Sharing Options"> <span class="fa fa-plus"></span> </a> <div class="atclear"></div> </div> <div class="addthis_toolbox hide"> <a class="addthis_button_facebook at300b" title="Share on Facebook" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-facebook"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_twitter at300b" title="Tweet Page" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-twitter"></span> </a> <a class="addthis_button_mailto at300b" target="_blank" title="Email Page" href="#"> <span class="fa fa-envelope"></span> </a> </div> <div class="atclear"></div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <script type="application/json" data-drupal-selector="drupal-settings-json">{"path":{"baseUrl":"\/","scriptPath":null,"pathPrefix":"","currentPath":"node\/85226","currentPathIsAdmin":false,"isFront":false,"currentLanguage":"en"},"pluralDelimiter":"\u0003","suppressDeprecationErrors":true,"data":{"extlink":{"extTarget":false,"extTargetNoOverride":false,"extNofollow":false,"extNoreferrer":false,"extFollowNoOverride":false,"extClass":"0","extLabel":"(link is external)","extImgClass":false,"extSubdomains":true,"extExclude":".\\.gov\|http:\/\/www.xbrl.org\/utr\/2013-05-17\/utr.xml\|http:\/\/www.xbrl.org\/dtr\/type\/numeric-2009-12-16.xsd\|http:\/\/www.xbrl.org\/dtr\/type\/nonNumeric-2009-12-16.xsd\|https:\/\/secir.secure.force.com\/ombudsman\/OMMSForm","extInclude":"","extCssExclude":".data-exempt","extCssExplicit":"","extAlert":true,"extAlertText":"You are now leaving the SEC Website. The link you have selected is located on another server. Please click on the OK button below to proceed to the selected site. The SEC does not endorse this web site, its sponsor, or any of the policies, activities, products, or services offered on the site or by any advertiser on the site.","mailtoClass":"0","mailtoLabel":"(link sends email)","extUseFontAwesome":false,"extIconPlacement":"append","extFaLinkClasses":"fa fa-external-link","extFaMailtoClasses":"fa fa-envelope-o","whitelistedDomains":null}},"user":{"uid":0,"permissionsHash":"be93764d3e8de6c48387d9f2c599940f17294deeee6c67667df88d64322d3b56"}}</script> <script src="/files/js/js_0J5-fFKxY3d8Rl3zkTpfxd_KSPehf0EZQRZk0qRTWFs.js?scope=footer&delta=0&language=en&theme=secgov&include=eJxtjksOgzAMRC8UyJEiEywaMDG1HdT09A0CNm2X8-ajIahcLAwl0YgSYlHjNb1R_EQ8AHVqlVKenGIMgoSgqP6OgSXO6rSq4eqH5h25ife7HVXd_CwoNZTkUzaUDNTvKNqa_6wFa-Txe2fW7oHQHv7wG_B2fDlRZEE_StmAHL6s_V8u2V_yA2_TYNY"></script> <script src="/themes/custom/secgov/js/third-party/addthis_widget.js?sbtj1z" async></script> <script src="/files/js/js_Y8ctq8UHZ8N-OzfQPJIItXwnmG8YpX3IbTpCcKivdeg.js?scope=footer&delta=2&language=en&theme=secgov&include=eJxtjksOgzAMRC8UyJEiEywaMDG1HdT09A0CNm2X8-ajIahcLAwl0YgSYlHjNb1R_EQ8AHVqlVKenGIMgoSgqP6OgSXO6rSq4eqH5h25ife7HVXd_CwoNZTkUzaUDNTvKNqa_6wFa-Txe2fW7oHQHv7wG_B2fDlRZEE_StmAHL6s_V8u2V_yA2_TYNY"></script> <script type="text/javascript">window.NREUM\|\|(NREUM={});NREUM.info={"beacon":"bam.nr-data.net","licenseKey":"32edb8f179","applicationID":"436723953","transactionName":"ZQZSMBQEXxZZARJeXlxMcQcSDF4LFxIHUFRtAFEHDgA=","queueTime":4,"applicationTime":35,"atts":"SUFRRlweTBg=","errorBeacon":"bam.nr-data.net","agent":""}</script><noscript><img src="https://www.sec.gov/akam/13/pixel_2774cd83?a=dD04Y2I4MzAyZDlkZGY3YWRhYmM3NTZhMTJhN2E2NzBkZmE5OWNmNzMzJmpzPW9mZg==" style="visibility: hidden; position: absolute; left: -999px; top: -999px;" /></noscript></body> </html>
text/markdown	0.499578	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/acl.gov/news-and-events/acl-blog/integrated-employment-lessons-colorados-community-link.json	# Integrated Employment Lessons from Colorado’s Community Link \| ACL Administration for Community Living An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know Here’s how you know Official websites use .govA .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPSA lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Skip to contentSkip to navigation Announcements A - Z Browse For the Network Search ACL Administration for Community Living - Program and Policy AreasColumn 1 - Programs* COVID-19 * - ACL A to Z: Programs, Networks, & Focus Areas - Overview - Aging and Disability NetworksAging and Disability Resource Centers - Americans with Disabilities Act National Network - Area Agencies on Aging - Assistive Technology Network - Centers for Independent Living - Protection and Advocacy Systems - Senior Centers and Supportive Services for Older Adults - State Councils on Developmental Disabilities - State Units on Aging - University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities - Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia - Connecting People to ServicesAging and Disability Resource Centers Program/No Wrong Door System - Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act - State Health Insurance Assistance Program - Consumer Choice and ControlPerson-Centered Planning - Supported Decision Making - Transportation Research and Demonstration Program - Veteran Directed Care Program - Data Projects - Empowering AdvocacyThe President’s Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities - Employment - For American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians - Health & WellnessBehavioral Health - Brain Health - Chronic Disease Self-Management - Falls Prevention - Health Promotion - I Can Do It! (ICDI) - HIV/AIDS - Nutrition - Oral Health - Opioid Crisis - Program Evaluations and Reports - Protecting Rights and Preventing AbuseElder Abuse Prevention - Elder Justice Coordinating Council - Help America Vote Act Programs - Legal Assistance - Long-Term Care Ombudsman - For People with Disabilities - Senior Medicare Patrol - Supporting Adult Protective Services - Research and Development Advanced Rehabilitation Research and Training (ARRT) Program - Disability and Rehabilitation Research Program - Field-Initiated Projects Program Rehabilitation Research - Model Systems Program - NIDILRR Annual Report - NIDILRR External Evaluation - NIDILRR Performance and Evaluation - Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Program - Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program - Small Business Innovation Research Program - Switzer Research Fellowship Program - Retirement Planning and Pension Support - Support to CaregiversLifespan Respite Care Program - National Family Caregiver Support Program - RAISE Family Caregiving Advisory Council - Supporting Grandparents Raising Grandchildren - Support for People with Limb Loss, Paralysis and TBILimb Loss Resource Center - Paralysis Resource Center - Traumatic Brain Injury - Strengthening the Aging and Disability NetworksAging and Disability Evidence-Based Programs and Practices - Diversity & Cultural Competency - Duals Demonstration Ombudsman Program Technical Assistance - Improving Business Practices - Improving Quality of Services - National Resource Centers - Projects of National Significance - Person-Centered, Trauma-Informed Service - Success Stories - Volunteer Opportunities and Civic Engagement - Column 1 - GrantsACL’s Grants Process - Applying for GrantsApplication Tips - How to Apply - Funding OpportunitiesClosed Opportunities - Grant Lifecycle - Managing a Grant - Column 1 - AgingOverview - Data and ResearchACL Data - The State of the States in Developmental Disabilities - NIDILRR Publications and Resources - Profile of Older Americans - Issue Briefings and Other Reading - Column 1 - NewsLatest News - Announcements - ACL Blog - Events and Observances - Speeches and Testimony - Column 2 - NewsACL Updates - Ready-to-publish materialsACL Logos - Articles, Infographics, and Fact Sheets - Videos - For ReportersStory Ideas - Communicating with Older Adults - FOIA - Column 1 - About ACLAbout Community Living - About the Aging and Disability Networks - Mission & Vision - OrganizationOrganizational Chart - Leadership - Regional Offices - History - Budget - Policy and Regulations - Public Input - Reports to Congress and the President - Column 2 - About ACLAuthorizing StatutesDevelopmental Disabilities Act - Older Americans Act - Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act - Elder Justice Act - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) - Help America Vote Act - Medicare Improvements for Patients & Providers Act - Public Health Service Act - Rehabilitation Act - Working at ACL - Contact Us 1. Home 2. ACL Blog 3. Integrated Employment Lessons from Colorado’s Community Link # Integrated Employment Lessons from Colorado’s Community Link Integrated Employment Lessons from Colorado’s Community Link ## Newsroom - Latest News - ACL Updates - Announcements - ACL Blog - Ready-to-publish materials ACL Logos - Articles, Infographics, and Fact Sheets - Videos - Story Ideas - Communicating with Older Adults - FOIA Home and community-based services (HCBS) provide opportunities for individuals with disabilities and older adults to receive services in their own home or community. On January 16, 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published a final rule that sets forth new requirements for states using Medicaid funds to pay for HCBS, supports enhanced quality in HCBS programs, and adds protections for individuals receiving these services. In addition, the rule reflects the intent of CMS to ensure that individuals receiving services and supports through Medicaid’s HCBS programs have full access to the benefits of community living and are able to receive services in the most integrated setting. ACL is highlighting examples of a promising practice for employment benefits designed to meet the needs of individuals, promote integrated employment, and comply with requirements of the HCBS settings rule and the Supreme Court’s Olmstead v. L.C. ruling. With regard to Medicaid-funded employment services it is the state’s responsibility to ensure that 1915(c) HCBS supported employment waiver services are furnished to a waiver participant to the extent that they are not available as vocational rehabilitation services funded under section 110 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Read our first post in this series to learn about the Arc of Washington’s efforts to transition youth into integrated employment. Twenty-five years ago Community Link in Colorado developed a strategic plan to convert their sheltered workshops to a more integrated employment support model. According to Bob Lawhead, Chief Executive Officer of Colorado Community Link and President of the Colorado Association of People Supporting Employment First, the strategic plan was initiated after the majority of participants expressed a desire for community employment, with only 14% of those served choosing a segregated workshop option. This preference drove the change process and persuaded the board of directors, agency staff, family members, and people receiving services that conversion from segregated to integrated services made sense. In the years following implementation of the strategic plan, people waiting to be connected to employment may have been placed into a day service program with small groups funded by the state‘s HCBS waiver program. That service offered volunteer experiences to small groups of individuals in community settings. The goal was to provide individuals with opportunities for work and social skill enhancement and to facilitate relationship-building between participants and nondisabled community members. However, the program did not result in an effective pathway to employment as the agency had hoped. The agency’s experience with congregate models has been challenging as many got “stuck” in the transitional phase involving group activities, whether volunteer or paid employment, and were not ready to proceed to integrated employment. According to Lawhead, the supported employment service rate made it cost prohibitive to provide individual, non-group employment supports and did not allow for individualized choice-driven community participation. Building on these lessons, Community Link was able to develop a new model which has allowed individuals to experience improved employment outcomes. Under this model, Community Link offers career-counseling, discovery-based assessment, job development, job placement, on the job training, and ongoing employment support for individual job seekers with intellectual and developmental disabilities. And they have found that the more individualized the support, the greater the likelihood of a successful employment outcome. Community Link historically received two thirds of their employment service funding from Medicaid waiver services and one third from Vocational Rehabilitation (VR). Presently, successfully employed individuals receive services which are funded in sequence from Medicaid and VR. Discovery and writing an individual job development plan is paid for through the HCBS waiver. After that the waiver support for employment stops and VR funding support picks up. Customized job development (the most resource intensive activity), job coaching, and job stabilization are paid for using VR funding. Once stabilization occurs, when the job coach is spending less than one third of scheduled job hours with the individual, the waiver employment services resume. Lawhead believes the state made significant progress recently by changing their VR vendor payment schedule by significantly improving funding for customized job development. Lawhead feels that this change along with enhanced HCBS waiver funding for supported employment services will result in better employment outcomes for the individuals receiving their services and supports. He and others in Colorado are presently working on Employment First legislation that would align state agencies to prioritize competitive integrated employment services for people with disabilities, with a focus on HCBS waiver program participants who experience intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). This legislation, introduced in early 2016, seeks to align Colorado’s IDD services with the Olmstead ruling and CMS’ HCBS rule requirements by affirmatively expanding integrated employment outcomes. ACL is interested in hearing from states, providers, and advocates working on integrated employment. Share your successes, challenges, and questions by e-mailing aclinfo@acl.gov. Editor’s note: this page has been updated to replace a broken link Last modified on 06/20/2023 Back to Top ## ACL Administration for Community Living ## What We Do and Why We Do It ACL was created around the fundamental principle that all people, regardless of age or disability, should be able to live independently and fully participate fully in their communities. Learn more about community living. Facebook YouTubeTwitter x logo X LinkedIn Share on Other Platforms ## Site Support - Home - Accessibility - Disclaimers - Contact Us - Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - Privacy Policy - Site Map - Viewers & Players - Vulnerability Disclosure Policy ## Other ACL Sites - Disability Assistance and Information Line - Eldercare Locator - ElderJustice.acl.gov - LongTermCare.gov - OlderIndians.gov ## Related Sites - Grants.gov - HHS.gov - No Fear Act - Plain Writing (on HHS.gov) - USA.gov - WhiteHouse.gov - Vote.gov ## Sign up for ACL updates Receive important announcements, events, and resources via email. Subscribe An official website of the Administration for Community Living, an operating division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
text/markdown	0	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/usc/118/66/10_-Subtitle_E-ptII-ch1221.json	### CHAPTER 1221—SEPARATION Sec. 12681. Reserves: discharge authority. 12682. Reserves: discharge upon becoming ordained minister of religion. 12683. Reserve officers: limitation on involuntary separation. 12684. Reserves: separation for absence without authority or sentence to imprisonment. 12685. Reserves separated for cause: character of discharge. 12686. Reserves on active duty within two years of retirement eligibility: limitation on release from active duty. 12687. Reserves under confinement by sentence of court-martial: separation after six months confinement. #### Editorial Notes #### Amendments 1996—Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §563(a)(2)(B), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 325, added item 12687.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/ussgl/tfm-archive/effective-june2019/part1/sec5-cover-2019.docx.json	Part 1, Section V: USSGL Crosswalks to Standard External Reports This section includes crosswalks for use in Fiscal Year 2019 GTAS Reporting. These crosswalks map USSGL accounts to external reports in accordance with current reporting guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), and the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (Fiscal Service). Each report crosswalk lists the proper USSGL accounts and applicable attributes for each line and/or column on the reports. Attributes identify information subsidiary to the basic 6-digit USSGL accounts. This subsidiary information is necessary to meet external reporting requirements. See Section IV for additional information on attributes. All crosswalks require pre-closing USSGL account balances. The following are crosswalks from the USSGL Chart of Accounts to standard external reports required by OMB and Fiscal Service: Section V Page Number Balance Sheet (BS) V BS - 1 Statement of Net Cost (SNC) V SNC - 1 Statement of Changes in Net Position (SCNP) V SCNP - 1 Statement of Custodial Activity (SCA) V SCA - 1 Statement of Budgetary Resources (SBR) V SBR - 1 SF 133 and Schedule P: Report on Budget Execution and V SF 133/Sch P - 1 Budgetary Resources and Budget Program and Financing Schedule Page 1 of 1 # image1.jpg
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.cob.483312/gov.uscourts.cob.483312.22.0.pdf.json	Fill in this information to identify your case and this filing: Debtor 1 ### Jeffrey Michael Speicher First Name Middle Name Last Name Debtor 2 (Spouse, if filing) First Name Middle Name Last Name United States Bankruptcy Court for the: DISTRICT OF COLORADO, DENVER DIVISION Case number ### 19-13850-MER ##  Check if this is an amended filing # Official Form 106A/B # Schedule A/B: Property 12/15 In each category, separately list and describe items. List an asset only once. If an asset fits in more than one category, list the asset in the category where you think it fits best. Be as complete and accurate as possible. If two married people are filing together, both are equally responsible for supplying correct information. If more space is needed, attach a separate sheet to this form. On the top of any additional pages, write your name and case number (if known). Answer every question. Part 1: Describe Each Residence, Building, Land, or Other Real Estate You Own or Have an Interest In 1. Do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in any residence, building, land, or similar property? ##  No. Go to Part 2. #  Yes. Where is the property? 1.1 What is the property? Check all that apply Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . ### 222 Basin Creek Cir #    Single-family home Duplex or multi-unit building Condominium or cooperative Street address, if available, or other description ### Durango CO 81301 ##   Manufactured or mobile home Land Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? City State ZIP Code ##  Investment property ### $650,000.00 $650,000.00 ##  Timeshare Describe the nature of your ownership interest (such as fee simple, tenancy by the entireties, or a life estate), if known. ##  Other Who has an interest in the property? Check one ##  Debtor 1 only ### 100% La Plata ##  Debtor 2 only County ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) #  At least one of the debtors and another Other information you wish to add about this item, such as local property identification number: Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 1 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page1 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER If you own or have more than one, list here: 1.2 What is the property? Check all that apply Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . ### 1210 E 28th Ave # 6 ##   #  Single-family home Duplex or multi-unit building Condominium or cooperative Street address, if available, or other description ### Denver CO 80205-4407 ##   Manufactured or mobile home Land Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? City State ZIP Code #  Investment property ### $550,000.00 $550,000.00 ##  Timeshare Describe the nature of your ownership interest (such as fee simple, tenancy by the entireties, or a life estate), if known. ##  Other Who has an interest in the property? Check one ##  Debtor 1 only ### Denver ##  Debtor 2 only County ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) #  At least one of the debtors and another Other information you wish to add about this item, such as local property identification number: ### Rental Property 2. Add the dollar value of the portion you own for all of your entries from Part 1, including any entries for pages you have attached for Part 1. Write that number here........................................................................... => ### $1,200,000.00 Part 2: Describe Your Vehicles Do you own, lease, or have legal or equitable interest in any vehicles, whether they are registered or not? Include any vehicles you own that someone else drives. If you lease a vehicle, also report it on Schedule G: Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases. 3. Cars, vans, trucks, tractors, sport utility vehicles, motorcycles ##  No #  Yes 3.1 Make: ### Harley Davidson Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Road Glide #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2018 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 6000 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $31,000.00 $31,000.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.2 Make: ### Maserati Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Levante #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2018 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 10964 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $54,000.00 $54,000.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 2 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page2 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER 3.3 Make: ### MINI Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Cooper Clubman #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2016 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 36768 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $16,000.00 $16,000.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.4 Make: ### Ford Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Pickup-Raptor #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2018 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 26000 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $67,500.00 $67,500.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.5 Make: ### Mercedes-Benz Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Sprinter #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2015 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 55097 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $30,000.00 $30,000.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.6 Make: ### Harley Davidson Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Sportster #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2003 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 9850 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### Daughter's motorcycle $1,000.00 $1,000.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.7 Make: ### PIA Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Scooter #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2005 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 450 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $400.00 $400.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) 3.8 Make: ### BMW Who has an interest in the property? Check one Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Motorcycle #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2003 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? Approximate mileage: ### 7000 ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### $750.00 $750.00 ##  Check if this is community property (see instructions) Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 3 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page3 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER 4. W a t e r c r a f t , a i r c r a f t , m o t o r h o m e s , AT V s a n d o t h e r r e c r e a t i o n a l v e h i c l e s , o t h e r v e h i c l e s , a n d a c c e s s o r i e s E x a m p l e s : B o a t s , t r a i l e r s , m ot o r s , p e r s o n a l wa t e r c r a f t , f i s h i n g ve s s e l s , s n ow m o b i l e s , m ot o r c yc l e a c c e s s o r i e s ##  No #  Ye s 4.1 Make: ### Artic Cat Who has an interest in the property? C h e c k o n e Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Snow Pro #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2010 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ### 2 snowmobiles ##  Check if this is community property ### $1,000.00 $1,000.00 (see instructions) 4.2 Make: ### Starcraft Who has an interest in the property? C h e c k o n e Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Pop Out Toy Hauler #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2003 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ##  Check if this is community property ### $1,500.00 $1,500.00 (see instructions) 4.3 Make: ### Ski Doo Who has an interest in the property? C h e c k o n e Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Bombardier #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2006 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ##  Check if this is community property ### $500.00 $500.00 (see instructions) 4.4 Make: ### A L K O Who has an interest in the property? C h e c k o n e Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. Put the amount of any secured claims on Schedule D: Creditors Who Have Claims Secured by Property . Model: ### Trailer #  Debtor 1 only Year: ### 2017 ##  Debtor 2 only Current value of the entire property? Current value of the portion you own? ##  Debtor 1 and Debtor 2 only Other information: ##  At least one of the debtors and another ##  Check if this is community property ### $500.00 $500.00 (see instructions) 5 .A d d t h e d o l l a r v a l u e o f t h e p o r t i o n y o u o w n f o r a l l o f y o u r e n t r i e s f r o m P a r t 2 , i n c l u d i n g a n y e n t r i e s f o r p a g e s y o u h a v e a t t a c h e d f o r P a r t 2 . W r i t e t h a t n u m b e r h e r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = > ### $204,150.00 Part 3: Describe Your Personal and Household Items D o y o u o w n o r h a v e a n y l e g a l o r e q u i t a b l e i n t e r e s t i n a n y o f t h e f o l l o w i n g i t e m s ? C u r r e n t v a l u e o f t h e p o r t i o n y o u o w n ? D o n ot d e d u c t s e c u r e d claims or exemptions. 6. H o u s e h o l d g o o d s a n d f u r n i s h i n g s E x a m p l e s : M a j o r a p p l i a n c e s , f u r n i t u r e , l i n e n s , c h i n a , k i t c h e n wa r e ##  No #  Ye s . D e s c r i b e . . . . . ### Furniture $1,000.00 7. E l e c t r o n i c s E x a m p l e s : T e l ev i s i o n s a n d r ad i o s ; a u d i o , v i d e o , s t e r e o , a n d d i g i t a l e q u i p m e n t ; c o m p u t e r s , p r i n t e r s , s c a n n e r s ; m u s i c c o l l e c t i o n s ; e l e c t r o n i c d ev i c e s including cell phones, cameras, media players, games ##  No #  Ye s . D e s c r i b e . . . . . Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property p a g e 4 S o f t w a r e C o p y r i g h t ( c ) 2 0 1 9 C I N G ro u p - w w w . c i n c o m p a s s . c o m # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page4 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER Various electronics $500.00 8. Collectibles of value Ex amples: Antiques and figurines; paintings, prints, or other artwork; books, pictures, or other art objects; stamp, coin, or baseball card collections; other collections, memorabilia, collectibles #  No ##  Yes. Describe..... 9. Equipment for sports and hobbies Ex amples: Sports, photographic, exercise, and other hobby equipment; bicycles, pool tables, golf clubs, skis; canoes and kayaks; carpentry tools; musical instruments ##  No #  Yes. Describe..... ### Raft, bicycles and camping gear $2,750.00 10. Firearms Ex amples: Pistols, rifles, shotguns, ammunition, and related equipment ##  No #  Yes. Describe..... ### Shot guns; hand guns; hunting rifles (approximately 12 guns) $5,000.00 11. Clothes Ex amples: Everyday clothes, furs, leather coats, designer wear, shoes, accessories ##  No #  Yes. Describe..... ### Clothes, leather coat $300.00 12. Jewelry Ex amples: Everyday jewelry, costume jewelry, engagement rings, wedding rings, heirloom jewelry, watches, gems, gold, silver ##  No #  Yes. Describe..... ### Watches and silver $1,700.00 13. Non-farm animals Ex amples: Dogs, cats, birds, horses #  No ##  Yes. Describe..... 14. Any other personal and household items you did not already list, including any health aids you did not list #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information..... 15. Add the dollar value of all of your entries from Part 3, including any entries for pages you have attached for Part 3. Write that number here .............................................................................. ### $11,250.00 Part 4: Describe Your Financial Assets Do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in any of the following? Current value of the portion you own? Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. 16. Cash Ex amples: Money you have in your wallet, in your home, in a safe deposit box, and on hand when you file your petition ##  No #  Yes................................................................................................................ ### Cash on hand $15,000.00 Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 5 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page5 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER 17. Deposits of money Examples: Checking, savings, or other financial accounts; certificates of deposit; shares in credit unions, brokerage houses, and other similar institutions. If you have multiple accounts with the same institution, list each. ##  No #  Yes........................ Institution name: 17. 1. ### Checking Account Alpine Bank, Youth Checking 9324* $86.76 17. 2. ### Checking Account Alpine Bank, 4136* $2,071.79 17. 3. ### Checking Account Alpine Bank, Camulus Irrevocable Gift Trust, 6297* $2,750.26 17. 4. ### Checking Account TBK Bank, SSB, 3284 $100,772.48 18. Bonds, mutual funds, or publicly traded stocks Examples: Bond funds, investment accounts with brokerage firms, money market accounts ##  No #  Yes.................. Institution or issuer name: ### Wells Fargo Advisors, #6532 (Mutual Funds)* $2,476.14 Wells Fargo Advisors, #8036 (Stocks)* $93,767.54 Wells Fargo Advisors #8297 (Mutual Funds)* $4,750.59 19. Non-publicly traded stock and interests in incorporated and unincorporated businesses, including an interest in an LLC, partnership, and joint venture #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information about them................... Name of entity: % of ownership: 20. Government and corporate bonds and other negotiable and non-negotiable instruments Negotiable instruments include personal checks, cashiers ’ checks, promissory notes, and money orders. Non-negotiable instruments are those you cannot transfer to someone by signing or delivering them. ##  No #  Yes. Give specific information about them Issuer name: ### Cashier's Check in the name of Jeffrey Speicher $20,000.00 Cashier's Check in the name of Jeffrey Speicher $30,000.00 21. Retirement or pension accounts Examples: Interests in IRA, ERISA, Keogh, 401(k), 403(b), thrift savings accounts, or other pension or profit-sharing plans ##  No #  Yes. List each account separately. Type of account: Institution name: ### IRA Wells Fargo Advisors* $93,421.00 IRA Wells Fargo Advisors* $261,632.74 401(k) or Similar Plan Wells Fargo Advisors* $493,932.00 Additional Account Wells Fargo. Deferred Compensation (Vested)* $657,000.00 Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 6 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com based on latest statement available based on latest statement available # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page6 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER 22. Security deposits and prepayments Your share of all unused deposits you have made so that you may continue service or use from a company Examples: Agreements with landlords, prepaid rent, public utilities (electric, gas, water), telecommunications companies, or others #  No ##  Yes. ..................... Institution name or individual: 23. Annuities (A contract for a periodic payment of money to you, either for life or for a number of years) #  No ##  Yes............. Issuer name and description. 24. Interests in an education IRA, in an account in a qualified ABLE program, or under a qualified state tuition program. 26 U.S.C. §§ 530(b)(1), 529A(b), and 529(b)(1). ##  No #  Yes............. Institution name and description. Separately file the records of any interests.11 U.S.C. § 521(c): ### Wells Fargo Advisors (ESA Mutual Funds #4179)* $19,560.11 Wells Fargo Advisors (529 Mutual Funds #5706)* $58,514.82 Wells Fargo Advisors (529 Mutual Funds #5733)* $36,600.24 Wells Fargo Advisors (ESA Mutual Funds #1069)* $19,544.84 25. Trusts, equitable or future interests in property (other than anything listed in line 1), and rights or powers exercisable for your benefit ##  No #  Yes. Give specific information about them... ### The Jeffrey Speicher Living Trust $65,000.00 Partial beneficiary of the Thess Ekberg Living Trust $0.00 26. Patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property Examples: Internet domain names, websites, proceeds from royalties and licensing agreements #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information about them... 27. Licenses, franchises, and other general intangibles Examples: Building permits, exclusive licenses, cooperative association holdings, liquor licenses, professional licenses #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information about them... Money or property owed to you? Current value of the portion you own? Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. 28. Tax refunds owed to you #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information about them, including whether you already filed the returns and the tax years....... 29. Family support Examples: Past due or lump sum alimony, spousal support, child support, maintenance, divorce settlement, property settlement #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information...... 30. Other amounts someone owes you Examples: Unpaid wages, disability insurance payments, disability benefits, sick pay, vacation pay, workers ’ compensation, Social Security benefits; unpaid loans you made to someone else ##  No #  Yes. Give specific information.. ### Unpaid wages for last pay period to May 7, 2019 $31,000.00 Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 7 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com *based on latest statement available # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page7 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER 31. Interests in insurance policies Examples: Health, disability, or life insurance; health savings account (HSA); credit, homeowner ’ s, or renter ’ s insurance ##  No #  Yes. Name the insurance company of each policy and list its value. Company name: Beneficiary: Surrender or refund value: ### Wells Fargo Basic Life ($400,000) Estate $0.00 Wells Fargo Accidental Death ($600,000) Estate $0.00 Wells Fargo Optional Term Life ($3,000,000) Estate $0.00 Prudential Life ($1,000,000) Estate $0.00 32. Any interest in property that is due you from someone who has died If you are the beneficiary of a living trust, expect proceeds from a life insurance policy, or are currently entitled to receive property because someone has died. #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information.. 33. Claims against third parties, whether or not you have filed a lawsuit or made a demand for payment Examples: Accidents, employment disputes, insurance claims, or rights to sue #  No ##  Yes. Describe each claim......... 34. Other contingent and unliquidated claims of every nature, including counterclaims of the debtor and rights to set off claims ##  No #  Yes. Describe each claim......... ### Wells Fargo Advisors - Note Claims unknown Malpractice Settlement Recovery Set Off Against Roddess Ekberg, Timothy Ekberg, Sarah and Justin Fierstein $300,000.00 35. Any financial assets you did not already list #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information.. 36. Add the dollar value of all of your entries from Part 4, including any entries for pages you have attached for Part 4. Write that number here..................................................................................................................... ### $2,307,881.31 Part 5: Describe Any Business-Related Property You Own or Have an Interest In. List any real estate in Part 1. 37. Do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in any business-related property? ##  No. Go to Part 6. #  Yes. Go to line 38. Current value of the portion you own? Do not deduct secured claims or exemptions. 38. Accounts receivable or commissions you already earned #  No ##  Yes. Describe..... 39. Office equipment, furnishings, and supplies Examples: Business-related computers, software, modems, printers, copiers, fax machines, rugs, telephones, desks, chairs, electronic devices #  No Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 8 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page8 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER ##  Yes. Describe..... 40. Machinery, fixtures, equipment, supplies you use in business, and tools of your trade ##  No #  Yes. Describe..... ### Desk, computer $1,100.00 41. Inventory #  No ##  Yes. Describe..... 42. Interests in partnerships or joint ventures #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information about them................... Name of entity: % of ownership: 43. Customer lists, mailing lists, or other compilations #  No. ##  Do your lists include personally identifiable information (as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(41A))? #  No ##  Yes. Describe..... 44. Any business-related property you did not already list #  No ##  Yes. Give specific information......... 45. Add the dollar value of all of your entries from Part 5, including any entries for pages you have attached for Part 5. Write that number here..................................................................................................................... ### $1,100.00 Part 6 : Describe Any Farm- and Commercial Fishing-Related Property You Own or Have an Interest In. If you own or have an interest in farmland, list it in Part 1. 46. Do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in any farm- or commercial fishing-related property? #  No. Go to Part 7. ##  Yes. Go to line 47. Part 7: Describe All Property You Own or Have an Interest in That You Did Not List Above 53. Do you have other property of any kind you did not already list? Examples: Season tickets, country club membership ##  No #  Yes. Give specific information......... ### Burial lot and maintenance, Greenmount Cemetery of the City of Durango, Colorado $800.00 54. Add the dollar value of all of your entries from Part 7. Write that number here .................................... ### $800.00 Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 9 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page9 of 10Debtor 1 ### Speicher, Jeffrey Michael Case number (if known) ### 19-13850-MER Part 8: List the Totals of Each Part of this Form 55. Part 1: Total real estate, line 2 ...................................................................................................................... ### $1,200,000.00 56. Part 2: Total vehicles, line 5 ### $204,150.00 57. Part 3: Total personal and household items, line 15 ### $11,250.00 58. Part 4: Total financial assets, line 36 ### $2,307,881.31 59. Part 5: Total business-related property, line 45 ### $1,100.00 60. Part 6: Total farm- and fishing-related property, line 52 ### $0.00 61. Part 7: Total other property not listed, line 54 + ### $800.00 62. Total personal property. Add lines 56 through 61... ### $2,525,181.31 Copy personal property total ### $2,525,181.31 63. Total of all property on Schedule A/B . Add line 55 + line 62 ### $3,725,181.31 Official Form 106A/B Schedule A/B: Property page 10 Software Copyright (c) 2019 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com # Case:19-13850-MER Doc#:22 Filed:05/21/19 Entered:05/21/19 18:45:48 Page10 of 10
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.af.mil/News/Photos/igphoto/2003241672/mediaid/7100404/index.html.json	- # Airman 1st Class Steven Marshall, 718th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron crew chief, and Air Force Maj. Myles Berthold, 909th Air Refueling Squadron pilot, conduct preflight checks on a KC-135 Stratotanker at Kadena Air Base, Japan, May 23, 2023. In service for over 40 years, the KC-135 Stratotanker provides long-range aerial refueling support for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and allied aircraft, and has the capacity to offload 6,500 pounds of fuel per minute. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Yosselin Campos) PHOTO BY:Senior Airman Yosselin Campos VIRIN:230523-F-IV266-1022.JPG FULL SIZE:2.9 MB Download Share CAMERA NIKON Z 6 LENS 24.0-70.0 mm f/2.8 APERTURE 28/10 SHUTTERSPEED 1/640 ISO 250 No camera details available. #### IMAGE IS PUBLIC DOMAIN Read More This photograph is considered public domain and has been cleared for release. If you would like to republish please give the photographer appropriate credit. Further, any commercial or non-commercial use of this photograph or any other DoD image must be made in compliance with guidance found at https://www.dimoc.mil/resources/limitations, which pertains to intellectual property restrictions (e.g., copyright and trademark, including the use of official emblems, insignia, names and slogans), warnings regarding use of images of identifiable personnel, appearance of endorsement, and related matters. Go to Gallery
text/markdown	0.531142	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/cap/53000.json	#### Petition of UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA for an Order Setting Aside Civil Investigative Demand No. 0179. Civ. No. 63-1026-S. United States District Court S. D. California, Central Division. Dec. 18, 1963. L. A. Gibbons, Los Angeles, Cal., Moses Lasky, Richard Haas, Brobeek, Phleger 487& Harrison, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner. Stanley E. Disney, Chief, Los Angeles Office, Department of Justice, Los Angeles, Cal., George R. Kucik, Antitrust Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., for the United States. STEPHENS, District Judge. On or about August 19, 1963, by certified air mail, the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Section of the Department of Justice served Civil Investigative Demand No. 0179 on the Union Oil Company of California pursuant to authority conferred upon him in 15 U.S.C. § 1312. The demand was signed by William H. Orrick, Jr., Assistant Attorney General and was accompanied by a transmittal letter from Mr. Orrick by Lewis Bernstein, Chief, Special Litigation Section. On August 27, 1963, the Union Oil Company filed its petition for an order setting aside the civil investigative demand. This Court has jurisdiction by virtue of 15 U.S.C. § 1314(b). Section 1312 of Title 15, U.S.C. authorizes the civil investigative demand to be served on “ * * any person under investigation who may be in possession, custody, or control of any documentary material relevant to a civil antitrust investigation, * * Two terms referred to in Section 1312 are defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1311(c) and (d), as follows: > “(c) The term ‘antitrust investigation’ means any inquiry conducted by any antitrust investigator for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is or has been engaged in any antitrust violation; > “(d) The term ‘antitrust violation’ means any act or omission in violation of any antitrust law or any antitrust order; * * .” Among other things, the investigative demand must “state the nature of the conduct constituting the alleged antitrust violation which is under investigation and the provision of law applicable thereto; * (15 U.S.C. § 1312.) Petitioner Union Oil Company claims that it is not a person under investigation. While the civil investigative demand does not clearly state, which it could easily do, that the Union Oil Company of California is under investigation, when the demand is read in conjunction with the schedule of documents which is a part of the demand, it may be fairly inferred that petitioner is a person under investigation. Petitioner next contends that no valid antitrust investigation is being conducted in that it appears on the face of the demand that the investigation is not designed to ascertain whether the person under investigation is or has beenengaged in any antitrust violation, but on the contrary, is designed to investigate what petroleum companies may do in the future. Responsive to the requirements of 15 U.S.C. § 1312(b) (1), quoted above, the nature of the conduct constituting the alleged antitrust violation which is under investigation and the provision of law applicable thereto, the demand reads as follows: > “This civil investigative demand is issued pursuant to the provisions of the Antitrust Civil Process Act, 76 Stat. 548-552, Title 15 United States Code Sec. 1311-1314, in the course of an inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining whether there is or has been a violation of the provisions of Title 15 United States Code Sec. 18 by conduct of the following nature: The proposed acquisitions of fertilizer companies by petroleum companies.” An inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining whether there is or has been a violation of the provisions of Title 15 United States Code, Section 18 is appropriate, but when the conduct supposedly violating that section is described as “The proposed acquisitions of fertilizer companies by petroleum companies,” there exists a contradiction of terms. A proposed acquisition is not and quite obviously has not been a violation of the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 18. The fact that the investigation concerns prosper.-*488tive acquisitions is reinforced by the contents of the transmittal letter, in which the petitioner is advised, “The Department of Justice is investigating proposed acquisitions by petroleum companies of fertilizer companies.” The Government argues in support of the validity of the demand that 15 U.S.C. § 25 is an antitrust law and the term “antitrust violation” by definition means “any act or omission in violation of any antitrust law.” That section invests District Courts of the United States with jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of the Act and provides that it shall be the duty of the United States Attorneys under the direction of the Attorney General to institute proceedings in equity to prevent and restrain such violations. Under this section, mergers which, if effected, would constitute antitrust violations may be enjoined. For a case in point, see United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U.S. 321, 83 S.Ct. 1715, 10 L.Ed.2d 915 (1963) wherein the Supreme Court holds that the merger of appellees is forbidden by Section 7 of the Clayton Act and so must be enjoined. Section 7 of the Clayton Act is 15 U.S.C. § 18. It is literally impossible for any person under investigation to violate 15 U.S.C. § 25. Since it appears on the face of the investigative demand and in the letter of transmittal and also from the Government’s argument in support of the investigative demand with its reliance on 15 U.S.C. § 25, that the investigation is in fact not whether there is or has been a violation of the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 18, but an investigation of proposed acquisitions which if consummated might violate that section, the petition requesting an order that civil investigative demand No. 0179 is void and that it be set aside, should be granted. An investigative order issued in aid of an investigation to determine whether there is or has been a violation of any other antitrust laws (15 U.S.C. § 1, for example) by conduct of the nature of proposed acquisitions of fertilizer companies by petroleum companies is not before the Court. The ruling in this matter is limited to one proposition, namely, that the civil investigative demand served in this case is invalid. Petitioner overstates its position when it claims that no valid antitrust investigation is being conducted. The Court has not the slightest doubt but that the Attorney General and the several United States Attorneys may validly pursue antitrust investigations designed to ascertain whether the proposed acquisitions of fertilizer companies by petroleum companies violate 15 U.S.C. § 18. It is doubtlessly their duty to do so in order to determine what action should be taken pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 25. For the reasons appearing above, It is hereby ordered that Civil Investigative Demand No. 0179 be and the same is hereby set aside and annulled.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.copyright.gov/licensing/111/2023.1/28438.2023.1.pdf.json	This form is effective beginning with the January 1 to June 30, 2017 accounting period (2017/1) SA1-2E If you are filing for a prior accounting period, contact the Licensing Division for the correct form. Short Form for Secondary Transmissions by DATE RECEIVED Cable Systems (Short Form) General instructions are located in the first tab of this workbook A ACCOUNTING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS STATEMENT: (YYYY/(Period)) 2023/1 Period 1 = January 1 - June 30 Period 2 = July 1 - December 31 Barcode Data Filing Period (optional - see instructions) Accounting Period Owner LEGAL NAME OF OWNER/MAILING ADDRESS OF CABLE SYSTEM BUSINESS NAME(S) OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM (IF DIFFERENT) MAILING ADDRESS OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM (Number, street, rural route, apartment, or suite number) (City, town, state, zip) INSTRUCTIONS: In line 1, give any business or trade names used to identify the business and operation of the system unless these names already appear in space B. In line 2, give the mailing address of the system, if different from the address given in space B. System IDENTIFICATION OF CABLE SYSTEM: MAILING ADDRESS OF CABLE SYSTEM: (Number, street, rural route, apartment, or suite number) (City, town, state, zip code) Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Offce to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Offce's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal suffciency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. ONE MEDIACOM WAY B MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC Instructions: Give the full legal name of the owner of the cable system. If the owner is a subsidiary of another corporation, give the full corporate title of the subsidiary, not that of the parent corporation. List any other name or names under which the owner conducts the business of the cable system. If there were different owners during the accounting period, only the owner on the last day of the accounting period should submit a single statement of account and royalty fee payment covering the entire accounting period. Check here if this is the system’s first filing. If not, enter the system’s ID number assigned by the Licensing Division. 28438 Return completed workbook by email to: For additional information, contact the U.S. Copyright Office Licensing Division at: Tel: (202) 707-8150 ALLOCATION NUMBER 2 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT coplicsoa@loc.gov FOR COPYRIGHT OFFICE USE ONLY AMOUNT $ MEDIACOM PARK, NY 10918 C Waseca, MN 56093 1504 Second Street S.E. 1 MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) 8/23/2023 Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 1b. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC 28438 Area Served CITY OR TOWN STATE First Fulda MN Community Ivanhoe MN Lake Benton (Town) MN Add Rows as Necessary Tyler MN Slayton MN Pipestone MN Hadley MN Trosky MN Instructions: List each separate community served by the cable system. A "community" is the same as a "community unit" as defined in FCC rules: "a separate and distinct community or municipal entity (including unincorporated communities within unincorporated areas and including single, discrete unincorporated areas)." 47 C.F.R. 76.5(dd). The first community that you list will serve as a form of system identification hereafter known as the "first community." Please use it as the first community on all future filings. Note: Entities and properties such as hotels, apartments, condominiums, or mobile home parks should be reported in parentheses below the identified city. Name D U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC SECONDARY TRANSMISSION SERVICE: SUBSCRIBERS AND RATES In General: The information in space E should cover all categories of secondary transmission service of the cable system, that is, the retransmission of television and radio broadcasts by your system to subscribers. Give information Secondary about other services (including pay cable) in space F, not here. All the facts you state must be those existing on the Transmission last day of the accounting period (June 30 or December 31, as the case may be). Service: Sub- Number of Subscribers: Both blocks in space E call for the number of subscribers to the cable system, broken scribers and down by categories of secondary transmission service. In general, you can compute the number of subscribers in Rates each category by counting the number of billings in that category (the number of persons or organizations charged separately for the particular service at the rate indicated—not the number of sets receiving service). Rate: Give the standard rate charged for each category of service. Include both the amount of the charge and the unit in which it is generally billed. (Example: “$20/mth”). Summarize any standard rate variations within a particular rate category, but do not include discounts allowed for advance payment. Block 1: In the left-hand block in space E, the form lists the categories of secondary transmission service that cable systems most commonly provide to their subscribers. Give the number of subscribers and rate for each listed category that applies to your system. Note: Where an individual or organization is receiving service that falls under different categories, that person or entity should be counted as a subscriber in each applicable category. Example: a residential subscriber who pays extra for cable service to additional sets would be included in the count under “Service to the first set” and would be counted once again under “Service to additional set(s).” Block 2: If your cable system has rate categories for secondary transmission service that are different from those printed in block 1 (for example, tiers of services that include one or more secondary transmissions), list them, together with the number of subscribers and rates, in the right-hand block. A two- or three-word description of the service is sufficient. NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS Residential: • Service to first set 29.99-76.49 • Service to additional set(s) • FM radio (if separate rate) Motel, hotel Commercial 29.99-76.49 Converter • Residential • Non-residential SERVICES OTHER THAN SECONDARY TRANSMISSIONS: RATES In General: Space F calls for rate (not subscriber) information with respect to all your cable system’s services that were not covered in space E, that is, those services that are not offered in combination with any secondary transmission service for a single fee. There are two exceptions: you do not need to give rate information concerning (1) services Services furnished at cost or (2) services or facilities furnished to nonsubscribers. Rate information should include both the Other Than amount of the charge and the unit in which it is usually billed. If any rates are charged on a variable per-program basis, Secondary enter only the letters “PP” in the rate column. Transmissions: Block 1: Give the standard rate charged by the cable system for each of the applicable services listed. Rates Block 2: List any services that your cable system furnished or offered during the accounting period that were not listed in block 1 and for which a separate charge was made or established. List these other services in the form of a brief (two- or three-word) description and include the rate for each. CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE RATE Continuing Services: Installation: Non-residential • Pay cable PP • Motel, hotel ##### • Pay cable—add’l channel PP • Commercial • Fire protection • Pay cable •Burglar protection • Pay cable-add’l channel Installation: Residential • Fire protection • First set 109.99 • Burglar protection • Additional set(s) 49.00 Other services: • FM radio (if separate rate) • Reconnect 49.00 • Converter 10.50 • Disconnect • Outlet relocation 49.00 • Move to new address Family Cable CATEGORY OF SERVICE BLOCK 2 F 0 BLOCK 1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 2. Name E BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 398 28438 CATEGORY OF SERVICE NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS RATE CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 3. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC 28438 PRIMARY TRANSMITTERS: TELEVISION In General: In space G, identify every television station (including translator stations and low power television stations) carried by your cable system during the accounting period, except (1) stations carried only on a part-time basis under FCC rules and regulations in effect on June 24, 1981, permitting the carriage of certain network programs [sections Primary 76.59(d)(2) and (4), 76.61(e)(2) and (4), or 76.63 (referring to 76.61(e)(2) and (4))]; and (2) certain stations carried on a Transmitters: substitute program basis, as explained in the next paragraph. Television Substitute Basis Stations: With respect to any distant stations carried by your cable system on a substitute program basis under specific FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations: • Do not list the station here in space G—but do list it in space I (the Special Statement and Program Log)—if the station was carried only on a substitute basis. • List the station here, and also in space I, if the station was carried both on a substitute basis and also on some other basis. For further information concerning substitute basis stations, see page (v) of the general instructions. Column 1: List each station’s call sign. Do not report origination program services such as HBO, ESPN, etc. Identify each multicast stream associated with a station according to its over-the-air designation. For example, report multistream "WETA-2" as the same on the form. Column 2: Give the channel number the FCC assigned to the television station for broadcasting over the air in its community of license. For example, WRC is channel 4 in Washington, D.C. Column 3: Indicate in each case whether the station is a network station, an independent station, or a noncommercial educational station, by entering the letter “N” (for network), “N-M” (for network multicast), “I” (for independent), “I-M” (for independent multicast), “E” (for noncommercial educational), or “E-M” (for noncommercial educational multicast). For the meaning of these terms, see page (iv) of the general instructions in the paper SA1-2 form. Column 4: Give the location of each station. For U.S. stations, list the community to which the station is licensed by the FCC. For Mexican or Canadian stations, if any, give the name of the community with which the station is identified. 1. CALL SIGN 2. B’CAST CHANNEL NUMBER 3. TYPE OF STATION 4. LOCATION OF STATION KARE (NBC) 11 N Minneapolis, MN KDLT/KDLT (HD) NBC 47 N Mitchell, SD Add Rows as Necessary KDLT-DT2/ KDLT-DT2 FOX (H 47.2 I-M Mitchell, SD KDLT-DT3 Antenna TV 47.3 I-M Mitchell, SD KDLT-DT4 Cozi TV 47.4 I-M Mitchell, SD KELO/KELO (HD) CBS 11 N Sioux Falls, SD KELO-DT2 MyNet 11.2 I-M Sioux Falls, SD KESD/KESD (HD) PBS 8 E Brookings, SD KESD-DT2 PBS World 8.2 E-M Brookings, SD KESD-DT3 PBS Create 8.3 E-M Brookings, SD KESD-DT4 PBS Kids 8.4 E-M Brookings, SD KSFY/KSFY (HD) ABC 13 N Sioux Falls, SD KSFY-DT2/KSFY-DT2 (HD) (C 13.2 I-M Sioux Falls, SD KSFY-DT3 MeTV 13.3 I-M Sioux Falls, SD KTCA-DT (PBS) TPT 2 34.1 E-M St. Paul, MN KTTW-DT1/KTTW-DT1 (HD) T 7 I Sioux Falls, SD KTTW-DT2 This TV 7.2 I Sioux Falls, SD KWCM (PBS) 36 E SIOUX FALLS, SD WCCO (CBS) 32 N Minneapolis, MN Name G U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 4. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC 28438 CALL SIGN AM or FM S/D LOCATION OF STATION CALL SIGN AM or FM S/D LOCATION OF STATION H PRIMARY TRANSMITTERS: RADIO In General: List every radio station carried on a separate and discrete basis and list those FM stations carried on an all-band basis whose signals were generally receivable by your cable system during the accounting period. Column 4: Give the station’s location (the community to which the station is licensed by the FCC or, in the case of Mexican or Canadian stations, if any, the community with which the station is identified). Primary Transmitters: Radio Special Instructions Concerning All-Band FM Carriage: Under Copyright Office regulations, an FM signal is generally receivable if (1) it is carried by the system whenever it is received at the system’s headend, and (2) it can be expected, on the basis of monitoring, to be received at the headend, with the system’s FM antenna, during certain stated intervals. For detailed information about the Copyright Office regulations on this point, see page (v) of the general instructions in the. Column 1: Identify the call sign of each station carried. Column 2: State whether the station is AM or FM. Column 3: If the radio station’s signal was electronically processed by the cable system as a separate and discrete signal, indicate this by placing a check mark in the “S/D” column. paper SA1-2 form. U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 5. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC 28438 1. SPECIAL STATEMENT CONCERNING SUBSTITUTE CARRIAGE broadcast by a distant station? X log in block 2. 2. LOG OF SUBSTITUTE PROGRAMS FROM — TO — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — the case of Mexican or Canadian stations, if any, the community with which the station is identified). Column 4: Give the broadcast station’s location (the community to which the station is licensed by the FCC or, in 5. MONTH AND DAY 6. TIMES Name Substitute Carriage: Special Statement and Program Log SUBSTITUTE CARRIAGE: SPECIAL STATEMENT AND PROGRAM LOG I In General: In space I, identify every nonnetwork television program, broadcast by a distant station, that your cable system carried on a substitute basis during the accounting period, under specific present and former FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations. For a further explanation of the programming that must be included in this log, see page (v) of the general instructions in the paper SA1-2 form. • During the accounting period, did your cable system carry, on a substitute basis, any nonnetwork television program Note: If your answer is “No”, leave the rest of this page blank. If your answer is “Yes,” you must complete the program YES NO first. Example: for May 7 give “5/7.” Column 2: If the program was broadcast live, enter “Yes.” Otherwise enter “No.” SUBSTITUTE PROGRAM WHEN SUBSTITUTE CARRIAGE OCCURRED 1. TITLE OF PROGRAM 2. LIVE? Yes or No Column 6: State the times when the substitute program was carried by your cable system. List the times accurately to the nearest five minutes. Example: a program carried by a system from 6:01:15 p.m. to 6:28:30 p.m. should be was substituted for programming that your system was permitted to delete under FCC rules and regulations in stated as “6:00–6:30 p.m.” Column 7: Enter the letter “R” if the listed program was substituted for programming that your system was required to delete under FCC rules and regulations in effect during the accounting period; enter the letter “P” if the listed program In General: List each substitute program on a separate line. Use abbreviations wherever possible, if their meaning is clear. If you need more space, please add additional rows to the tables. Column 1: Give the title of every nonnetwork television program ("substitute program") that, during the accounting period, was broadcast by a distant station and that your cable system substituted for the programming of another station 3. STATION'S CALL SIGN 4. STATION'S LOCATION under certain FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations. See page (v) of the general instructions for further information. Do not use general categories like “movies” or “basketball.” List specific program titles, for example, “I Love Lucy” or “NBA Basketball: 76ers vs. Bulls.” Column 3: Give the call sign of the station broadcasting the substitute program. Column 5: Give the month and day when your system carried the substitute program. Use numerals, with the month effect on October 19, 1976. 7. REASON FOR DELETION U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 6. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC GROSS RECEIPTS Instructions: The figure you give in this space determines the form you file and the amount you pay. Enter the total of all amounts (gross receipts) paid to your cable system by subscribers for the system’s secondary transmission service Gross Receipts (as identified in space E) during the accounting period. For a further explanation of how to compute this amount, see page (vii) of the general instructions located in the paper SA1-2 form. Gross receipts from subscribers for secondary transmission service(s) during the accounting period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IMPORTANT: You must complete a statement in space P concerning gross receipts. COPYRIGHT ROYALTY FEE Instructions: To compute the royalty fee you owe: Copyright • Complete block 1, block 2, or block 3. Royalty Fee • Use block 1 if the amount of gross receipts in space K is $137,100 or less • Use block 2 if the amount of gross receipts in space K is more than $137,100 but less than or equal to $263,800 • Use block 3 if the amount of gross receipts in space K is more than $263,800 but less than $527,600 See page (vi) of the general instructions located in the paper SA1-2 form for more information. Instructions: As a cable system with gross receipts of $137,100 or less, the royalty fee that you must pay for this six-month accounting period is $52.00 Line 1. Royalty fee for accounting period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Line 2. Interest charge. Enter the amount from line 4, space Q, page 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Line 3. TOTAL ROYALTY FEE PAYABLE FOR ACCOUNTING PERIOD. Add lines 1 and 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Base amount under statutory formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Enter amount of gross receipts from space K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Enter the amount of gross receipts from space K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Enter the amount from line 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. Multiply line 6 by .005 (enter figure here) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Interest charge. Enter the amount from line 4, space Q, page 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. TOTAL ROYALTY FEE PAYABLE FOR ACCOUNTING PERIOD. Add lines 7 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Enter the amount of gross receipts from space K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Base amount under statutory formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Multiply line 3 by .01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Royalty due on the first $263,800 of gross receipts (under statutory formula) . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Interest charge. Enter the amount from line 4, space Q, page 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. TOTAL ROYALTY FEE PAYABLE FOR ACCOUNTING PERIOD. Add lines 4, 5, and 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Royalty Fee Payable for Accounting Period (from Block 1, 2, or 3, above) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Filing Fee (See the instructions for more information on filing fee calculations) . . . . . . . . . . . 3. TOTAL AMOUNT DUE FOR ACCOUNTING PERIOD. Add lines 2 and 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L Name K (Amount of gross receipts) 28438 $ 167,818.99 $ 359.19 BLOCK 3: GROSS RECEIPTS OF MORE THAN $263,800 (but less than $527,600) BLOCK 1: GROSS RECEIPTS OF $137,100 OR LESS BLOCK 2: GROSS RECEIPTS OF $263,800 OR LESS (but more than $137,100) $ 263,800.00 $ 95,981.01 $ 167,818.99 $ 359.19 0.00 0.00 $ 95,981.01 $ 71,837.98 $ 167,818.99 $ 1,319.00 0.00 $ 263,800.00 Important: Your remittance must be in the form of an electronic payment payable to the Register of Copyrights! See page i of the general instructions in the paper SA1-2 form for more information. $ 20.00 $ 379.19 Filing Fee and Total Remittance Due FILING FEE AND TOTAL REMITTANCE DUE $ 359.19 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 7. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC CHANNELS M Instructions: You must give (1) the number of channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations to its subscribers, and (2) the cable system’s total number of activated channels during the accounting period. Channels 1. Enter the total number of channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Enter the total number of activated channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations and nonbroadcast services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INDIVIDUAL TO BE CONTACTED IF FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED (Identify an individual to whom we can contact about this statement of account.) Individual to Be Contacted for Further Name Telephone 845-443-2762 Address (Number, street, rural route, apartment, or suite number) (City, town, state, zip) Email Fax (optional CERTIFICATION (This statement of account must be certified and signed in accordance with Copyright Office regulations) O Certification • I, the undersigned, hereby certify that (Check one, but only one , of the boxes.) (Owner other than corporation or partnership) I am the owner of the cable system as identified in line 1 of space B; or X (Agent of owner other than corporation or partnership) I am the duly authorized agent of the owner of the cable system as identified in line 1 of space B and that the owner is not a corporation or partnership; or (Officer or partner) I am an officer (if a corporation) or a partner (if a partnership) of the legal entity identified as owner of the cable system in line 1 of space B. • I have examined the statement of account and hereby declare under penalty of law that all statements of fact contained herein are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and are made in good faith. [18 U.S.C., Section 1001(1986)] X Typed or printed name: Title: (Title of official position held in corporation or partnership) Date: Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Office to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Office's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal sufficiency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. One Mediacom Way Mediacom Park, NY 10918 Information 8/4/2023 Kenneth J. Kohrs Group Vice President, Financial Reporting Copyrights@mediacomcc.com ☛ /s/ Kenneth J. Kohrs Enter an electronic signature on the line above to certify this statement. Enter signature using an "/s/ signature" (e.g., /s/ John Smith) Kenneth J. Kohrs Name N 26 67 28438 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17) Accounting Period: 2023/1 FORM SA1-2E. PAGE 8. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC 28438 SPECIAL STATEMENT CONCERNING GROSS RECEIPTS EXCLUSIONS The Satellite Home Viewer Act of 1988 amended Title 17, section 111(d)(1)(A), of the Copyright Act by adding the following sentence: “In determining the total number of subscribers and the gross amounts paid to the cable system for the basic service of providing secondary transmissions of primary broadcast transmitters, the system shall not include subscribers and amounts collected from subscribers receiving secondary transmissions pursuant to section 119.” For more information on when to exclude these amounts, see the note on page (vii) of the general instructions located in the paper SA1-2 form. During the accounting period, did the cable system exclude any amounts of gross receipts for secondary transmissions made by satellite carriers to satellite dish owners? X NO YES. Enter the total here and list the satellite carrier(s) below. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Name Name Mailing Address Mailing Address INTEREST ASSESSMENT You must complete this worksheet for those royalty payments submitted as a result of a late payment or underpayment. For an explanation of interest assessment, see page (viii) of the general instructions located in the paper SA1-2 form. Line 1 Enter the amount of late payment or underpayment . . . . x Line 2 Multiply line 1 by the interest rate* and enter the sum here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x days Line 3 Multiply line 2 by the number of days late and enter the sum here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Line 4 Multiply line 3 by 0.00274** and enter here in space L, (page 6) block 1, line 2, or block 2 line 8, or block 3 line 6 . . . . . . * To view the interest rate chart click on www.copyright.gov/licensing/interest-rate.pdf. For further assistance please contact the Licensing Division at (202) 707-8150 or licensing@loc.gov. ** This is the decimal equivalent of 1/365, which is the interest assessment for one day late. NOTE: If you are filing this worksheet covering a statement of account already submitted to the Copyright Office, please list below the owner, address, first community served, ID number, and accounting period as given in the original filing. Owner Address ID number First community served Accounting period Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Office to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Office's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal sufficiency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. - Interest Assessment P Special Statement Concerning Gross Receipts Exclusion Q - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x 0.00274 (interest charge) $ - U.S. Copyright Office Form SA1-2E Short Form (Rev. 05-17)
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.689428/gov.uscourts.azd.689428.20.0.pdf.json	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Bari E. Clapick; Kuma & Cash, LLC, Plaintiffs, vs. First National Bank of Arizona; Bank of New York Mellon; Bank of America N.A.; Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Incorporated; ReconTrust Company N.A.; John Does, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 12-00666-PHX-FJM ORDER We have before us plaintiffs' motion to remand (doc. 10), plaintiff's notice of errata (doc. 15), defendants' response (doc. 16), and plaintiffs' reply (doc. 18). Plaintiffs filed this action in the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County on February 21, 2012. Their amended special action complaint asserts claims for violation of A.R.S. § 33-420, violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, and quiet title. Defendants The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., ReconTrust Company, N.A., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. removed on the basis of diversity on March 28, 2012. Plaintiff Clapick purchased a house in Scottsdale, Arizona in August 2004. She financed the purchase with a loan for $520,800 from the First National Bank of Arizona ("FNBA"). FNBA was one of three banks owned by First National Bank Holding Company. FNBA was merged into a sister bank, First National Bank of Nevada ("FNBN"), on June 30, Case 2:12-cv-00666-FJM Document 20 Filed 06/20/12 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 2 - 2008. FNBN was soon closed and its assets sold to Mutual of Omaha Bank ("MOB"), a federal savings association. "[R]emoval statutes are strictly construed against removal." Libhart v. Santa Monica Dairy Co., 592 F.2d 1062, 1064 (9th Cir. 1979). "Federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance." Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). When a case has been removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 on the basis of diversity, "the proponent of federal jurisdiction – typically the defendant in the substantive dispute – has the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that removal is proper." Geographic Expeditions, Inc. v. Estate of Lhotka ex rel. Lhotka, 599 F.3d 1102, 1106-07 (9th Cir. 2010). Defendants purport to base jurisdiction on diversity of citizenship. Plaintiffs claim that an unserved defendant, FNBA, destroys diversity because it was an Arizona citizen and its successor MOB is a national citizen. Defendants contend that FNBN was a citizen of Nevada and, because it acquired FNBA before being closed and placed into a receivership, the last state of citizenship of FNBA was Nevada. Defendants fail to discuss the effect of MOB's acquisition of FNBN's assets. MOB, a federally chartered savings association, was the successor to FNBA before plaintiffs filed their complaint and apparently continues to be FNBA's successor. "In determining whether a Federal court has diversity jurisdiction over a case in which a Federal savings association is a party, the Federal savings association shall be considered to be a citizen only of the State in which such savings association has its home office." 12 U.S.C. § 1461(x). Defendants have made no allegations regarding the state of MOB's citizenship in general or home office under this statute. In addition, one of the plaintiffs is a limited liability company ("LLC"). An LLC "is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens." Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). The parties fail to discuss the citizenship of the members of plaintiff Kuma & Cash, LLC. Defendants have not overcome the "strong presumption" against federal jurisdiction and have not met their burden of proving that removal was proper. Case 2:12-cv-00666-FJM Document 20 Filed 06/20/12 Page 2 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 - 3 - IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiff's motion to remand and remanding this action to the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. (Doc. 10). DATED this 20th day of June, 2012. Case 2:12-cv-00666-FJM Document 20 Filed 06/20/12 Page 3 of 3
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.occ.gov/static/cra/craeval/nov23/3727.pdf.json	PUBLIC DISCLOSURE July 31, 2023 COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION First National Bank of Granbury Charter Number: 3727 101 E. Bridge Street Granbury, Texas 76048 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Dallas/Fort Worth Office 225 E. John Carpenter Freeway, Suite 900 Irving, Texas 75062-2270 NOTE: This document is an evaluation of this institution's record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operation of the institution. This evaluation is not, and should not be construed as, an assessment of the financial condition of this institution. The rating assigned to this institution does not represent an analysis, conclusion, or opinion of the federal financial supervisory agency concerning the safety and soundness of this financial institution. i Table of Contents Overall CRA Rating....................................................................................1 Description of Institution..............................................................................2 Scope of the Evaluation...............................................................................3 Discriminatory or Other Illegal Credit Practices Review..........................................4 State Rating...............................................................................................5 State of Texas..................................................................................5 Community Development Test ......................................................................10 Appendix A: Scope of Examination.................................................................A-1 Appendix B: Summary of State Ratings.................................................................B-1 Appendix C: Definitions and Common Abbreviations...........................................C-1 Appendix D: Tables of Performance Data.........................................................D-1 Charter Number: 3727 1 Overall CRA Rating Institution’s CRA Rating: This institution is rated Satisfactory. The Lending Test is rated: Satisfactory. The Community Development (CD) Test is rated: Satisfactory. The major factors that support this rating include: • The Lending Test rating is based on performance in Hood County and Johnson County assessment areas (AAs). • The CD Test rating is based on performance in the Hood County and Johnson County AAs. • The bank’s loan-to-deposit (LTD) ratio is reasonable. • A majority of the bank’s loans are inside its AAs. • The geographic distribution of loans across geographies of different income levels is reasonable. • The distribution of loans to individuals of different income levels and businesses of different sizes is reasonable. • CD activities reflect adequate responsiveness to community development needs. Charter Number: 3727 2 Loan-to-Deposit Ratio Considering the bank’s size, financial condition, and credit needs of the AA(s), the bank’s LTD ratio is reasonable. The First National Bank of Granbury’s (FNB or bank) quarterly LTD ratio averaged 49.21 percent during the 24-month evaluation period ending December 31, 2021. Over this period, the bank’s quarterly LTD ratio ranged from a low of 44.02 percent to a high of 58.75 percent. We compared the bank’s LTD ratio to six similarly situated banks. The average LTD ratio for the peer banks was 51.60 percent. FNBs average LTD ratio is slightly below that of peer banks because FNB sells a significant portion of its one- to four-family residential loans to secondary market investors. Since the last evaluation, January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2019, the bank has originated and sold 2,280 loans totaling $595 million. If these loans were maintained in the bank’s portfolio, the LTD would be much higher. Lending in Assessment Area A majority of the bank’s loans are inside its AAs. The bank originated and purchased 73.2 percent of its total loans inside the bank’s AAs during the evaluation period. This analysis is performed at the bank, rather than the AA level. Lending Inside and Outside of the Assessment Area Loan Category Number of Loans Total # Dollar Amount of Loans $(000s) Total $(000s) Inside Outside Inside Outside # % # % $ % $ % Home Mortgage 608 72.4 232 27.6 840 132,597 63.9 74,920 36.1 207,517 Small Business 54 84.4 10 15.6 64 9,603 76.4 2,961 23.6 12,564 Total 662 73.2 242 26.8 904 142,200 64.6 77,881 35.4 220,081 Description of Institution FNB is a community bank chartered in 1887 in Granbury, Hood County, Texas. The bank is wholly owned by First Granbury Bancorporation, a single bank holding company headquartered in Granbury, Texas. FNB is the primary asset of the holding company and there are no subsidiaries or affiliates. FNB had total assets of $908 million as of December 31, 2021. This included total loans of $366 million, or 40 percent of total assets, and total deposits of $819 million. Outstanding loans by category include one- to four-family residential real estate at 36 percent of the portfolio, commercial real estate loans at 39 percent of the portfolio, commercial and industrial loans at 9 percent of the portfolio, agriculture/agriculture real estate at 9 percent of the portfolio, and consumer loans at 6 percent of the portfolio. Total tier 1 capital as of December 31, 2021, was $85 million, for a tier 1 leverage ratio of 9.73 percent. FNB is a single state institution and has two AAs, Hood County and Johnson County. FNB operates five full-service branches located throughout Hood County, two mobile branches used to provide services to senior living facilities, and a branch in Johnson County. FNB also has a mortgage operation, FNB Mortgage Group, that operates in Granbury. The branches are open 9am to noon on Saturday. Each location has a motor bank which opens at 8am and closes at 6pm daily. The motor banks are open 9am Charter Number: 3727 3 to noon on Saturdays. Additionally, each full branch location has an ATM available 24/7. During the evaluation period, the bank opened a Northside ATM Center. FNBs lending strategy focuses on the origination of commercial, one- to four-family residential (purchase and construction), and consumer loans. FNB offers traditional credit products and deposit account options plus Online Banking, Mobile Banking, P2P, Bill Payment, Mobile Deposit, Commercial Online Banking, Remote Deposit Capture, electronic delivery of bank statements, voice-response bank by phone, student accounts and accounts for seniors. Loan products offered consist of residential mortgage loans, residential construction loans, commercial real estate loans, commercial loans, agriculture loans, and consumer loans. There is no minimum loan amount for consumer lending. There was no merger or acquisition activity during the assessment period. FNB received a “Satisfactory” rating at their last CRA evaluation dated July 6, 2020. There are no legal or financial impediments to FNBs ability to meet the credit needs of its AAs. Scope of the Evaluation Evaluation Period/Products Evaluated FNB was evaluated under the interagency Intermediate Small Bank (ISB) CRA evaluation procedures. As such, this Performance Evaluation (PE) assesses the bank’s performance under the Lending Test and CD Test. The Lending Test evaluates the bank’s record of meeting credit needs of the AAs through its lending activities. In evaluating the bank’s lending performance, we identified commercial loans and residential real estate as the bank’s primary loan products. The CD Test evaluates the bank’s responsiveness to CD needs in its AAs through loans, investments, and services that meet the regulatory definition of CD activities. Loan information used for this evaluation included HMDA data from 2020 and 2021 as well as commercial loan data for loans originated in 2020 and 2021. We did not incorporate 2022 calendar year performance due to changes associated with the 2020 census and the unavailability of 2022 aggregate peer lending data at the start of this CRA evaluation. The CD test is based on the bank’s CD activities between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021 to coincide with the review period of the lending test. Selection of Areas for Full-Scope Review In each state where the bank has an office, one or more AAs within that state was selected for a fullscope review. For purposes of this evaluation, bank delineated assessment areas located within the same metropolitan statistical area (MSA), multistate metropolitan statistical area (MMSA), or combined statistical area (CSA) are combined and evaluated as a single AA. Similarly, bank delineated non-MSA AAs within the same state are combined and evaluated as a single area. These combined AAs may be evaluated as full- or limited-scope. Refer to the “Scope” section under each State Rating for details regarding how full-scope AAs were selected. Refer to Appendix A, Scope of Examination, for a list of full- and limited-scope AAs. FNB has delineated two AAs in Texas consisting of all whole Census Tracts (CTs) within Hood County and all whole CTs within Johnson County. Johnson County makes up a portion of the Fort WorthArlington-Grapevine MSA; it is allowable for the bank to designate only part of the MSA as an AA, given the size and location relative to the MSA. The AAs meet the regulatory requirements, do not Charter Number: 3727 4 reflect discrimination, and do not arbitrarily exclude any low- or moderate-income (LMI) geographies. We performed a full-scope review of both the Hood County and Johnson County AAs. Ratings The bank’s overall rating is based on performance in the state of Texas. The state rating is based on the performance in all of the bank’s AAs. FNB’s primary loan products are one- to four-family mortgage loans and small business loans, and each product was given equal weight in the analysis. Refer to the “Scope” section under the State Rating section for details regarding how the areas were weighted in arriving at the respective ratings. Discriminatory or Other Illegal Credit Practices Review Pursuant to 12 CFR 25.28(c) or 195.28(c), respectively, in determining a national bank’s or federal savings association’s (collectively, bank) CRA rating, the OCC considers evidence of discriminatory or other illegal credit practices in any geography by the bank, or in any AA by an affiliate whose loans have been considered as part of the bank’s lending performance. As part of this evaluation process, the OCC consults with other federal agencies with responsibility for compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, including the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, as applicable. The OCC has not identified that this institution (or any affiliate whose loans have been considered as part of the institution’s lending performance) has engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices that require consideration in this evaluation. The OCC will consider any information that this institution has engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices, identified by or provided to the OCC before the end of the institution’s next performance evaluation in that subsequent evaluation, even if the information concerns activities that occurred during the evaluation period addressed in this performance evaluation. Charter Number: 3727 5 State of Texas CRA rating for the State of Texas1: Satisfactory The Lending Test is rated: Satisfactory The Community Development Test is rated: Satisfactory The major factors that support this rating include: • The distribution of loans across geographies of different income levels is reasonable. • The distribution of loans to individuals of different income levels and businesses of different sizes is reasonable. • FNBs CD performance exhibits adequate responsiveness to the CD needs of its AAs in Texas through CD loans, qualified investments, and CD services. • The bank did not receive any CRA related complaints during the evaluation period. Description of Institution’s Operations in Texas The bank operates in two AAs located in Texas as described in the “Description of the Institution” section of this Performance Evaluation: Hood County, a non-MSA and Johnson County, a part of the Fort Worth-Arlington-Grapevine MSA. Competition Competition for deposits in the AAs is significant. FNBs deposit lending activities are primarily in the Hood County AA. According to the June 30, 2020, FDIC Market Share Report, FNBs deposits in the AA totaled $821 million, or 45.64 percent of the deposit market share in the AA. FNB ranked 1st out of 13 reporting financial institutions in the AA. Competing financial institutions include other community banks, larger national and regional banks, as well as several mortgage/financial companies. In the Johnson County AA, FNB has just $31 million or 1.04 percent of the deposit market share and ranks 14th out of 19 financial institutions. The bank’s low level of market share in the Johnson County AA is a reflection of the competition from larger national banks, as well as regional and community banks. As of June 30, 2022, approximately 96.37 percent of FNB’s deposits are located in Hood County AA, while only 3.63 percent are held in Johnson County AA. We contacted representatives from organizations with knowledge of local economic conditions for the purpose of determining a community profile and identifying opportunities for participation by local financial institutions. The first community contact organization assists in developing the economic base of employment through infrastructure study and actions related to education, environment, government affairs, transportation, and watershed. This is non-profit organization primarily funded by its members, partners, and private donations that serves the Hood County AA. The second community contact is an organization that provides services targeted to low-income households including utility assistance, non1 This rating reflects performance within the state. The statewide evaluations do not reflect performance in the parts of those states contained within the MMSA. Charter Number: 3727 6 emergency rental assistance, and education and financial management. The organization serves a ninecounty region of North Central Texas that includes Hood and Johnson Counties. The primary credit needs in the AAs remain financing for small businesses. According to both contacts, the financial institutions in the area are helpful to small businesses and meet their credit needs. Demographics The following table provides a summary of demographics, including population, housing, and business information, for both Hood County and Johnson County AAs. Hood County AA Table A – Demographic Information of the Assessment Area Assessment Area: Hood County AA 2021 Demographic Characteristics # Low % of # Moderate % of # Middle % of # Upper % of # NA* % of # Geographies (Census Tracts) 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 Population by Geography 53,171 0.0 0.0 39.5 60.5 0.0 Housing Units by Geography 25,350 0.0 0.0 39.3 60.7 0.0 Owner-Occupied Units by Geography 16,070 0.0 0.0 36.6 63.4 0.0 Occupied Rental Units by Geography 4,862 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 Vacant Units by Geography 4,418 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 0.0 Businesses by Geography 6,144 0.0 0.0 31.9 68.1 0.0 Farms by Geography 253 0.0 0.0 40.3 59.7 0.0 Family Distribution by Income Level 14,328 21.3 18.2 22.3 38.3 0.0 Household Distribution by Income Level 20,932 23.7 18.6 19.3 38.4 0.0 Median Family Income Non-MSAs - TX $52,198 Median Housing Value $144,790 Median Gross Rent $885 Families Below Poverty Level 7.9% Source: 2015 ACS and 2021 D&B Data Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% () The NA category consists of geographies that have not been assigned an income classification. Geographic Distribution of the Population There were no LMI CTs in the Hood County AA. According to the 2015 ACS Census data, the area population for Hood County AA was 53,171 with zero percent residing in moderate-income CTs in the AA, 21,003 (39.5 percent) residing in middle-income CTs, and 32,168 (60.5 percent) residing in upperincome CTs. Charter Number: 3727 7 Johnson County AA Table A – Demographic Information of the Assessment Area Assessment Area: Johnson County AA 2021 Demographic Characteristics # Low % of # Moderate % of # Middle % of # Upper % of # NA % of # Geographies (Census Tracts) 28 3.6 17.9 60.7 17.9 0.0 Population by Geography 155,450 3.0 13.6 64.7 18.8 0.0 Housing Units by Geography 58,451 2.5 14.0 64.5 19.0 0.0 Owner-Occupied Units by Geography 39,484 1.4 10.9 64.4 23.3 0.0 Occupied Rental Units by Geography 14,201 5.1 20.2 65.4 9.3 0.0 Vacant Units by Geography 4,766 3.8 21.2 62.6 12.4 0.0 Businesses by Geography 12,467 5.2 10.4 58.8 25.7 0.0 Farms by Geography 484 1.2 7.2 64.3 27.3 0.0 Family Distribution by Income Level 41,093 19.9 21.1 21.9 37.1 0.0 Household Distribution by Income Level 53,685 22.0 18.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 Median Family Income MSA - 23104 Fort Worth-Arlington-Grapevine, TX $69,339 Median Housing Value $121,640 Median Gross Rent $909 Families Below Poverty Level 9.3% Source: 2015 ACS and 2021 D&B Data Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% () The NA category consists of geographies that have not been assigned an income classification. Geographic Distribution of the Population According to the 2015 ACS census data, the area population for Johnson County AA was 155, 450 with 21,141 (13.6 percent) residing in moderate-income CTs in the AA, 100,576 (64.7 percent) residing in middle-income CTs, and 29,225 (18.8 percent) residing in upper-income CTs. Scope of Evaluation in Texas The Hood County AA continues to hold the largest share of the bank’s deposits and largest volume of lending. As discussed above, a full-scope review was performed on both of the bank’s AAs. However, more weight will be given to performance in Hood County AA, given this represents the market where the bank has the most predominant deposit concentration, lending activity, and branch distribution. Refer to table in Appendix A “Scope of Examination” for a list of all AAs under review. Charter Number: 3727 8 CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS IN TEXAS LENDING TEST The bank’s performance under the Lending Test in Texas is rated Satisfactory. Conclusions for Areas Receiving a Full-Scope Reviews Based on a full-scope review, the bank’s lending performance in the state of Texas is reasonable. Distribution of Loans by Income Level of the Geography The bank exhibits a reasonable geographic distribution of loans in the state. Home Mortgage Loans Refer to Table O in the State of Texas section of Appendix D for the facts and data used to evaluate the geographic distribution of the bank’s home mortgage loan originations and purchases. Hood County AA For 2020-2021, a geographic distribution analysis was not completed for Hood County AA as there were no LMI CTs in the AA. Johnson County AA For 2020-2021, the bank reported no mortgage loans to individuals living in low-income geographies. There is only one low-income CT in the AA. Only 1.4 percent of owner-occupied housing units are located in these geographies, thus limiting opportunities. For moderate-income geographies, the bank’s home mortgage lending was lower than owner-occupied housing and lower than the aggregate lending. The Johnson County AA is in a location with high level of competition from larger regional and national banks and FNB has a small deposit market share of 1.04 percent in the AA. Small Loans to Businesses Refer to Table Q in the state of Texas section of Appendix D for the facts and data used to evaluate the geographic distribution of the bank’s originations and purchases of small loans to businesses. Hood County AA For 2020-2021, a geographic distribution analysis was not completed for Hood County AA as there were no LMI CTs in the AA. Johnson County AA There is only one low-income CT in the AA. The bank’s small business lending in low- and moderateincome geographies exceeded both the number of small businesses and the aggregate lending in these geographies. Charter Number: 3727 9 Distribution of Loans by Income Level of the Borrower The bank exhibits a reasonable distribution of loans to individuals of different income levels and businesses of different sizes, given the product lines offered by the bank. Home Mortgage Loans Refer to Table P in the state of Texas section of Appendix D for the facts and data used to evaluate the borrower distribution of the bank’s home mortgage loan originations. Hood County Non-MSA AA For 2020-2021, the bank’s home mortgage lending in the Hood County AA to low-income borrowers was lower than the percentage of families identified as low-income but exceeded the aggregate lending to low-income borrowers. The bank’s mortgage lending in the AA to moderate-income borrowers was lower than the percentage of moderate-income families, and near to the aggregate lending to moderateincome borrowers. Johnson County AA In 2020-2021, the bank’s mortgage lending to low-income borrowers was near the aggregate lending to low-income borrowers and lower than the percentage of families identified as low-income. The bank’s mortgage lending to moderate-income borrowers was somewhat lower than the aggregate lending to moderate income borrowers and lower than the percentage of families identified as moderate-income. The bank’s ability to fully penetrate the LMI borrower demographic was impacted by temporary increase in unemployment rate due to COVID-19 and the high housing costs. Small Loans to Businesses Refer to Table R in the state of Texas section of Appendix D for the facts and data used to evaluate the borrower distribution of the bank’s originations and purchases of small loans to businesses. Hood County Non-MSA AA In 2020-2021, the percentage of the bank’s loans to businesses with revenues less than or equal to $1 million was lower than the percentage of businesses identified as having revenues of $1 million or less but exceeded the aggregate level of lending to these businesses. Johnson County AA In 2020-2021, the percentage of the bank’s loans to businesses with revenues less than or equal to $1 million was lower than the percent of businesses identified as having revenues of $1 million or less, and near the aggregate level of lending to these businesses. The Johnson County AA is in a location with high level of competition from larger regional and national banks and FNB has a small deposit market share of 1.04 percent in the AA. In addition, this analysis is skewed by the fact that 23 percent of the small business sample reported no revenue information. Per FNB’s lending policy, a business credit application is not required for loans less than $50,000. As a result, revenue information is not consistently collected for these small dollar loans. Loans with original amounts of less than $50,000 comprise 65 percent of the small business sample for the AA. Loan size often correlates to the size of the business. Charter Number: 3727 10 Responses to Complaints The bank had no CRA-related complaints during the evaluation period. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TEST The bank’s performance under the CD Test in the state of Texas is rated Satisfactory. Conclusions for Areas Receiving a Full-Scope Reviews Based on a full-scope review, the bank exhibited adequate responsiveness to CD needs in the state through CD loans, qualified investments, and CD services, as appropriate, considering the bank’s capacity and the need and availability of such opportunities for CD in the bank’s assessment areas. Number and Amount of Community Development Loans The CD Loans Table, shown below, sets forth the information and data used to evaluate the bank’s level of CD lending. The table includes all CD loans, including multifamily loans that also qualify as CD loans. Community Development Loans Assessment Area Total # % of Total # $(000’s) % of Total $ Hood County 156 95.71 4,466 94.16 Johnson County 7 4.29 277 5.84 Hood County AA The level of CD lending in the Hood County AA demonstrates adequate responsiveness. FNB made 94.16 percent of its CD loans in the AA which represents 5.44 percent of the bank’s allocated tier 1 capital. The bank originated 89 loans totaling $2.3 million in loans under the SBA Payroll Protection Program (PPP) to help stabilize small businesses and their employees impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, 66 loans totaling $1.5 million in economic development loans to support local small businesses, and a $657,000 loan to a non-profit that provides community services to LMI individuals. Johnson County AA The level of CD lending in the Johnson County AA demonstrates adequate responsiveness. FNB made 5.84 percent of its CD loans in the AA which is 8.96 percent of the bank’s allocated tier 1 capital. The bank originated seven loans totaling $277,000 under the SBA PPP to help stabilize small businesses and their employees impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Charter Number: 3727 11 Number and Amount of Qualified Investments Qualified Investments Assessment Area Prior Period Current Period Total Unfunded Commitments** # $(000’s) # $(000’s) # % of Total # $(000’s) % of Total $ # $(000’s) Hood County 1 1000 57 37 58 86.57 1,027 17.15 Johnson County 1 236 3 3 4 5.97 241 4.02 Statewide with Indirect Benefit 5 4,721 5 7.46 4,721 78.83 3 991 * Prior Period Investments means investments made in a previous evaluation period that are outstanding as of the examination date. ** Unfunded Commitments means legally binding investment commitments that are tracked and recorded by the institution's financial reporting system. Hood County AA FNB demonstrated adequate responsiveness to CD needs through qualified investments, donations, and grants in the Hood County AA. During the evaluation period, the bank continued its $1 million investment toward residential safety services for LMI seniors. Additionally, FNB made $37,000 in qualifying donations to 10 CD organizations. The largest donation was made to United Way of Hood County ($10,500). These organizations provide social services to LMI individuals and those displaced by natural disasters. The majority of the charitable donations were to organizations in Hood County AA. There is minimal CD investment opportunities in Hood County since there are no LMI tracts and the local institution continues to meet the credit needs of the AA. Johnson County AA FNB demonstrated adequate responsiveness to CD needs through qualified investments and donations relative to the size and scale of bank operations in the Johnson County AA. During the evaluation period, the bank continued its $236,000 investment toward providing social services for LMI individuals. Additionally, FNB made $3,000 in qualifying donations to two CD organizations. The bank made significant donations to Johnson County Children’s Advocacy Center ($2,250) and Cleburne ISD Education Foundation ($750). These organizations provide social services to LMI individuals. FNB maintains additional investments with $4.7 million outstanding in Small Business Investment Companies funds. These investments were made during the evaluation period. These funds promote economic development by providing financing to small businesses. Proceeds were used to finance businesses located outside the AAs, but in a broader statewide area. Extent to Which the Bank Provides Community Development Services The bank’s level of CD services demonstrates adequate responsiveness to the needs of the AAs. Hood County AA The bank’s level of CD services demonstrates adequate responsiveness. During the evaluation period, 10 employees provided more than 1,011 service hours to seven qualified organizations within the AAs. Bank staff serve as board members, and provide financial planning, fundraising/marketing, and * 'Prior Period Investments' means investments made in a previous evaluation period that are outstanding as of the examination date. Charter Number: 3727 12 budgeting expertise. The organizations are engaged in a variety of community services targeted at LMI individuals and families. Examples of CD services during the evaluation period include: • A vice president (VP) completed 270 hours while serving on the board of an organization that promotes community services targeted to the LMI community in Hood County. • A VP completed 81 hours serving on the board of the local housing authority which manages public housing under HUD guidelines. • A VP completed 90 hours while serving on the board for an educational foundation which provides grants to fund educational programs for a school district in which over half of the students are economically disadvantaged. This employee also completed 90 hours serving on the board and provided marketing and fundraising expertise to a local mission that provides community service targeted at LMI individuals’ necessities. Johnson County AA The level of qualified services in the Johnson County AA demonstrates poor responsiveness. During the evaluation period, there were no employees that provided qualified service in the local community. However, it is acknowledged that COVID-19 resulted in reduced opportunities for in-person community development volunteerism. Considering this, coupled with the bank’s limited operations in the AA, this performance had a neutral impact on the overall Service Test rating. Charter Number: 3727 A-1 Appendix A: Scope of Examination The following table identifies the time period covered in this evaluation, affiliate activities that were reviewed, and loan products considered. The table also reflects the MSA(s) and non-MSA(s) that received comprehensive examination review, designated by the term “full-scope,” and those that received a less comprehensive review, designated by the term “limited-scope”. Time Period Reviewed: 01/01/2020 to 12/31/2021 – Lending Test 01/01/2020 to 12/31/2021 – Community Development Test Bank Products Reviewed: Home mortgage, small business Community development loans, qualified investments, community development services Affiliate(s) Affiliate Relationship Products Reviewed No Affiliates NA NA List of Assessment Areas and Type of Examination Rating and Assessment Areas Type of Exam Other Information Texas Hood County AA Full–Scope Entire county consisting of 10 whole census tracts. Johnson County AA Full–Scope Entire county consisting of 28 whole census tracts. The county is part of the Fort Worth-ArlingtonGrapevine MSA. Charter Number: 3727 B-1 Appendix B: Summary of MMSA and State Ratings RATINGS The First National Bank of Granbury Overall Bank: Lending Test Rating* CD Test Rating Overall Bank/State/ Multistate Rating The First National Bank of Granbury Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory MMSA or State: Texas Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory (*) The Lending Test and Community Development Test carry equal weight in the overall rating. Charter Number: 3727 C-1 Appendix C: Definitions and Common Abbreviations The following terms and abbreviations are used in this performance evaluation, including the CRA tables. The definitions are intended to provide the reader with a general understanding of the terms, not a strict legal definition. Affiliate: Any company that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with another company. A company is under common control with another company if the same company directly or indirectly controls both companies. For example, a bank subsidiary is controlled by the bank and is, therefore, an affiliate. Aggregate Lending (Aggt.): The number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders (HMDA or CRA) in specified income categories as a percentage of the aggregate number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders in the state/assessment area. Census Tract (CT): A small, relatively permanent statistical subdivision of a county delineated by a local committee of census data users for the purpose of presenting data. Census tracts nest within counties, and their boundaries normally follow visible features, but may follow legal geography boundaries and other non-visible features in some instances, Census tracts ideally contain about 4,000 people and 1,600 housing units. Combined Statistical Area (CSA): A geographic entity consisting of two or more adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas with employment interchange measures of at least 15. An employment interchange measure is a measure of ties between two adjacent entities. The employment interchange measure is the sum of the percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work in the larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller entity that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger entity. Community Development (CD): Affordable housing (including multifamily rental housing) for low- or moderate-income individuals; community services targeted to low- or moderate-income individuals; activities that promote economic development by financing businesses or farms that meet Small Business Administration Development Company or Small Business Investment Company programs size eligibility standards or have gross annual revenues of $1 million or less; or activities that revitalize or stabilize low- or moderate-income geographies, distressed or underserved nonmetropolitan middleincome geographies, or designated disaster areas. Community Reinvestment Act (CRA): The statute that requires the OCC to evaluate a bank’s record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community, including LMI areas, consistent with the safe and sound operation of the bank, and to take this record into account when evaluating certain corporate applications filed by the bank. Consumer Loan(s): A loan(s) to one or more individuals for household, family, or other personal expenditures. A consumer loan does not include a home mortgage, small business, or small farm loan. This definition includes the following categories: motor vehicle loans, credit card loans, other secured consumer loans, and other unsecured consumer loans. Family: Includes a householder and one or more other persons living in the same household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. The number of family households always Charter Number: 3727 C-2 equals the number of families; however, a family household may also include non-relatives living with the family. Families are classified by type as either a married-couple family or other family, which is further classified into ‘male householder’ (a family with a male householder and no wife present) or ‘female householder’ (a family with a female householder and no husband present). Full-Scope Review: Performance under the Lending, Investment, and Service Tests is analyzed considering performance context, quantitative factors (e.g., geographic distribution, borrower distribution, and total number and dollar amount of investments), and qualitative factors (e.g., innovativeness, complexity, and responsiveness). Geography: A census tract delineated by the United States Bureau of the Census in the most recent decennial census. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA): The statute that requires certain mortgage lenders that conduct business or have banking offices in a metropolitan statistical area to file annual summary reports of their mortgage lending activity. The reports include such data as the race, gender, and the income of applicants, the amount of loan requested, the disposition of the application (e.g., approved, denied, and withdrawn), the lien status of the collateral, any requests for preapproval, and loans for manufactured housing. Home Mortgage Loans: A closed-end mortgage loan or an open-end line of credit as these terms are defined under 12 CFR 1003.2, and that is not an excluded transaction under 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(1) through (c)(10) and (c)(13). Household: Includes all persons occupying a housing unit. Persons not living in households are classified as living in group quarters. In 100 percent tabulations, the count of households always equals the count of occupied housing units. Limited-Scope Review: Performance under the Lending, Investment, and Service Tests is analyzed using only quantitative factors (e.g., geographic distribution, borrower distribution, total number and dollar amount of investments, and branch distribution). Low-Income Individual: Individual income that is less than 50 percent of the area median income. Low Income Geography: A census tract with a median family income that is less than 50 percent. Market Share: The number of loans originated and purchased by the institution as a percentage of the aggregate number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders in the state/assessment area. Median Family Income (MFI): The median income determined by the U.S. Census Bureau every five years and used to determine the income level category of geographies. The median is the point at which half of the families have income above, and half below, a range of incomes. Also, the median income determined by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) annually that is used to determine the income level category of individuals. For any given area, the median is the point at which half of the families have income above, and half below, a range of incomes. Metropolitan Division: As defined by Office of Management and Budget, a county or group of counties within a Core Based Statistical Area that contains an urbanized population of at least 2.5 million. A Metropolitan Division consists of one or more main/secondary counties that represent an Charter Number: 3727 C-3 employment center or centers, plus adjacent counties associated with the main/secondary county or counties through commuting ties. Metropolitan Statistical Area: An area, defined by the Office of Management and Budget, as a core based statistical area associated with at least one urbanized area that has a population of at least 50,000. The Metropolitan Statistical Area comprises the central county or counties containing the core, plus adjacent outlying counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with the central county or counties as measured through commuting. Middle-Income: Individual income that is at least 80 percent and less than 120 percent of the area median income, or a median family income that is at least 80 percent and less than 120 percent, in the case of a geography Moderate-Income: Individual income that is at least 50 percent and less than 80 percent of the area median income, or a median family income that is at least 50 percent and less than 80 percent, in the case of a geography. Multifamily: Refers to a residential structure that contains five or more units. Owner-Occupied Units: Includes units occupied by the owner or co-owner, even if the unit has not been fully paid for or is mortgaged. Qualified Investment: A qualified investment is defined as any lawful investment, deposit, membership share, or grant that has as its primary purpose community development. Rating Area: A rated area is a state or multi-state metropolitan statistical area. For an institution with domestic branches in only one state, the institution’s CRA rating would be the state rating. If an institution maintains domestic branches in more than one state, the institution will receive a rating for each state in which those branches are located. If an institution maintains domestic branches in two or more states within a multi-state metropolitan statistical area, the institution will receive a rating for the multi-state metropolitan statistical area. Small Loan(s) to Business(es): A loan included in ‘loans to small businesses’ as defined in the Consolidated Report of Condition and Income (Call Report) instructions. These loans have original amounts of $1 million or less and typically are either secured by nonfarm or nonresidential real estate or are classified as commercial and industrial loans. Small Loan(s) to Farm(s): A loan included in ‘loans to small farms’ as defined in the instructions for preparation of the Consolidated Report of Condition and Income (Call Report). These loans have original amounts of $500,000 or less and are either secured by farmland or are classified as loans to finance agricultural production and other loans to farmers. Tier 1 Capital: The total of common shareholders’ equity, perpetual preferred shareholders’ equity with non-cumulative dividends, retained earnings and minority interests in the equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries. Upper-Income: Individual income that is at least 120 percent of the area median income, or a median family income that is at least 120 percent, in the case of a geography. D-1 Appendix D: Tables of Performance Data Content of Standardized Tables A separate set of tables is provided for each state. All multistate metropolitan statistical areas, if applicable, are presented in one set of tables. References to the “bank” include activities of any affiliates that the bank provided for consideration (refer to Appendix A: Scope of the Examination). For purposes of reviewing the Lending Test tables, the following are applicable: (1) purchased are treated as originations; and (2) “aggregate” is the percentage of the aggregate number of reportable loans originated and purchased by all HMDA or CRA-reporting lenders in the MMSA/assessment area. Deposit data are compiled by the FDIC and are available as of June 30th of each year. Tables without data are not included in this PE. The following is a listing and brief description of the tables included in each set: Table O. Assessment Area Distribution of Home Mortgage Loans by Income Category of the Geography - Compares the percentage distribution of the number of loans originated and purchased by the bank in low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income geographies to the percentage distribution of owner-occupied housing units throughout those geographies. The table also presents aggregate peer data for the years the data is available. Table P. Assessment Area Distribution of Home Mortgage Loans by Income Category of the Borrower - Compares the percentage distribution of the number of loans originated and purchased by the bank to low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income borrowers to the percentage distribution of families by income level in each MMSA/assessment area. The table also presents aggregate peer data for the years the data is available. Table Q. Assessment Area Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses by Income Category of the Geography - The percentage distribution of the number of small loans (less than or equal to $1 million) to businesses that were originated and purchased by the bank in low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income geographies compared to the percentage distribution of businesses (regardless of revenue size) in those geographies. Because arrogate small business data are not available for geographic areas smaller than counties, it may be necessary to compare bank loan data to aggregate data from geographic areas larger than the bank’s assessment area. Table R. Assessment Area Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses by Gross Annual Revenue - Compares the percentage distribution of the number of small loans (loans less than or equal to $1 million) originated and purchased by the bank to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less to: 1) the percentage distribution of businesses with revenues of greater than $1 million; and, 2) the percentage distribution of businesses for which revenues are not available. The table also presents aggregate peer small business data for the years the data is available. D-2 Table O: Assessment Area Distribution of Home Mortgage Loans by Income Category of the Geography 2020-21 Total Home Mortgage Loans Low-Income Tracts Moderate-Income Tracts Middle-Income Tracts Upper-Income Tracts Not Available-Income Tracts Assessment Area: # $ % of Total Overall Market % of OwnerOccupied Housing Units % Bank Loans Aggregate % of OwnerOccupied Housing Units % Bank Loans Aggregate % of OwnerOccupied Housing Units % Bank Loans Aggregate % of OwnerOccupied Housing Units % Bank Loans Aggregate % of OwnerOccupied Housing Units % Bank Loans Aggregate Hood County AA 2021 550 116,996 90.5 4,019 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.6 29.3 32.8 63.4 70.7 67.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Johnson County AA 2021 58 15,602 9.5 10,745 1.4 0.0 1.1 10.9 3.4 7.9 64.4 87.9 71.5 23.3 8.6 19.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 608 132,597 100.0 14,764 1.0 0.0 0.8 7.7 0.3 5.8 56.3 34.9 61.0 34.9 64.8 32.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Source: 2015 ACS; 01/01/2020 - 12/31/2021 Bank Data, 2021 HMDA Aggregate Data, "--" data not available. Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% Table P: Assessment Area Distribution of Home Mortgage Loans by Income Category of the Borrower 2020-21 Total Home Mortgage Loans Low-Income Borrowers Moderate-Income Borrowers Middle-Income Borrowers Upper-Income Borrowers Not Available-Income Borrowers Assessment Area: # $ % of Total Overall Market % Families % Bank Loans Aggregate % Families % Bank Loans Aggregate % Families % Bank Loans Aggregate % Families % Bank Loans Aggregate % Families % Bank Loans Aggregate Hood County AA 2021 550 116,996 90.5 4,019 21.3 2.7 1.7 18.2 6.5 6.9 22.3 14.2 15.2 38.3 67.8 54.8 0.0 8.7 21.4 Johnson County AA 2021 58 15,602 9.5 10,745 19.9 3.4 3.6 21.1 10.3 13.8 21.9 15.5 22.0 37.1 53.4 33.8 0.0 17.2 26.8 Total 608 132,597 100.0 14,764 20.3 2.8 3.1 20.4 6.9 11.9 22.0 14.3 20.1 37.4 66.4 39.5 0.0 9.5 25.4 Source: 2015 ACS ; 01/01/2020 - 12/31/2021 Bank Data, 2021 HMDA Aggregate Data, "--" data not available. Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% The total loan amount presented in the tables for each assessment area may differ from the total loan amount reported in the aggregate table due to how the underlying loan data is rounded in each table. D-3 Table Q: Assessment Area Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses by Income Category of the Geography 2020-2021 Total Loans to Small Businesses Low-Income Tracts Moderate-Income Tracts Middle-Income Tracts Upper-Income Tracts Not Available-Income Tracts Assessment Area: # $ % of Total Overall Market % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate Hood County AA 28 6,906 51.9 1,624 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.9 50.0 30.0 68.1 50.0 70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Johnson County AA 26 2,697 48.1 4,299 5.2 15.4 4.0 10.4 34.6 9.2 58.8 50.0 60.5 25.7 0.0 26.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 54 9,603 100.0 5,923 3.5 7.4 2.9 6.9 16.7 6.7 49.9 50.0 52.1 39.7 25.9 38.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Source: 2021 D&B Data; 01/01/2020 - 12/31/2021 Bank Data; 2021 CRA Aggregate Data, "--" data not available. Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% Table R: Assessment Area Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses by Gross Annual Revenues 2020-2021 Total Loans to Small Businesses Businesses with Revenues <= 1MM Businesses with Revenues > 1MM Businesses with Revenues Not Available Assessment Area: # $ % of Total Overall Market % Businesses % Bank Loans Aggregate % Businesses % Bank Loans % Businesses % Bank Loans Hood County AA 28 6,906 51.9 1,624 90.2 75.0 43.0 2.7 25.0 7.1 0.0 Johnson County AA 26 2,697 48.1 4,299 87.9 42.3 44.5 3.8 34.6 8.4 23.1 Total 54 9,603 100.0 5,923 88.6 59.3 44.0 3.4 29.6 8.0 11.1 Source: 2021 D&B Data; 01/01/2020 - 12/31/2021 Bank Data; 2021 CRA Aggregate Data, "--" data not available. Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100.0% The total loan amount presented in the tables for each assessment area may differ from the total loan amount reported in the aggregate table due to how the underlying loan data is rounded in each table.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/Headquarters/Administrative Law Judges/Decisions and Orders/2003/SR-2003-20 Griffith.pdf?ver=2018-04-10-113346-003.json	### UNITED STATES OF ### AMERICA U.S. DEPARTMEXT ### OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNITED STATES COAST GUARD UYITED STATES COAST GUARD Complainant NEUELL. NASH GRIFFITH, Respondent Docket Number: 02-0637 CG Case No. 1686445 DECISION ,4NDORDER Issued: August 20,2003 ### lssued by: ### Honorable Archie R. Boggs, Administrative Law Judge Appearance: James A. Wilson, Assistant Senior Investigating Officer ### LTJG. Boris ### K.Towns United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Office ### 800David Drive, Room 232 Morgan City, LA 70380- 1304 For the Coast Guard L. Stephen Cox, Esquire Courtenay, Hunter & ### Fontana, L.L.P. Texaco Center, Suitc 1540 400 Poydrrts Street New Orleans. L.ouisialla 70130-3245 For the Respondent ### PRELI&lINARYSTATEMENT TheUnited States Coast Guard ("Coast Guard") initiated this administrative action seekingrevocation of License &umber 594821 issued to Respondent Neuell Nash Griffith. This administrative action was brought pursuant to the legal authority contained in 46 U.S.C. 7704 and its underlying regulations codified at 46 C.F.R. ### Part ### 5. The Coast Guard issued a Complaint on October 21,2002, which charged Respondent Griffith with Use oforAddiction to the Use of Danggrous Drugs based on a positive drug test by urinalysis for cocaine metabolite.' 'The dangerous drug charge against Respondent Griffith is supported by five (5)factual allegations, which read as follows: 1. On August 23, 2002, Rcspondent took a Post-Casualty drugtest.' 2. A URINE specimen was Collected byTESSIE DUPRE. ### 3. The Rcspondent signed a Federal DrugTesting Custody and Control Form.' 4. The uri~~e specimen was collected and analyzed by Quest 1)iagnostics (Atlanta. GA.) using procedures approved by the Department of Transportation. ### 5. That specimen subsequently tested positwe for Cocaine metabolite. TheRespondent filed an Answer to the Coast Guard's Complaint and requested a hearing. More specifically, Responcicnt Griffith admitted alljurisdictional allegations contained I During the pcnclnncy of this ciise. the U.S. Coast Guard transferred kom the Ilepart~nciit oi"1'ranspirtation to tile i>cpartincut ol'Ilonieland Security. I'ursuaiit to the Saving.; Provision of FIR 5005 Section 1512 (PI. 107-296).pendirlg proceedings arc continiicd notwithstanding the transfer of the agency Itespo~ideiit Grillith reqliestcd lca~e Crolvl work to recover konl a moiorcycli: accident. IIe was directed by his employer to take a urinalysis bcljrc lie could rcturii to duty.inthe Complaint, with the exccptioti ofthelisted telephone number, and denied all factual allegations for lack of sufficient infbrtnation. OnNovember 6> 2002> this case was assigned to theundersigned judge for adjudication. Thehearing in this matter convened on January 15, 2003 at the Marine Safety Office in Morgan City, Louisiana before the Honorable Archie R. Boggs, Administrative Law Judge ofthe United States Coast Guard. The hearing was conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act as amended and codified at 5 L.S.C. $$ 551-559, and the Coast Guard procedurai regulations located at 33 C.F.R. Part 20. Mr. JamesA. Wilson, Assistant Senior Investigating Ofticer, and Lieutenant Junior Grade Boris Towns represented the United States Coast Guard at thehearing. Respondent Griffith also appeared at the hearing accompanied by counsel, L. Stephen Cox, Esq. of Courtenay, Hunter & Fontana, L.L.P. A total of four (4)witnesses, including Respondent Griffith, testified in this proceeding. At the hearing, the Coast Guard introduced six (6) exhibits into evidence; whereas, the Respondent introduced two (2) exhibits into evidence. Thewitness and exhibits are listed in Appendix A. On February 14,2003,the Coast Guard tiled Proposed Findings ofFact. Rulings on the Coast Guard's proposed findings are in Appendix ### B. Respondent Griffith also filed a PostHearing Memorandum. However, rulings on the Iicspondents' Proposed Findings ofFact and Conclusions of Law are not rendered because the Respondents failed to enulnerate such Proposcd Findings ofFact and Conclusions of Law. 1 .ilthougl~ an employer-directed drug icsc is a lion-kdcrril drug Icst under 46 CFK Piirt I6 aiid 49 CFK I'art 40; a 1:cdciai 11r~1g I'cstiiig i'ostody and Control Form was uscd in ti;? colleciioii and rrnalysi.; prows\. 3After careful review of the hcts and applicable law in this case, ### I find that the Coast Guard has established by a preponderance ofreliable and credible evidence that Respondent Griffith either used or is addicted to the use of a dangerous drug. ### FINDINGS ### OFFACT The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law arebased on a thorough and careful analysis of the documentary evidence, the testimonies ofwitnesses, and the entire record as a whole. 1. On Aupst23,2002, Respondent Neuell Nash Griffith submitted a urine specimen that subsequently tested positive for cocainemetabolites on a standardDepartment of Transportation ("DOT") drug-screen test. (EntireRecord). 2. Respondent Ciriffith is the holder of ### U.S. Coast Guard License ### No 894821. He is authorized to operate steam or motor vessels ofless than one hundred gross tons on inland waters and to act asmate aboard steam or motor vessels ofless then two hundred bmss tones on coastal waters. (Transcript ### ("li-. ## 'y 13). 3. At the time ofthe events giving rise to this action, Respondentwas an employee of Tidewater Marine Corporation. He had been a licensed seaman for five years. ### (77~.la). 4. During the month ofAugust 2002, Respondent suffered severeback pain following ### an injury and requested leave hm work. . 13 ### I. Respondent sought medical attention forhis injury at the Bourgeois Medical Clinic ("Clinic") in Morgan City, 1,ouisiana. ### (Tr. 129. /7'0). ### 5. On August 23, 2002; Respondent Griffith ### took ### an employer-directed ### dnrg test as required by 'Tidewater Marine. (7;. 37, 171,/l~cncy hiribit I).6. Tile Respondent reported to the Bourgeois Medical Clinic where h4s. Tessie Dupre. a certified drug screcner and urinc collector for the Clinic, identified Respondent Griffith by referring to his driver's license photo. ### (Ti. 12,22-23, Agency ### Exhibit 2). Ms. Dupre verified the Respondent's social security nutnher and directed him to furnish a urine specimen for the test. ### (2 22-23, 30, 33-34). 7. Ms. Dupre treated the employer-directed test as though it were a post-accident drug test," which is governedby the Department ofTransportation ("DOT") drug testing procedures and regulations. in turn, Ms. Dupre filled out a Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form ("'Custody and Control Fonn") and collected the Respondent's urine samplein accordance with DOT drug testing guidelines. ### (Tr. 37-44). ### 8. When the Respondent retuned the sample, ### Ms. Dupre checked the temperature to ensurethat it wasbetween ninety and onehundred degrees Fahrenheit. ### (Ti.41-42). Ms. Dupre then split the Respondent's urine sample by pouring the contents into two separate tubes. fly. 41- 4 The samplebottles were sealed and dated in the Respondent's presence and, thereafter, packed for shipment with the required seals. (Tr. 43-44). ### 9. The Respondent's urine sample was given the specimen identification number 1897008, which followed the specimen througl~out he screening system. # err. 33- 34,Aqency E.xizibit 1,3). 4 Under Coast (iuard dnig testing rzgulations, iiiariners arc required to submit ti>malidatory drug testing regulations fc~llowing a scrious tnnrinc incident, jCL246 C.F.K. ### 534.06-10and 16.240. A serious rnasine incident is dcfincdas: a rnarinc casunity resulting in the dcath or injury rcquiririg medical treatment beyond firstaid ofaperson; a riinrine ciisiialty ii~volving daiilage lo property in excessof 0; 10,000: a m;irine casualty involving actual or constructive kiss ill' any inspected vessel or any self-propelled uni~ispectcd vessel of 100grc~ss tons orrnoro: or a discharge of at leal 10.000 gallons of oil or discharge ofa hazardous s~hsr~ii~c~ into liic tiavigahlc waters of the United S~;rt(:s tvliether or not rcsulling Lfo~n a marine casualty. 46C.'..K. ### 3 303-2. Tile Kespoiicleiit's drug tcst did not ~jiiaiil\i :is a post-accidcnt drug tcst wirhin tiic ClJllieXt01.46 C.k.K. P:lrt 16. 510. Ms. Dupre signed the Custody and Control Form certifying that the specimen was provided by Respondent Griffith and that it was collected, labeled, and sealed in accordance with federal requirements, Responcient Griffith also signed the Custody md Control Form attestingthat the specimen was his, the infonnation provided on the form was correct, and that the sample was sealed in his presence. (Tr.44,Agency ### Exhibit I, 3). 1 1.Resportdent's specimen sample was secured in a locked room until a courier was sent by Quest Diagnostics laboratory to collect the specimen and deliver it to their facility in New Orleans. (Tr. 44-45, ### 66). 12.Quest Diagnostics is a certified facility and medical laboratory that perfom~s work place dn~g testing. (Ti: 43-44, 59-60, 65,Agency ### Exhibit I). 13.The Respondent's specimen arrived intact at the laboratory and was carefully analyzed according to tested and approved procedures by the laboratory's scientists and computers. ### (li.77, Agency ### Exhibit 4). Thereceipt of the specimen. as well iti; thchandling and testing procedures, are documented onthe laboratory's internal chain of custody. (Agency ### Exhibit 4). 14.An initial screen test ofthe Respondent's urine sampletested positive for cocaine. ### (Ti.. 70- 71). Another aliquot was taken from the original sampleand a confirmatory test (gas chromatography/mass spectrometry) was conducted. (Zi. 74). That test result also revealed the presence of cocaine metabolite in exccss ### of tile DOT threshold. fli-.70-71,Agcnclj ### Exhibit 4). 15. Quest Diagnostics ### forwarded thc Respondent's test results to Dr. Melvin Bourgeois nfthc Bourgeois blcdical Clinic, who was the acting rncdical review officer ### (-'MRO") k)r Titiewater Marine. ### (Ti.. 11, 103-104,/lpeilcy ### Zi~hihit 5). 616.Dr. Bourgeois treated the urinalysis asthough it were a post-accidcnt test, governed by the DOT drugtesting procedures and regulations. In turn, Dr. Bourgeois completed the Custody and Control ### Fom and verified the urinalysis results in accordance with DOT drug testing bxidelines. ### (Tr. 102-105). 17.Upon verifjing that the urine samplewas positive for cocaine metabolite, Dr. Bourgeois met with the Respondent to discuss the positiveurinalysis results. /Tr. 92, 94, 10.7-105, Agcney Exhibiz 4, ### 5). 18.Upon lenming that he tested positive, Respondent immediately requested a retest ofthe split sanlple. ### Dr. Bourgeois documented the Respondent's request it1 the applicablemedical review records. ### (Tr. 1113, 159-160,Agency Exhibit 6). 19.Despite Respondent's expressed desire to obtain a retest, Dr. Bourgeois concluded that Respondent actually sought another urine test. (Tv. 119). This assumption was based on Dr. Bourgeois' past experience with patients who have requested a second urinalysis after testing positive for drugs. ### (Tr. 119). ### 20. Dr. Bourgeois inforuled the Respondent that a retest was not a new urinalysis, but rather a retest ofthe original split sample specimen provided on August 23, ### 2002. (Tr, 117-1 19). When a retest ### is performed, the lab only checks lo see ifthe drug is present in the urine <md whether the test was conducted properly. ### (Tr. 117-119). More specifically,the split specimen retest is conducted qualitatively not quantitatively, and the cutofflirnit is significantlylower than on the first test. ### Cri. II%IIY). 21. Becausc a split spccimen retest only detcrnmincs whether ### a drug is prese~lt in the urinc, Dr. Bourgeois consiciers it a waste ### oftime and typically advises patients against scekirlga retest even when they rcquest it. ### (5. 119, 152-154).22. Dr. Bourgeois advised Responilent to discuss the retest with his employer. Tidewater Marine. If Respondent still wanted the split sampletested, he could call the Bourgeois Medical Clinic and request it again. ### (Tr. 113, 119,Agerzcv Exhibit @. ### 23. 'The Respondent never notified Dr. Bourgeois ofhis decision to retest the split sample after the procedure was explained. (Tr. 113, 119,Agcncv. ### Exhibit 6). ### Dr. Bt)ourgeoissubsequently indicated in his MROreport that the Respondent was offered a retest hut failed to respond after the retesting procedure was explained. ### lli.120, 155-1-56, 159,Agency Exhibit 6). ### 24. Dr. Bourgeois did not direct Quest Diagnostics to retest the split sample. (Tr. 15@. 25.Although the Respondent indicated he was taking prescribed medications, Dr. Bourgeois did not record these prescriptions in his report as he determined they would not interfere with the drug-screening test. ### T I 3 Accordingly, Dr. Bourgeois did not confer with the Respondent's physicians to determine whether treatment for a back and shoulder injury could have resulted in a positive dn~g test for cocaine. ### (E.149-151, 164). 26. Dr. Bourgeois considered the type of drug test used by Quest Diagnostics to be virtually infallible. r 1 In his opinion, the gas chromatogaphy!mass spectrotnetry is the "gold standard for substancetesting." As such, Dr. Bourgeois detennined that none of the medications mentionedby ### the Respondent would give a false positive. ### 1E. 113-114, 151). ### 27. The Respondent claimed to be taking the prescribed lnedications Carisoprodoi and Vicoprofen. Carisoprodol is ### a neurological blockirtg agent often used ### in sleep medication ### or as a nlusclerelaxant. ### 0. 0). It is a synthetic derivative of the heroin poppy anti resembles the activities ofopiates. r. 1 Vicoproten is a combination drug that coniains Flycirocodonc and Ibuprofen. It is ### a man-made ### synthetic opiate that is legally prescribed as ### apainkiller. . ### 8-83. Neither ofthe prescriptions, either separately or combined, would cause the Respondent's urine sampleto test positive for cocainemetabolite. (Tr. 81, ### 84). CiLTI31ATE ### FINDINGS OF FACT ### AND CONCLUSIONS ### OF LAW ### 1. Respondent Neuell Griffith and the subject matter ofthishearing areproperly within the jurisdiction ofthe United States Coast Guard and the Acln~inistrative Law Judge in accordance with 46 U.S.C. $ 7704(e) (West Supp. 2002); 46 C.F.R. Parts 5 and 16 (2002); and 33 C.F.K. Part 20 (2002). 2. At all relevant times, Respondent Griffith was the holder of U.S. Coast Card issued Lice~lse No. 894821. 3. OnAupst 23,2002,Respondent Griffith voluntarily submitted to an employer-directed urinalysis for dangerous drugs. 4. The use of a Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form for a non-federal einployerdirected drug test did not invalidate the results as the urinalysis was conducted under 49 CFR Part 40procedures and the chain of custody remained intact. 5. Respondent's specimen sample was collected, labeled, sealed, and released to Quest Diagnostics Laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia in accordance with all chemical and urine testing rules, including ### 46 C.F.R.Pait 16. 6. Respondent's urine specimen was examined, handled using chain ### of custody procedures, analyzed and reported ### in accordance with ail chemical and urine testing rules, including 46 C.F.R. Part 10. 7. On .4ugust 28, 2002, Responcient's spccinientested positive fbr cocaitlc as it excecded tlie ### DOT threshold for cocaine ~netaholitc on both the initial anci contirrnation tests.8. ### TheRespondent failcd to present a leg~tir~late n~ed~cal ewplanatlnn that would account for the presence of cocaine metabolite in his urine sample. 9. ### The charge of.'Use of orAddiction tothe Useof Dangerous Drugs" against the Respondent 1sfound PROVED by a preponderance ofthereliable and crcd~ble evidence and testimony as taken fiom the record considered as a whole. ### DlSCUSSION In a suspension and revocation proceeding, the Coast Guard carries the burden ofproving w ### alleged violation by a preponderance ofthe evidence. 5USC $ ### 556(d); see also, 33 CFR $S ### 20.701 and 20.702; Appeal Decision 2485 (YATESI; &peal Decision 2635 ### (SINCLAIR). However, when a mariner is specifically charged with the use ofa dangerous drug, the governing regulations allow a prestimption ofdrug use ifthe individual provides a urine sample and fails a chemical test conducted in accordance with 46 C.F.R. Part 16, which incorporates the DOT drug testingregulations codified at 49 C.F.R. Part 40by ### reference. 46 C.F.R.$ ### 16.201(h). When theCoast Guard seeksto rely upon the regulatory presumption, all ofthe elements ofthecase must be shown by substantial evidence of a reliable and probative nature. Anpeal Decision 2603 (HACKSTAFF); see also, Appeal Decision 2592 (MASON). Therefore, in order to successfully invoke the presumption above,the Investigating Officer must show (1)that the Respondent was the person who was tested; (2) that the Respondent failed the test; and (3)that the test was conciuctedin accordance with 46 C.F.R. Part 16. ### SeL., A?peal Decision 2603 (HACKST.4FF); see also, At>pcalDecision 2614 (W.&LLENSTW.i_AppealDecision 25Q2 {SkI14KESPE;4RE). ### A chemical test falls cvithiri thc scope ### of46 ### C.F.R. Part 16iftheurinalysis ### was issued for one of thc tive (5) ### followiiig reasons: pre-employment, periodic. random, serious nlarine 10 ### incident. and reasonable cause testing. 46 C.F.R. ## $6 16.210 - ### 16.250. Ifthe urinalysis does not fall within one of the five categories specifically tlelineated in 46 CFR Part 16, the presunlption ofdrug use does not attach. However, that fact alone does not preclude the test results ti-om being admissible in determining whether the Respondent used a dangerous drug. Appeal Decision 2633 (MERRILQ. Moreover, any fact that sheds light on the proof or falsity of ### a charge snayproperly be considered for what it's worth. ## Set.Appeal Decision 2252 (BOYCE); seealso, Appeal Decision 2542 fDEFORGE1. Therefore, the Coast Guard rnay offer evidence from any sourcethat establishes tiruguse in violation of46 U.S.C. $ ### 7704. In turn, the Administrative Law Judge may consider any relevant and material evidence of drug use, including a chemical test that was not perforrned in strict adherence to theprocedures of46 C.F.R. Part 16 ### and 49 C.F.R.Part 40. ### &Appeal Decision 2542LDEFORCE). In this case, the Respondent agecd to take the employer-directed drug test following a leave of absence to recover from aback injury. A ### review of the record reveals that the Respondent did not objectto his employer's request and voluntarily took the test, as he understood it was merely apart ofthe company's pol~cy before a mariner could return to work after taking an extended leave of ### absence. ## /rr. 171). ### As such, the evidence showsthat the IZesponctentmade an independent decision based on his own tiee will to take the drugtest. In turn?it has been repeatedly held that revocation of a mariner's license can hepredicated upon a voluntarily submitted urine samplethat tests positive ### fixan illegal drug. ### Seeilppeal Decision 2635 (SINCI.AIR): see also Appeal Decision 2545 (JARDlN)&peal Decision 2633 RRL Sumn~arily, the Rcspo~~tlent's voluntary sample can be used as the basis fbr ### a charge ### ofdangerous cimguse.It shc,uld be noted that even ~f the urinalys~s wab not voluntary, it m~ght st111be consideretf relevant evidence ofdrug use; as an employer has tlie right to request a non-federal test. According to Louisiana case law, an c~llployer's policy of eornpulsory drug testing does not abusethe rights ofits employees rfthe rule is reasonable and directly related to its goal of providing a safe place for its workers. Chiles Offshore, Inc. v. Deot. of Employment Sec., 551 So.2d 849(La App. 3 Cir. 1089); see also Casse v. Louisiaria General Services, Inc., 531 So.2d 554 (La App. ### 5 Cir. 1988). In the instant case, Tidewater Marine Coyoration hils a legitimate interest inmaintaining a drug-free work environment by instituting a drug-testing policy before an employee returns to work afier ### an extended leave of absence. Thus, the Respondent's nghts were not abusedbythe imposition of a mandatory unnalys~s. Although a technical violation of the regulations occurred when both the collection site and the laboratory used the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form for a non-federal test, the error did not invalidate the urinalysis results. It is important tonote that the applicable regulations require ### DOT tests be completely separate from non-DO'T tests in all respects. ### &49 C.F.R. ## 5 40.13(a). In particular, an employer is prohibited from using the Custody and Control Fo~m fixnon-federal urine collections. ### &49C.F.R. ## 5 40.47(a). However, the regulations also provide that theuse of the incorrect form does not automatically cancel the test, but rather is deemed a correctable flaw. 49C.F.R. ## 5 40.47(b). While the technical error in the present case was not corrected by the ### MRO, case law has repeatedly held that a positive test result ofan individual's urinalysis samplemay still be considcsed substantial cvidencc as 1011: as therecord indicates the actwal chain of custody has been ### maintained. See Appeal Decision 2606 (SWAN); see ### ~IISOAppeal Dccision 254 ### I ### (RAYMOUD), .4p~~ec~l Dccision 2603 ### (HACKSTAFFl. @eal Decision 2541 ### (RAYMOND) 17I-'.,, I-',.. i.' c;..,., # g: ... Therefore,tests that contain technical errors orminor infractions ### ofthe regulations, which do not affect the integrity of the sample, will still support the inkrence ofdruguse. Apl7eal ### Dwc 2605 ### (SWANLh1)peal Decision ### 25555 ILAVALLAIS), Appeal Decision ### 2627 (SHAFFER). In this case, the evidence and testimony adduced at the hearing hllysupport the integrity ### ofthe chain of c~lstody and provide sufficient proof thdt the urinalysis is scientifically valici. In particular, the urinalysis specimen was collected and analyzed by trained, experienced and qualified persons using carefully approved proced~~res and rules that govern chemical urinalysis drugtcsting. Tobegin with, Ms. TessieDupre collected the Respondent's urine sampleat the Bourgeois Medical Clinic and assigned an appropriate identification number, which followed the samplethroughout the screeningprocess. ### ('Tr. 33-34,Agency Eshibit ### I,3). The specimenwas placed in an appropriate container and sealed with a tamperproof seal in the Respondent's presence. (7'r. 43-44), In addition,both Ms. Dupre and the Respondent signed the Custody and Control Fonn certifying that the specimen was in fact submitted by the Respondent, that thc infbnnation provided on the form was correct, and that the sample was collected, labeled and sealed in accordance with federal regulations. ### (I'F.TF. 44, Agmcv Exhibit 1, ## 3. Next, the initial screening and scientific analysis ofRespondent's urine sample indicated thepresence of cocainemetabolite. A confinnation test and additional analysis were achieved through a gas chrot~~atograpl~yhass spectrometry test in accordance with the guidelines established in 49 ### CFR 40.29(f). ### (fi. 70-71,Agencyf<.xlzihit 4). Thetest results were forwarded to the MRO, Dr. Melvin Bourgeois of the Bourgeois bledical Clinic, who reviewed the results and conducted an interview with the Respondent. (Tr. ### 93, ### 94,IO3-103, ilgcnc-vILrhihii 4 ### unii3). Thereafter, the ### MRO contirined that the laboratoly test results wcre positive. ### Or. ### 93,94. 103- 105,,,lgertcy E,rizihii 4 ### and 5). 13Therecor(1indicates that the chemical tests and procedures fbllowedby Quest Diag~iostics were conducted in accordance with 46 C.F.R. Part 16. Dr. Edward A'Zary, the laboratory's Scientific Director, verified that Quest Diagnostics is a certified facility and medical laboratory. ### (f?. 43-44, 59-60, 665, .4gencyEdzibit 1). Through creclibletestimony, Dr. '4'Zary described the procedures followed once the specimen arrived at the laboratory. More specifically, afier ensuring the specimen arrived intact_ the sample was carefully analyzed according to tested and approved procedures by the laboratory scientists and coniputers. (Tr. 77, Agrncy Exhibit 4). Moreover, thereceipt ofthe specimen, as well ### as thehandling and testing procedures, aredocumented on the laboratory's internal chain ofcustody. agencyE,rhibit 4). Substantial evidence of a reliable and probative nature exists in the record to support a determinationthat Respondent Griftith used a dangerous drug. Although the Respondent hiled to produec any evidence to sufficiently rebut the accuracy or validity of the test, he raises two affirmative defenses. First, the Respondent contends that the Medical Review Officer ignored an explicit request to retest the urine specimen, which denied the Respondent an opportunity to refute the validity ofthe test results. Second, the Respondent argues that the MRO failed to conduct a thorough medical investigation to determine whethtr the Respondent's ### use of prescription medicine interfered with the screening results. For the reasons stated herein, all of the Respondents' arguments arc rejected. 1. Th~Medical Review Officer did not Invalidate tile Test Results bv Failing to Honor the Respondent's Request to Retest the Urlnc Sam~le Respondent Griffith asserts that the absence of a retest denied him the opportunityto refute the validity ofthe test and tire ability to prove he never used cocainc. Having been denied the ncccssary cxculpatc1ry eviclcnce. Respondent argues that he was sevcrcly prcj~idiceci a~id tlie 13integrity ofthe drug screeningprocess was compromised. As such. Respondent contends that the laboratory test results indicating the presence of cocaine metabolites arc invalid. The federal drug screeningre~wlations are in place not only to ensure a system of checks and balances during collection and analysis of specimens, but also to protect the integrity ofthe drug screeningprocess. See .4~1,eaI Decision ### 25555 (L4VALLAIS). The regulations govemirig these proceedings provide that an employee has a right to obtain aretest of a split urinalysis satnple upon notificttion of apositive result. 49 C.F.R. ### 9 40.l71(ajt). The applicableregulations Further provide that the request may be verbal or in writing. ### See ## Id. However, once the request is made, the MRO must immediately provide written notice to the testing laboratory, directing the facility to forward the split specimen to a second certified laboratory. ### &40 C.F.R. ## 5 40,17l(c). In this case, Respondent immediately requested a retest ofthe split specimen upon learningthat he tested positive for cocaine. Although Dr. Bo~~rgeois documented this request in the medical review records, he ignored the Respondent's initial request and failed to instruct Quest Diagnosticto forward the sample onto a second laboratory forretesting. Dr. Bourgeois testified that he assumed Respondent aci~ialiy sought another urine test rather than a split sample retest. ### (Tr. IlY). This conclusion was based on Dr. Bourgeois' past experience with patients who've requested a second urinalysis after testing positive for drugs. r. 1Y.Dr. Bourgeois further testified that he considers the retcst "a waste oftime" and typically advises patients against sccking a retest even when they request it. ### Or. 119, ### 152-154). Accorclingly,Dr. Bourgeois advised Respondcnt to discuss the rctest and its financial cost with his eniployer, Tidewater Marine. If Rcspoiident still wantcd thc spiit sampletested, he coi~ld call the Bourgeois "vledicalClinic and rcqucst it again. (A,. 113, 119,Ageizcy /%hihit6). I5Considering a mariner's livelihood is at stake. Dr. Bourgeois should have taken the time todiligently listen and com~nunicate with the Respondent. This \vould include, at the very Icast, a display of civility and coilsideration towards the Respondent during the interview. Instead, ### Dr. Bourgeois leapt to a brash and incorrect assumption. TheRespondent testified that he specifically requested a split sampletest, with theknowledge that another aliquot oftheoriginal samplewould be retested. ### (7i- 188). In fact, the Respondent's knowledge ofhis rights regarding the retesting process was detailed in the informationprovided at the Bourgeois bledical Clinic. /'(t 189). Yet, despite Respondent's explicit request, Dr. Bourgeois in~properly directed the Respondentto first discussthematter with his employerbefore contacting the Clinic with a second request. ### A thorough review ofgoverningregulations reveals that there are no such additional requirements that rnust be fulfilled before a mariner mayrequest a split specimen test. Although the MRO's failure tohonor theinitial request for retest constitutes clear error, it did not invalidate the test results. There was substantial evidence in the record corroborating the integrity ofthe specimen. Moreover, the record as a whole reflects that sufficient safe&%~ards and procedures were employed to ensure a proper chain of c~~stody and an unadulterated specimen. As such, the error is not fatal. It should be noted that ### a nun~ber of times throughout tlie course ofthe hearing, the Administrative Law Judge extended the opportunity to retest the split sample ofRespondent's urine. ### I' 15 16 ### I However, Responcieut repeatedly rejected this oft'er. (Tr. 156, 160, ### 191). As such. the Respondent's argurneritthat he was severely prejudicccl by the inability to retest the uriiiitlysis is without iiierit.11. TheMedical ReviewOfficcr's Inquiry into Respondent's use ofmriptionMedication was Co- ### -- Respondent Griffith asscrts that Dr. Bourgeois failed to adequately interview him regarding his medical history or afford him the opportunityto present a legitimate medical explanation. More spec~fically, Respondent allegesthat Dr. Rourgeols erroneously bel~eved the Respondent initially tested positive for marijuana rather than cocaine. Because Dr. Bourgeois wasconfused asto the nature of the drug detected, heprematurely dismissed thepossibility that Respondent's prescription medication could cause a false positive. Respondent states that he wasundergoing treatment for a back and shoulder injury that he sustained a few months prior to thedrug test. As such, Dr. Bourgeois was required by federal regulations to thoroughlyreview the Respondent's medical history and contact his primary carephysician to determinewhether treatment for this injury was a potential cause for a positive test result. Theapplicableregulations provicie specificguidelines to assist Medical Review Officers through the verification process. &49 C.F.R. Part 40. In particular, there&mlations provide that the MRO nonnally verifies a confinned positive test after itltcrviewingthe employee. 49 C.F.R. ## 5 40.133(a). D~iring the llledical interview, the MRO Innst review the employee's medical history and any otherrelevant factors presented by the employee. ### See49 C.F.R. ## 5 40.141(a). However, the employee carries theburden ofproving that a legitimate medical explanation exits. # s.~ 49 C.F.R. $ 40.137(c). Lft11c employee asserts that prescriptition meciication ### interfered with the screeningprocess, the ### 'LIROmust review and take reasonable stcps to \;erif')l the authenticity of all rnedical records provided by the employee. S3 49 C.F.R 40.14l(b). ### In addition, the MROrl~ay contact the employee's physician if he bclievcs fill-thcrinlirrtnation is ncccssary. ## &e 30 ### C.F.R. ## 5 40.13!(b). 17On the othcr hand, ifthe employee fails to present a legitimate mctlical explanation for the presence ofdrugs in his system,the ### MROinust verify the test result as positive fbr drugs. ### & 49C.F.R. ## 649. 137(a). In this case, Dr. Bourgeois made a detennination that the type ofprescription n~edication taken by thc Respondent would not interfere with theurinalysis results. According to the tt~tirnony ofboth the Respondent and Dr. Bourgeois, the Respondent ### was given the ttpportunity topresent ### a legitimate n~edical explanation for testing positive. More specifically, when the Respondent replied that he had never used drugs orbeen around drug use, Dr. Bourgeois inquired about possible prescription medication. ### (Ti. 114-115, I76 186). However: Dr. Bourgeois determined that none ofthe medications mentioned by the Respondent would give ### a falsepositive because the type of coniirmationtest used by Quest Diagnostics is virtualiy flawless. /fi.151). Dr. Bourgeois testified that the gas chromatographylmass spectromehy is the "gold standard for substance testing" because there are no known medical prescriptions that will interferewith tlie results. (jri-. 113-114, 140, 151, 164-165). ### In fact, Dr. Bourgeois stated that the only medical explanation for a specimen to test positive for cocaine is a legitimate medical prescription titr cocaine. ### 1'0..113-115, 151. 164-165). Based on the information provided by the Respondent, Dr. Bourgeois determined that there was no verifiable legitiinate medical explanation for the positive test result. As Dr. Bourgeois was satisfied with this detcnnination, aclditional iniitnnation regarding the Respondent's medical history and records was not necessary. Accordingly, Dr. Bourgeoiswas not required to extcnd his ### investigation ink the Rcsponcicnt's cntirc incdical history or even confer with the Responilcnt's other physicians.Upon revlew ### ofthe documentary e~ldencc and thc record as a whole, ### I find that the Respondent has not prcsented a leg~t~tnate inedlcal explanation that woiild account tbr the presence of cocaine metabolite in his urine sample. The Respondent claimed to be taking the prescribed medications Caiisoprodol and Vicoprofen. According to the testimony ofDr. Edward A'Zary, the Scientific Director at Quest Diabmostics, neither oftheprescriptions, either separately or combined, would cause the Respondent's urine sampleto test positive for cocaine. (7r. 81, 84). More specifically, Carisoprodol is merely a neurological blocking agent often used in sleepmedication or as a muscle relaxant. ### (Tr KO). It is a synthetic derivative of the heroin poppy that resembles the activities of opiates. ### 1. 1. Similarly, Dr. A'Zary explained that Vicoprofen is a man-made synthetic opiate that is legally prescribed as ### apainkiller. ### (Tr.82-83), The Respondent's mere assertion ofprescription drug use was not sufficient to meet his burden ofproducing ### a legitimate medical explanation for the presence of cocaine inhis system. At the hearing and throughout these proceedings, the Respondent declined to produce any evidenceand/or expert testimony to demonstrate how those specific prescription drugs would interferewith the urinalysis or create a false positive for cocaine. ### In short, the Respondent failed to produce persuasive evidenceto rebut the inference of illicit druguse. SANCTION Oncethe charge of dangerous drug use is found proved, all licenses and documents shall be revoked tlnless the Respoildent establishes satisfactoryproof of cure. ### See 46 U.S.C. $ 7704(c); see also 46 ### C.F.R. $ 5.5?(b); ### Appeal .Decision.Z5555 (LA-; A~peal Decision 2527 (GEORGE:). In this case, the drug in issue is cocaine and tlic Responclc~lt did not provide any satisfactory evideitce of cure. Accordingly. an outright revocation of Respondent's license is mandatory. ### WI-[EREFORE. 10 ### ORDER ### IT IS ORDERED that G.S. ### Coast Guard License No. 894821, issued to the Respondent is ### hereby REVOKED. Respondent is ordered to immediately surrenderhis License to the Investigating Officers at U.S. ### Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Morgan City, Louisiana. It ### is hereby f~~rther, ORDERED that the service ofthis Decision onthe Respondent's counsel will serve ### as noticeto the Respondent ofhis right to appeal, the procedure for which is set forth in 33 ### C.F.R. 20.1001-20.1003. (Attachment A) ### ARCHIE R. BOGGS 'i 1 ### Administrative Law Judge ### U.S. Coast ### Guard Dated th~s # >-&& dayctf ### August, 2003 New Orlea~ls, Louisiana ### CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE ### I hereby eeriify that I have served the foregoing document upon the following parties (or their designated representative) to thisproceeding at the addresses indicatedby Federal Express James A. Wilson, Assistant Senior InvestigsltingOffice1 LTJG. Boris ### K. Towns United StatesCoast Guard Marine Safety Office 800 ### David Drive, Room 232 Morgan City, ### LA 70380-1304 L. Stephen Cow, E5qulre Courtenay, Hunter & ### Fontana, L.L.P. Texaco Center, Suste 1540 400 Poydras Street New Orleans, Louisiana ### 70130-3245 Attorney Advisor ### Done and Dated on August 2 ### 1,2003at Washington, District of Coli~snbia
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/IMAGERY/igphoto/2002163135/index.html.json	An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Official websites use .mil A .mil website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States. Secure .mil websites use HTTPS A lock (lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Skip to main content (Press Enter). U.S. Central Command Search Search Search - Home - ABOUT US - COMMAND PRIORITIES - LEADERSHIP - COMPONENT COMMANDS - HISTORY - POSTURE STATEMENT - CENTCOM AOR - CENTCOM COALITION - OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES - USMTM - CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT - CONTACT - OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT - COMMUNITY RELATIONS - THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE - INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL - MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL - MEDIA - SOCIAL MEDIA - NEWS ARTICLES - PRESS RELEASES - STATEMENTS - IMAGERY - VIDEOS - TRANSCRIPTS - VISITORS AND PERSONNEL - FAMILY CENTER - FAMILY READINESS - CENTCOM WEBMAIL - SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY - ACCOUNTABILITY - EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS - USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS - FOIA LIBRARY - INNOVATION OASIS - WELCOME GUIDE Search Search - All Images - Community Relations - Other - PreviousCommanders - Upload Date - Photo Date - Title Share ---- Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (3.1 MB) Tags:JOEP, JAF, New Jersey National Guard, Task Force Spartan, interoperability, Soldiers, Army, Guard, ceremony, Jordan, USARCENT, National Guard, Army National Guard, ARCENT, coalition, ASG-J, 102 CAV, Jordan Border Guard Force, JTC-J, Joint Operational Engagement Program Photo by:VIRIN: Photo Gallery
text/markdown	0.547645	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/usc/118/66/10_1080.json	### §1080. Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: election of facilities (a) Election.—A dependent covered by section 1079 of this title may elect to receive inpatient medical care either in (1) the facilities of the uniformed services, under the conditions prescribed by sections 1076–1078 of this title, or (2) the facilities provided under a plan contracted for under section 1079 of this title. However, under such regulations as the Secretary of Defense, after consulting the other administering Secretaries, may prescribe, the right to make this election may be limited for dependents residing in the area where the member concerned is assigned, if adequate medical facilities of the uniformed services are available in that area for those dependents. (b) Issuance of Nonavailability-of-Health-Care Statements.—In determining whether to issue a nonavailability-of-health-care statement for a dependent described in subsection (a), the commanding officer of a facility of the uniformed services may consider the availability of health care services for the dependent pursuant to any contract or agreement entered into under this chapter for the provision of health care services. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, with respect to obstetrics and gynecological care for beneficiaries not enrolled in a managed care plan offered pursuant to any contract or agreement under this chapter, a nonavailability-of-health-care statement shall be required for receipt of health care services related to outpatient prenatal, outpatient or inpatient delivery, and outpatient post-partum care subsequent to the visit which confirms the pregnancy. (c) Waivers and Exceptions to Requirements.—(1) A covered beneficiary enrolled in a managed care plan offered pursuant to any contract or agreement under this chapter for the provision of health care services shall not be required to obtain a nonavailability-of-health-care statement as a condition for the receipt of health care. (2) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement to obtain nonavailability-of-health-care statements following an evaluation of the effectiveness of such statements in optimizing the use of facilities of the uniformed services. (Added Pub. L. 85–861, §1(25)(B), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1449; amended Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §511(36), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2923; Pub. L. 98–557, §19(8), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 2870; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VII, §716(b)(1), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1692; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VII, §734(a)(1), (b)(1), (c), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2598; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title VII, §712(c), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 687.) \| Revised section \| Source (U.S. Code) \| Source (Statutes at Large) \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| 1080 \| 37:411(c). \| June 7, 1956, ch. 374, §201(c), 70 Stat. 252. \| The words "a plan contracted for under section 1079 of this title" are substituted for the words "such insurance, medical service, or health plan or plans as may be provided by the authority contained in this section". The words "under the terms of this chapter" are omitted as surplusage. #### Editorial Notes #### Prior Provisions A prior section 1080, act Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 85, related to style and marking of envelopes, inserts, return envelopes, and to weight of ballots, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 85–861, §36B(5), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1570, as superseded by the Federal Voting Assistance Act of 1955 which is classified to subchapter I–D (§1973cc et seq.) of chapter 20 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. #### Amendments 1999—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 106–65 inserted at end "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, with respect to obstetrics and gynecological care for beneficiaries not enrolled in a managed care plan offered pursuant to any contract or agreement under this chapter, a nonavailability-of-health-care statement shall be required for receipt of health care services related to outpatient prenatal, outpatient or inpatient delivery, and outpatient post-partum care subsequent to the visit which confirms the pregnancy." 1996—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–201, §734(a)(1), inserted "inpatient" before "medical care" in first sentence. Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104–201, §734(c), substituted "Nonavailability-of-Health-Care Statements" for "Nonavailability of Health Care Statements" in heading and "nonavailability-of-health-care statement" for "nonavailability of health care statement" in text. Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–201, §734(b)(1), added subsec. (c). 1993—Pub. L. 103–160 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b). 1984—Pub. L. 98–557 substituted reference to administering Secretaries for reference to Secretary of Health and Human Services. 1980—Pub. L. 96–513 substituted "Secretary of Health and Human Services" for "Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare". #### Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries #### Effective Date of 1980 Amendment Amendment by Pub. L. 96–513 effective Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701(b)(3) of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nigc.gov/commission/commissioners.json	Skip to main content - Contact Us - Report A Violation - Gaming Locations - Tribal Access Portal - Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn - Youtube - RSS - (202) 632-7003 - ContactUs@nigc.gov - Search - Home - Commission - About Us - History - Agency Strategic Goals - Organizational Structure - Strategic Plan - Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey - Performance Dashboard - Agency Actions - Commission Final Decisions - Enforcement Actions - NEPA Decision of Records - Categorical Exclusion Administrative Record - Commissioners - Chair's Notice - Speeches - Past Commissioners - Contact Us - Frequently Asked Questions - Human Trafficking Resources - Legislative Affairs - Congressional Testimony - Legislative History - NIGC Guidance Regarding COVID-19 - Office of Self-Regulation - Public Hearings - Reports and Publications - Annual Reports - Compliance Reports - FOIA Reports - Gross Gaming Revenue Reports - Quarterly FOIA Reports - Rulemaking - Tribal Consultations - Consultation Policy - Tribal Consultation 2021 - Tribal Consultation 2018 - Tribal Consultation 2017 - 2017 Consultation Briefing - Tribal Consultation 2015 - Draft Strategic Plan 2014-2018 - Tribal Consultation 2013 - Electronic One Touch Bingo - Regulatory Review 2011-2013 - 2013 Summary of Regulatory Changes - Tribal Advisory Committee - Regulatory Review 2010-2011 - Regulatory Review 2005-2010 - Compliance - Alternate Standards - Audit - Internal Control Assessment - Financial Submissions - Internal Audit MICS Compliance - Bulletins - Checklists and Worksheets - Regional Offices - Oklahoma City Regional Office - Portland Regional Office - Phoenix Regional Office - Sacramento Regional Office - St. Paul Regional Office - Tulsa Regional Office - Washington DC Regional Office - Rapid City Regional Office - Report A Violation - Finance - Annual Commission Budgets - Fees - Pay.gov - Fingerprint Fees - Pay.gov - Gross Gaming Revenues - Management Contracts - Submitting a Mgmnt. Contract - Public Affairs - Biographies - Community Impact - Event Calendar - Fact Sheets - Featured Articles - Media Center - Seals and Graphics - Press Conferences & Transcripts - News Releases - Reflecting on 30 Years of IGRA - Social Media - General Counsel - Compacts - Gaming Ordinances - Legal Opinions - Declination Letters - Game Classification Opinions - Indian Lands Opinions - Laws and Regulations - Commission Regulations - EPHS Interpretive Rule - Gaming Criminal Laws and Penalties - DOI Gaming Regulations - Indian Gaming Regulatory Act - Johnson Act - National Environmental Policy Act - Technology - CJIS Resource Materials - Fingerprint Process - IT Vulnerability Assessment - Kiteworks Guide for External Users - Tech Alerts and Warnings - Tribal Access Portal - Using TAP - Obtaining TAP Credentials - Training - Catalog of Courses - Environment, Public Health and Safety - Tailored & Site Specific Training - Toolkits - Auditing Revenue 543.24 Toolkit - Bingo 25 CFR 543.8 Toolkit - Cage 25 CFR 543.18 Toolkit - IT 25 CFR 543.20 Toolkit - 25 CFR 543.21 Surveillance Audit Toolkit - Training Event Calendar - Video Library - I want to.... - Contact the nearest NIGC office - Submit electronic financial statements - View upcoming training & events - Find the Min. Internal Control Standards - See agency decisions and actions - Report A Violation - View NIGC's Indian gaming regulations - Request a Declination Letter - Request a Game Classification Opinion - Request an Indian Lands Opinion - Subscribe to NIGC News and Updates # Commission ### Commissioner Biographies #### Vice-Chair Jeannie Hovland Jeannie Hovland (Flandreau Santee Sioux) is Vice-Chair of the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC). As such, she is responsible for regulating and ensuring the integrity of the more than 500 Indian gaming facilities, associated with over 250 tribes across 29 states. She served as the OSR Director from May 2021 through July 2023. Hovland began her three-year term at the agency on January 17, 2021, after being appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Before joining NIGC, Hovland served as Commissioner of the Administration for Native Americans providing oversight of a $57 million annual operating budget to promote self-sufficiency for American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. Hovland oversaw discretionary grants that support social and economic development, Native language restoration and revitalization, and environmental regulatory enhancement. Hovland created the Social and Economic Development Strategies for Growing Organizations program, which provides funding to strengthen internal governance structures and build capacity for tribes and tribal organizations. She also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Affairs at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), a $58 billion operating division under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Hovland provided expert and culturally appropriate advice to the Assistant Secretary in formulation of policy, positions, and strategies affecting Native Americans. Hovland chaired the HHS Secretary’s Intradepartmental Council on Native American Affairs (ICNAA), serving as an advisor to the Secretary, addressing issues of importance to tribal communities through partnerships with all of HHS departments. Hovland helped bring national awareness to the crisis of Missing and Murdered Native American’s through her role on the ICNAA as well as through her participation on the Presidential Taskforce, Operation Lady Justice. Under Hovland’s leadership, as chair of the ACF Native American Affairs Advisory Committee, comprised of ACF leadership and in partnership with the ACF Tribal Advisory Committee, the ACF Missing and Murdered Native Americans - A Public Health Framework for Action was published in October 2020. In her previous role as Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior, Hovland provided strategic recommendations to the Assistant Secretary on issues related to land leases, access to quality water, land into trust status, and energy and economic development issues. Hovland’s extensive knowledge and experience on Indian Affairs includes her many years serving Native American communities in South Dakota where she worked for Senator John Thune for nearly 13 years. As Tribal Affairs Advisor, Hovland dedicated most of her time in the communities as she believes in community-driven solutions. During that time, Hovland was able to provide input on important legislation such as the Tribal Law and Order Act and the Code Talkers Recognition Act of 2008. #### Past commissioners #### Subscribe to our RSS feeds by email: Choose a category for updates:** * #### Commission - About Us - Agency Actions - Commissioners - Past Commissioners - Contact Us - Frequently Asked Questions - Human Trafficking Resources - Legislative Affairs - NIGC Guidance Regarding COVID-19 - Office of Self-Regulation - Public Hearings - Reports and Publications - Rulemaking - Tribal Consultations #### Compliance - Alternate Standards - Audit - Bulletins - Checklists and Worksheets - Regional Offices - Report A Violation #### Finance - Annual Commission Budgets - Fees - Fingerprint Fees - Gross Gaming Revenues - Management Contracts #### Public Affairs - Biographies - Community Impact - Event Calendar - Fact Sheets - Featured Articles - Media Center - News Releases - Reflecting on 30 Years of IGRA - Social Media #### General Counsel - Compacts - Gaming Ordinances - Legal Opinions - Laws and Regulations #### Technology - CJIS Resource Materials - Fingerprint Process - IT Vulnerability Assessment - Kiteworks Guide for External Users - Tech Alerts and Warnings - Tribal Access Portal Terms of UsePrivacy PolicyDownload Adobe Acrobat Reader #### Stay updated on the NIGC Sign up to receive the latest gaming news and updates! Facebook*TwitterLinkedinYouTubeRSS* info@nigc.gov·202-632-7003
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/12/19/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-american-climate-corps-listening-sessions-new-actions-to-mobilize-the-next-generation-of-clean-energy-conservation-and-resilience-workers/index.html.json	December 19, 2023 # FACT SHEET: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Announces American Climate Corps Listening Sessions, New Actions to Mobilize the Next Generation of Clean Energy, Conservation, and Resilience Workers - Home - Briefing Room - Statements and Releases To register for virtual listening sessions and learn more about this groundbreaking initiative, visit:www.whitehouse.gov/climatecorps $2 billion program from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda includes option to create career pathways that advance environmental justice through American Climate Corps In September, President Biden announced the launch of the American Climate Corps, a groundbreaking, workforce training and service initiative that will prepare tens of thousands of young people for good-paying jobs in the clean economy. In the time since, nearly 50,000 Americans have expressed interest in joining the American Climate Corps. In launching this new initiative, President Biden fulfilled a key promise to mobilize a new, diverse generation of Americans – putting them to work conserving and restoring our lands and waters, bolstering community resilience, deploying clean energy, implementing energy efficient technologies, advancing environmental justice, and more.As the Biden-Harris Administration works toward establishing the first cohort of American Climate Corps members by summer 2024, the Administration is today announcing a series of key steps to further advance the initiative, including the launch of virtual listening sessions. The administration is also announcing a new partnership across seven Federal agencies to guide implementation and new information on how communities can leverage historic funding from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda to increase pathways for young people into environmental justice careers via the American Climate Corps.While Republicans in Congress continue to deny the very existence of climate change, the Biden-Harris Administration will continue to deliver on the most ambitious climate agenda in history, including by ensuring that young people in every corner of the country gain the skills necessary to access good-paying jobs that will help tackle the climate crisis.Launching Virtual Listening SessionsBeginning in January, senior Biden-Harris Administration officials will convene a series of virtual listening sessions to hear directly from prospective American Climate Corps applicants and implementing partners, including conservation and service corps partners, labor unions, educational institutions, employer partners, and state, local, territorial and Tribal governments about their priorities for the American Climate Corps. Each listening session will last roughly 90 minutes and will provide participants with the opportunity to engage directly with Administration officials who are overseeing the initiative, as the Administration works to establish the first cohort of American Climate Corps members by next summer. More information about the virtual listening sessions can be found here. Creating Career Pathways that Advance Environmental JusticeIn addition, EPA is leveraging historic funding from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda to increase pathways for young people into environmental justice careers through the American Climate Corps. EPA’s $2 billion Environmental and Climate Justice Community Change Grant Program announced in November includes an option for community-based organizations to propose their own Climate Corps program for youth in disadvantaged communities to pursue careers in greenhouse gas and air pollution reduction, along with other strategies to take climate action, reduce pollution, and increase community resilience. This is just one example of how the President’s Investing in America agenda is furthering the goals of the American Climate Corps.Establishing a New Federal Partnership Across Seven AgenciesToday, seven federal agencies – the Departments of Commerce, the Interior, Agriculture, Labor and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and AmeriCorps – are entering into a formal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that will serve as a blueprint for the multiagency initiative. The MOU defines the core principles of the American Climate Corps – from compensating members to ensure the initiative is accessible to all, to expanding workforce pathways in and led by disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by pollution, to serving all of America’s communities by improving climate resilience, public health, energy security, and by creating economic opportunity in our urban, rural, suburban, and wilderness remote areas.Additionally, the MOU establishes an Executive Committee – comprised of the Assistant to the President and National Climate Advisor, CEO of AmeriCorps, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Energy, and Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency – to provide leadership across the federal government for the American Climate Corps, as well as a Working Group to carry out and implement the initiative.The Administration expects to formally launch the recruitment portal for prospective applicants in spring 2024, positioning the initiative to establish the first cohort of American Climate Corps members next summer. ### Next Post: Readout of the Third Trilateral Fentanyl Committee Meeting between the United States, Mexico, and Canada Readout of the Third Trilateral Fentanyl Committee Meeting between the United States, Mexico, and Canada December 19, 2023•Statements and Releases Next Post ## Stay Connected We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better. Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden. - Share this page on Facebook - Share this page on X - https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/12/19/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-american-climate-corps-listening-sessions-new-actions-to-mobilize-the-next-generation-of-clean-energy-conservation-and-resilience-workers/?utm_source=link
text/markdown	0.021718	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/usc/118/66/10_-Subtitle_A-ptIII-ch109.json	### CHAPTER 109—EDUCATIONAL LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAMS Sec. 2171. Education loan repayment program: enlisted members on active duty in specified military specialties. [2172. Renumbered.] 2173. Education loan repayment program: commissioned officers in specified health professions. 2174. Interest payment program: members on active duty. #### Editorial Notes #### Amendments 2002—Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title VI, §651(a)(2), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2579, added item 2174. 1997—Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title VI, §651(b), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1803, added item 2173. 1994—Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1671(b)(13), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 3014, added item 2171 and struck out former items 2171 "General educational loan repayment program" and 2172 "Education loans for certain health professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve".
text/markdown	0.705254	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/cap/5299101.json	#### Thomas Gavin, Respondent, v.New York Contracting Company — Pennsylvania Terminal, Appellant. First Department, December 6, 1907. Deposition — examination of defendant before trial — proper and improper questions. In an action against a corporation to recover for personal injuries where the complaint alleges that the defendant failed to furnish a safe place to work in, ¡ that its locomotives, tracks, etc., were not in proper condition, and that it," failed to employ competent workmen or adopt proper rules, and that per- • sons exercising acts of superintendence were negligent, the plaintiff, in examin- j ing the defendant’s secretary before trial, is entitled to interrogate the witness j upon matters within his knowledge pertinent to the charges of negligence set . forth in the complaint. Thus, he may ask pertinent questions on the following subjects: The construe- . tion and character of the tracks, roadbed, etc., at the place where the plaintiff’s injury occurred; the condition of repair of the locomotive; as to whether defendant had adopted rules, and what rules; what knowledge the witness had as to the incompetency of the plaintiff’s fellow-servants and the negligence of his superintendent. But he is not entitled to ask questions calling for the witness’ opinion as to the meaning of certain allegations in the answer, or upon any other subject, unless he was properly sought to be examined as an expert. So, too, it is improper to question him concerning other accidents happening in the prosecution of the defendant’s work, unless prior to the one in which the plaintiff was injured, and happening in the same way and same locality, so as to show notice of the dangerous situation. So, too, he is not entitled to ask concerning matters pertaining to other parts of the defendant’s work, nor may he ask the names of other witnesses to the accident. The test of the propriety of questions put to the witness upon such examination is whether the testimony sought is material and proper to be used on the trial of the action. Appeal by the defendant, the New York Contracting Company — Bennsylyania Terminal, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 7th day of August, 1907, directing the defendant, through its secretary, to answer certain questions propounded upon an examination before trial. J. C.Toole, for the appellant. Charles H.Tuttle, for the respondent. 644Houghton, J.: The action is to recover damages by an employee for personal injuries .claimed to have been received through defendant’s negligence. The negligence charged against defendant by the plaintiff in his complaint is that it failed to furnish him a safe place in which to work; in that its locomotive engine, tracks, roadbed and embankments were not in proper condition, and that it failed to employ competent fellow workmen ; and that it failed to adopt proper rules for the guidance of its workmen; and further that some person exercising acts of superintendence was guilty of negligence. The plaintiff obtained an order for the examination of defendant through its secretary before trial. Upon such examination a large number of questions were objected to and not answered. Thereupon the plaintiff moved- for an order directing the witness to answer all of the questions, which was granted, from which the defendant appeals. . Some of the questions were proper and some Were not, and the order directing that all of them should be answered must be reversed. It was proper for the plaintiff to interrogate the witness upon - matters within his knowledge pertaining to the charges of négligence on the part of the defendant which the plaintiff had set forth in his complaint. It was, therefore, proper to ask the witness per- j tinent questions relating to the construction and character of the tracks, roadbed and embankment at the point Where plaintiff’s injury occurred; and as to the locomotive engine and its condition of repair; and also whether the defendant had adopted any rules and what rules for tile guidance of its employees; and also what knowledge ' the witness had with respect to the incomp.etency of plaintiff’s. immediate fellow workmen or their habitual recklessness of conduct which would also embrace the witness’s knowledge in that respect. concerning plaintiff’s immediate superintendent: It would be proper, for the plaintiff under the broad allegations of his complaint to give evidence of these facts upon the trial. An examination of a party before trial will not be granted unless the testimony sought.is material and proper to be used upon the trial. (Oakesv. Star Co.,119 App. Div. 358.) Therefore, the test of the propriety of the ques-645tions put to a witness upon such- an examination is, whether the testimony sought is material and proper to be used upon the trial of the action. Hence it was improper to ask questions calling for the witness’ opinion as to what certain allegations in defendant’s 'answer meant, or upon any other subject, unless he was 'properly sought to he examined as an expert. It wás also improper to interrogate him as to reports of, and his knowledge concerning, other accidents happening in the prosecution of defendant’s work, unless they were accidents happening prior to the one from which plaintiff claimed his injury, and in the same way, and in the same locality, which might show notice of a dangerous situation. It was likewise improper to interrogate the witness concerning matters pertaining to other parts of defendant’s work than the immediate-"neighborhood of plaintiff’s accident; for it is of no moment to the 'plaintiff that the defendant was negligent on another part of its work, or that another place on the work was unsafe, and evidence concerning them would be improper upon the trial. Nor should the witness have been' asked the names of other witnesses to the accident. An order for an examination is for the eliciting of testimony ' and not to gain information as to who might be called as witnesses. The court below should have selected such questions as were pertinent and proper to be answered, and confined itb order to directing-answers to them only. The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the matter remitted to the Special Term for the entry of an order in accordance with this opinion. Patterson, P. J., Ingraham, McLaughlin and Scott, JJ., concurred. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and matter remitted to Special Term as stated in opinion. Settle order. on notice.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.10-4319.11.0.pdf.json	10-4319 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT Echo Appellate Press, Inc. • 30 West Park Avenue • Long Beach, New York 11561 • (516) 432-3601 Printed on Recycled Paper 17497 BRIEF FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT FELDMAN AND FELDMAN Attorneys for Defendant-Appellant George Allen Ward 626 Reckson Plaza West Tower, 6th Floor Uniondale, New York 11556 (516) 522-2828 _______________________________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GEORGE ALLEN WARD, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 1 of 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....... ....... ....... ...... I STATEMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 STATEMENT OF ISSUES ....... ....... ....... ...... 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ....... ....... ....... ... 3 STATEMENT OF FACTS ....... ....... ....... ...... 4 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ....... ....... ....... . . 10 ARGUMENT ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 11 POINT I: REMAND IS WARRANTED BECAUSE, NOTWITHSTANDING A REQUEST BY APPELLANT, TRIAL COUNSEL FAILED TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM THE RESENTENCE, RENDERING HIM PER SE INEFFECTIVE. ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 11 CONCLUSION: THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED TO THE DISTRICT COURT ....... ....... ....... . 20 REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPEFACE AND LENGTH LIMITS PURSUANT TO FRAP 32(A)(7)(c) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ....... ....... ....... . . 23 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 2 of 27 i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES FEDERAL CASES Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403 (2004) ....... ....... ....... . . 6 Bunch v. Thompson, 949 F.2d 1354 (4th Cir. 1991) . . . . . . 11 Fontaine v. United States, 411 U.S. 213, 93 S. Ct. 1461, 36 L. Ed. 2d 169 (1973) ....... ....... ....... 18,19 Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147 (4th Cir. 1978) . . . . . . . . . 14 Peguero v. United States, 526 U.S. 23, 119 S. Ct. 961, 143 L. Ed. 2d 18 (1999) ....... ....... ....... . . 14 Rodriquez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327, 89 S. Ct. 1715, 23 L. Ed. 2d 340 (1969) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 120 S. Ct. 1029, 145 L. Ed. 2d 985 (2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,16 17,18 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738, 160 L. Ed. 2d 621 (2005) ....... ....... ....... . . 5 United States v. Christy, 3 F.3d 765 (4th Cir. 1993) . . . . . . 13 United States v. Edgerton, 282 Fed. Appx. 287 (4th Cir. 2008) ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 16 United States v. Miller, 318 Fed. Appx. 200, 201 (4th Cir. 2009) ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 14 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 3 of 27 ii United States v. Peak, 992 F.2d 39 (4th Cir. 1993) . . . . . . . 13 United States v. Poindexter, 492 F.3d 263 (4th Cir. 2007) ....... ....... ....... ....... 13,15 United States v. Proffitt, 240 Fed. Appx. 596, 597 (4th Cir. 2007) ....... ....... ....... ....... ... 14 United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351 (4th Cir. 1985) . . . . . 13 United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679 (4th Cir. 2009) . . . 12 FEDERAL STATUTES 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1) ....... ....... ....... ....... ... 4 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 4 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 5 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) & (b) ....... ....... ....... ..... 4 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 1,6 8,15 Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A) ....... ....... ....... ..... 12 Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(b) ....... ....... ....... ....... . . 13 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 4 of 27 1 STATEMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION i. The basis for subject matter jurisdiction in the District Court was 28 U.S.C. § 2255. ii. The basis for jurisdiction in the Court of Appeals is 28 U.S.C. § 2255. iii. The District Court entered judgment from the resentencing on November 9, 2009. It denied Appellant’s petition on February 5, 2010, and his motion for reconsideration on March 2, 2010. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on March 9, 2010. iv. This appeal is from a final judgment that disposes of all claims with respect to George Allen Ward. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 5 of 27 2 STATEMENT OF ISSUES 1. Is remand warranted because, notwithstanding a request by Appellant, trial counsel failed to file a notice of appeal from the resentence, thus rendering him per se ineffective? Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 6 of 27 3 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant, George Allen Ward, appeals from both his resentence, on November 2, 2009, and from the denial of his motion to obtain credit for time served, on February 5, 2010, in the United States District for the Eastern District of Virginia (Hon. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr.). Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 7 of 27 4 STATEMENT OF FACTS Procedural History On December 8, 1994, Defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)(Counts 1, 4 and 5), two counts of distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) & (b) (Counts 7 and 9), and one count of use of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(Count 8). On March 10, 1995, the United States DistrictCourt for the Eastern District of Virginia sentenced Defendant to 60 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release on Counts 1, 4 and 5, two hundred months’ imprisonment and five (5) years’ supervised release on Counts 7 and 9, to run concurrently with Counts 1, 4 and 5, sixty months’ imprisonment on Count 8, to run consecutively with all other counts; and three (3) years’ supervised release on Count 8, to run concurrently with all other counts. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 8 of 27 5 On January 13, 1998, the Court corrected its judgment to reflect that Defendant’s criminal history was VI, rather than V, pursuant to Rule 36 of the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure. Defendant thereafter moved, several times, for a downward sentencing departure under Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant’s May 17 and June 16, 1999, and March 31, 2000, requests were each denied by the Court. See Docket Sheet, Entries 56-59, 63 and 65. When the District Court denied his motion to reconsider its denial of his March 31, 2000 motion, the Defendant appealed the Court’s decision. See Docket Sheet, Entries 66-67. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed his appeal, denied his request to file a successive § 2255 petition, and denied his motion for a rehearing en banc. See Docket Sheet, Entries 66-74. On November 1, 2004 and, again, on March 4, 2005, Defendant moved to modify his sentence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). See Docket Sheet, Entries 75 and 79. These motions both challenged Defendant's sentence under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738, 160 L. Ed. 2d 621 (2005), Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 9 of 27 6 and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403 (2004). The Court denied the former motion and dismissed the latter motion as a successive petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Docket Sheet, Entries 76 and 80. On May 12, 2005, Defendant asked the Court to reconsider its dismissal of his March 2005 motion. See Docket Sheet, Entry 81. On July 5, 2005, the Court dismissed this motion to reconsider as another successive § 2255 motion. See Docket Sheet, Entry 85. On October 26, 2005, this Court dismissed Defendant's appeal of the dismissal of his March 2005 motion, and denied him permission to file a successive § 2255 motion. See Docket Sheet, Entries 86, 87. Following additional litigation, Defendant moved, on September 27, 2007, to retroactively apply the Sentencing Guidelines to his crack cocaine offense. See Docket Sheet, Entry 109. On April 8, 2008, the District Court granted Defendant’s motion to reduce his sentence on Counts 7 and 9 to 160 months’ imprisonment, to be served concurrently with his 60-month Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 10 of 27 7 sentence on Counts 1, 4 and 5, and consecutively with his 60- month sentence on Count 8. The Instant Appeal On November 2, 2009, Appellant was resentenced pursuant to the mandate filed on September 18, 2009. This time, he was sentenced to concurrent terms of 200 months under Counts 7 and 9. See Docket Sheet, page 18-19. An amended judgment was filed on November 9, 2009. See Docket Sheet, Entry 123. Defense counsel, however, never filed a notice of appeal from this judgment. On January 1, 2010, Appellant filed a seven-page, handwritten petition with the District Court, in which he sought an order for credit for time served from the federal sentence to be applied to the state sentence he is presently serving. The Court “emphathize[d]” with Defendant, and noted he had raised this “argument ... at resentencing” (Order: 2), yet ruled that “a federal district court does not have the authority to order a state court or the state department of corrections grant [sic] a defendant credit for time served in federal custody” (Order: 2). Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 11 of 27 8 On February 5, 2010, the District Court denied his motion and, on March 2, 2010, it denied his motion for reconsideration See Docket Sheet, Entries 125, 127. Ward then filed a pro se notice of appeal on March 9, 2010. See Docket Sheet, Entry 129. In the notice, he explained to the District Court that, “[a]fter [re]sentencing[,] the Petitioner Ward requested of the court appointed attorney to appeal the decision for him, therefore up until this moment he has failed to confer [with] the Petitioner have yet to hear anything from attorney Larry Dash.” Had counsel filed the notice of appeal, Ward continued, he would have argued, on appeal, that (1) trial counsel was ineffective; (2) no Booker argument was raised; and (3) that credit for time served that was not applied to his federal custody should apply to his state custody. Ward noted, in his pro se notice of appeal that, while the District Court wasstill referring to his case as “George Allen Ward v. Patricia Stansberry,” as if it were a 28 U.S.C. §2255 case, it should be styled as “United States of America v. George Allen Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 12 of 27 9 Ward,” because he sought a direct criminal appeal to challenge his resentence. He then requested “further attorney assistance” under the Criminal Justice Act, on appeal, to substitute for trial counsel. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 13 of 27 10 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Remand is warranted because, notwithstanding a request by Appellant, trial counsel failed to file a notice of appeal from the resentence, rendering him per se ineffective. Although Appellant informed the District Court, in writing, that trial counsel had failed to file the notice of appeal, it never addressed this in its order denying Appellant credit for time served. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 14 of 27 11 ARGUMENT POINT I REMAND IS WARRANTED BECAUSE, NOTWITHSTANDING A REQUEST BY APPELLANT, TRIAL COUNSEL FAILED TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM THE RESENTENCE, RENDERING HIM PER SE INEFFECTIVE. Standard of Review “The standard of review for ineffective assistance of counsel claims is a familiar one.” Bunch v. Thompson, 949 F.2d 1354, 1363 (4 Cir. 1991). Under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. th 668, 687, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984), in order to establish a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights, Ward must show that his counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficiency so prejudiced his defense that it deprived him of a fair hearing. Discussion of Issues On November 2, 2009, Appellant was resentenced pursuant to the mandate filed on September 18, 2009. The District Court sentenced him to concurrent terms of 200 months under Counts 7 and 9. See Docket Sheet Entry, page 18-19. An amended judgment Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 15 of 27 . The amended judgment was entered on November 9, 1 2009. See Docket Sheet, Entry 123. Appellant filed his pro se notice of appeal on March 9, 2010, from both the denial of his unnamed petition, and from his criminal judgment. See Docket Sheet, Entry 127. Clearly, however, a defendant’s notice of appeal in a criminal case must be filed within ten days after the entry of the judgment or order being appealed. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A). Defense counsel here thus had until November 19, 2009 to file his notice of appeal, but failed to do so. United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 683 (4 Cir. 2009)(“The notice was not timely. th Appellate Rule 4(b)(1)(A) imposes a ten-day deadline on the filing of a notice of appeal in criminal cases, and Urutyan never requested an extension of that deadline”). 12 was filed on November 9, 2009. See Docket Sheet, Entry 123. After being resentenced, Ward asked trial counsel to file a notice of appeal, yet he did not do so. This violated Ward’s right to the effective assistance of counsel. In order to establish a Sixth Amendment violation based on counsel’s failure to appeal, Ward must prove that (1) counsel was ineffective and (2) but for counsel’s ineffectiveness, an appeal would have been filed. See Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 120 S. Ct. 1029, 145 L. Ed. 2d 985 (2000). Here, Ward meets this standard. After Appellant was sentenced, he filed a pro se notice of appeal, in which he 1 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 16 of 27 Even after the ten day period, defense counsel did not move to extend the appeal period by making a showing of excusable neglect or good cause. Rule 4(b)(4). United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985). Appellant pro se, however, actually complied with this Court’s timeliness rules, because his pro se notice of appeal, in which he informed the Court that counsel had failed to file the notice, was filed on March 9, 2010, within ten days of the District Court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration of his undenominated petition. Although the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(b) do not provide for tolling of the ten-day appeal period for the filing of a motion for reconsideration, this Court has held that the filing of such a motion delays the time period for filing the notice of appeal until after the motion has been ruled upon. United States v. Christy, 3 F.3d 765, 767 n.1 (4th Cir. 1993) (citing United States v. Ibarra, 502 U.S. 1, 4 n.2, 112 S. Ct. 4, 116 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1991)). 13 explicitly informed the District Court that, despite asking trial counsel to file the notice of appeal, he failed to do so. Counsel’s failure to file the appeal, after being instructed by his client to do so, is per se ineffective. Flores-Ortega, 492 F.3d at 483. See also United States v. Peak, 992 F.2d 39, 42 (4th Cir. 1993)(the Sixth Amendment obligates counsel to file an appeal when his client requests him to do so and the failure to do so constitutes Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 17 of 27 . The District Court, which must liberally construe pro se 2 submissions, Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), could treat Appellant’s pro se letter as a § 2255 petition. United States v. Miller, 318 Fed. Appx. 200, 201 (4 Cir. th 2009)(“the district court’s order den[ied] relief on his letter that the court construed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2006)”); United States v. Proffitt, 240 Fed. Appx. 596, 597 (4 Cir. 2007)(“The district th 14 ineffective assistance of counsel, regardless of the likelihood of success on the merits). If nothing else, Flores-Ortega reaffirms the principle that an attorney is not at liberty to disregard the appellate wishes of his client. See Peguero v. United States, 526 U.S. 23, 28, 119 S. Ct. 961, 143 L. Ed. 2d 18 (1999)(“[W]hen counsel fails to file a requested appeal, a defendant is entitled to [a new] appeal without showing that his appeal would likely have had merit”); Rodriquez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327, 89 S. Ct. 1715, 23 L. Ed. 2d 340 (1969)(holding that an attorney who disregards his client’s instruction to file a timely notice of appeal acts in a professionally unreasonable manner). Even after Ward informed the District Court that he had asked defense counsel to file a notice of appeal, it never addressed this issue in its order denying Appellant credit for time served. 2 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 18 of 27 court issued an order in accordance with United States v. Emmanuel, 288 F.3d 644, 649 (4th Cir. 2002), giving Proffitt notice and opportunity to respond before the court construed the letter as an initial 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion”). 15 Ironically, Ward underscored his dissatisfaction with trial counsel’s failure to file a notice of appeal by imploring the District Court to stop referring to his case as “George Allen Ward v. Patricia Stansberry,” asif the entire resentencing case sounded in a 28 U.S.C. §2255 action, when it should have been styled, simply, as “United States of America v. George Allen Ward,” because it was nothing more than a direct criminal appeal from his resentence. Yet the District Court ignored this as well. Assuming, arguendo, the Court chose not to credit the Defendant’s statements in his notice of appeal, it should have still held a hearing to determine if, when and under what circumstances Appellant had asked trial counsel to file a notice of appeal on his behalf. United States v. Poindexter, 492 F.3d 263, 272 (4th Cir. 2007)(“Under our approach, when a defendant brings a § 2255 claim based on his attorney’s failure to file a requested notice of Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 19 of 27 16 appeal, the district court should hold a hearing if it is unclear in the record whether the attorney was so instructed”). Because Ward can showthat he “‘reasonably demonstrated’ that he expressed interest in appealing,” United States v. Edgerton, 282 Fed. Appx. 287 (4 Cir. 2008), this Court should remand. th Indeed, rare is the defendant has expressed such zeal in having his trial attorneys file notices of appeal. In fact, since he was indicted, on October 20, 1994, the docket sheet reflects that Ward had countless notices of appeal filed. See, e.g., Docket Sheet, Entries 49, 50, 67, 82, 87, 95, 116, 129. Given this long history of aggressively challenging his conviction for sixteen years, it would be out of character–even shocking–for the Defendant to now, suddenly, order defense counsel to not file a notice of appeal from his resentence. Grounds for Appeal Although a defendant need not prove his “hypothetical appeal might have had merit,” grounds for appeal are highly relevant in determining whetherWard has been prejudiced or even expressed a desire to appeal. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. at 485-486. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 20 of 27 17 Here, it is obvious that Ward expressed a strong desire to appeal. He even told the District Court in his pro se notice of appeal--at a time when it could have recalled its order, and ruled on this dispositive issue–that he had asked his trial counsel to file a notice of appeal, but he had failed to do so. But more important, Ward even told the District Court that he had three discrete issues he intended to raise on appeal, namely, that (1) trial counsel was ineffective; (2) that no Booker argument had been raised at sentence; and (3) that credit for time served that was not applied to his federal custody should apply to his state custody. Yet the District Court ignored all of this. Significantly, Ward may have had a meritorious argument regarding credit for time served in federal custody; indeed, even Judge Morgan empathized with his claim. It is beyond peradventure that federal district judges do not empathize with defendants who waste the Court’s time by raising frivolous claims. Ward’s two other points, regarding Strickland and Booker, need not be addressed with specificity here because, in Flores-Ortega, the Supreme Court held that the failure to file a Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 21 of 27 18 requested notice of appeal is per se ineffective assistance of counsel--with or without a showing that the appeal would have merit. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. at 483-86. The Court reasoned that “it is unfair to require an indigent, perhaps pro se, defendant to demonstrate that his hypothetical appeal might have had merit .... Rather, we require the defendant to demonstrate that, but for counsel’s deficient conduct, he would have appealed.” Id. at 486. Remand is Warranted Here, it is plain, from the contents of the pro se notice of appeal, that Ward asked counsel to file a notice of appeal. Remand is thus warranted, with instructions to direct trial counsel to file a notice of appeal. Short of this finding, the District Court, which never resolved--let alone addressed--the question of whether Ward made an express request to his attorney for an appeal, should be directed, on remand, to make factual determinations on whether Appellant did, in fact, ask counsel to file a notice of appeal. That would be consistent with the mandate of section 2255(b), which requires an evidentiary hearing on a motion Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 22 of 27 19 “[u]nless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” In Fontaine v. United States, 411 U.S. 213, 93 S. Ct. 1461, 36 L. Ed. 2d 169 (1973), the Supreme Court remanded for an evidentiary hearing because the Court determined that “[o]n this record, we cannot conclude with the assurance required by the statutory standard ‘conclusively show’ that under no circumstances could the petitioner establish facts warranting relief under § 2255.” Id. at 215. The same applies here. Based on the arguably unresolved nature of Ward’s claim, this Court should, at a minimum, remand for a hearing on this issue. Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 23 of 27 20 CONCLUSION THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED TO DISTRICT COURT. Dated: April 7, 2010 Uniondale, New York /s/ Arza Feldman Arza Feldman, Steven A. Feldman Feldman & Feldman Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 24 of 27 21 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. GEORGE ALLEN WARD, Appellant. REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT Given the nature of the case, this Court may dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the brief before the court and argument may not aid the decisional process. Counsel will, however, be pleased to orally argue the case, should the Court so request. /s/ Arza Feldman Arza Feldman Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 25 of 27 22 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. GEORGE ALLEN WARD, Appellant. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPEFACE AND LENGTH LIMITS PURSUANT TO FRAP 32(A)(7)(c) I, Arza Feldman, hereby certify that, pursuant to Rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, that this brief does not exceed 30 pages, 1,300 lines or 14,000 words. Rather, it contains 23 pages, 576 lines and 3,589 words. /s/ Arza Feldman Arza Feldman Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 26 of 27 Appeal: 10-4319 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/13/2010 Pg: 27 of 27
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.occ.gov/static/enforcement-actions/ea2021-030.pdf.json	## #2021 - 030 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY In the Matter of: Cadence Bank, N.A. Atlanta, Georgia ) ) ) ) ) AA - EC - 20 21 - 32 CONSENT ORDER WHEREAS , the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) has supervisory authority over Cadence Bank, N.A., Atlanta, Georgia (“Bank”); WHEREAS , the OCC intends to initiate civil money penalty proceedings against the Bank pursuant to 12 U.S .C. § 1818(i) , through the issuance of a Notice of Assess ment of a Civil Money Penalty , for engaging in violations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), (b), and 3605(a), and its implementing regulation, 24 C.F.R. § § 100.120 and 100.150 ; WHEREAS , in the interest of cooperation and to avoid additional costs associated with administrative and judicial proceedings with respect to the above matter, the Bank, by and through its duly elected and acting Board of Directors (“Board”), consents to the issuance of this Consent Order (“Order ”), by the OCC through the duly authorized representative of the Comptroller of the Curren cy (“Comptroller ”) ; and NOW, THEREFORE , pursuant to the authority vested in the OCC by Section 8 (i) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended, 12 U.S.C. § 1818 (i) , the OCC hereby orders that: ARTICLE I JURISDICTION (1) The Bank is an “insured depository institution” as that term is defined in 12 U.S.C. § 1813 (c)(2).2 (2) The Bank is a national banking association within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 1813(q)(1)(A), and is chartered and examined by the OCC. See 12 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. (3) The OCC is the “appropriate Federal banking agency ” as that term is defined in 12 U.S.C. § 1813(q) and is therefore authorized to initiate and maintain this civil money penalty action against the Bank pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1818 (i) . ARTICLE I I COMPTR OLLER’S FINDINGS The Comptroller finds, and the Bank neither admits nor denies, the following: (1) From 2014 through 2016 (“Relevant Period”) , the Bank did not provide equal access to credit to residents seeking first - lien mortgage loans in majority - minority census tracts (“MMCTs”) and majority - Hispanic census tracts (“MHCTs”) in the Bank’s Houston Assessment Area (“Houston AA ”) . (2) During the Relevant Period, t he Bank’s disparate treatment was evidenced through the Bank’s pattern of mortgag e application and origination activity, branching history , Mortgage Loan Officer (MLO) structure and operations , and marketing and advertising . (3) During the Relevant Period, among other evidence of disparate treatment, examiners found t he Bank’s mortgage le nding activity in MMCTs and MHCTs in its Houston AA was consistently statistically significantly lower than the lending activity of its peer s ; only one of the Bank’s 11 branches in its Houston AA was located in an MMCT, and it primarily relied on MLOs to generate mortgage applications but did not have an MLO working in its MMCT branch as it did in other non - MMCT and non - MHCT branches . (4) By reason of the for e going, the Bank engaged in a pattern or practice of violat ing the Fair Ho using Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a), (b), and 3605(a), and its implementing regulation,3 24 C.F.R. § § 100.120 and 100.150 . (5) Pursuant to the authority vested in him by the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended, 12 U.S.C. § 1818, the Comptroller hereby ORDERS that: ARTICLE III ORDER FOR A CIVIL MONEY PENALTY (1) The Bank shall make payment of a civil money penalty in the total amount of three million dollars ($ 3 ,000,000 ), which shall be paid upon the execution of this Order. (2) Such payment shall be made by a wire transfer sent in accordance with instructions provided by the OCC and the docket number of this case (AA - EC - 20 21 - 32 ) shall be entered on the wire confirmation. A photocopy of the wire confirmation shall be sent immediately, by over night delivery, to the Director of Enforcement and Compliance, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 40 0 7 th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20219. ARTICLE IV WAIVERS (1) The Bank, by executing and consenting to this Order, waives: (a) any and all rights to the issuance of a Notice of Charges pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1818; (b) any and all procedural rights available in connection with the issuance of this Order; (c) any and all rights to a hearing and a final agency decision pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1818 and 12 C.F.R. Part 19; (d) any and all rights to seek any type of administrative or judicial review of this Order;4 (e) any and all claims for fees, costs, or expenses against the OCC, or any of its officers, employees, or agents related in any way to this enforcement matter or this Order, whether arising under common law or under the terms of any statute, including, but not limited to, the Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. § 504 and 28 U.S.C. § 2412; (f) any and all rights to assert th ese proceeding s , the consent to and/or the issuance of this Order, as the basis for a claim of double jeopardy in any pending or future proceeding s brought by the United States Department of Justice or any other governmental entity; and (g) any and all rights to challenge or contest the validity of thi s Order. ARTI CLE V CLOSING (1) This Order is a settlement of the civil money penalty proceeding s against the Bank contemplated by the OCC, based on the violations of law described in the Comptroller’s Findings set forth in Article II of this Order. The OCC releases and discharges the Bank from all potential liability for a civil money penalty order t hat has been or might have been asserted by the OCC based on the violations described in Article II of this Order, to the extent known to the OCC as of the effective date of this Order . Nothing in this Order, however, shall prevent the OCC from: (a) institutin g enforcement actions other than a civil money penalty order against the Bank based on the Comptroller’s Findings set forth in Article II of this Order;5 (b) instituting enforcement actions against the Bank based on any other findings; (c) instituting enforcement a ctions against institution - affiliated parties (as defined by 12 U.S.C. § 1813(u)) based on the Comptroller’s Findings set forth in Article II of this Order, or any other findings; or (d) utilizing the Comptroller’s Findings set forth in Article II of this Orde r in future enforcement actions against the Bank or its institution - affiliated parties to establish a pattern or the continuation of a pattern. (2) Nothing in this Order is a release, discharge, compromise, settlement, dismissal, or resolution of any actions, or in any way affects any actions that may be or have been brought by any other representative of the United States or an agency thereof, including, without limitation, the United States Department of Justice. (3) This Order is: (a) an “order issued with the cons ent of the depository institution” within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 1818(h)(2); (b) an “effective and outstanding . . . order” within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 1818(i)(1); and (c) a “final order” within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 1818(i)(2) and (u). (4) This Order i s effective upon its issuance by the OCC, through the Comptroller’s duly authorized representative. (5) This Order is not a contract binding on the United States, the United States Treasury Department, the OCC, or any officer, employee, or agent of the OCC an d neither the Bank nor the OCC intends this Order to be a contract.6 (6) No separate promise or inducement of any kind has been made by the OCC, or by its officers, employees, or agents, to cause or induce the Bank to consent to the issuance of this Order. (7) The terms of this Order, including this paragraph, are not subject to amendment or modification by any extraneous expression, prior agreements, or prior arrangements between the parties, whether oral or written. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the undersigned, authorized by the Comptroller as his duly authorized representative, has hereunto set h is signa ture on behalf of the Comptroller. //s// Digitally S igned, D ated: 2021.8.27 Joel Denkert Deputy Comptroller Midsize Bank Supervision7 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the undersigned, as the duly elected and acting Board of Directors of Cadence Bank, N.A., Atlanta, Georgia have hereunto set their signatures on behalf of the Bank. /s/ August 24, 2021 3:36 PM Joseph Evans /s/ Date August 24, 2021 5:44 PM J. Richard Fredericks /s/ Date August 24, 2021 6:36 PM William Harrison, Jr. /s/ Date August 24, 2021 9:26 PM Virginia Hepner /s/ Date August 24, 2021 5:16 PM Hank Holmes /s/ Date August 25, 2021 10:21 AM Paul Murphy, Jr. /s/ Date August 25, 2021 9:38 PM Precious Owodunni /s/ Date August 24, 2021 5:04 PM Marc Shapiro /s/ Date August 25, 2021 7:42 AM Samuel Tortorici /s/ Date August 24, 2021 3:52 PM Kathy Waller /s/ Date August 25, 2021 10:27 AM J. Thomas Wiley, Jr. Date
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap_docs/2011/12/13/Zhao_Chen_v._Eric_Holder_Jr.pdf.json	UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1718 ZHAO WEN CHEN, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: November 16, 2011 Decided: December 13, 2011 Before KING, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Brown, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, William C. Peachey, Assistant Director, Paul T. Cygnarowicz, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Zhao Wen Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motions to reconsider and reopen. We have reviewed the administrative record and Chen’s claims and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Chen’s motion to reopen his asylum claim. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c) (2011). We accordingly deny the petition for review in part for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Chen (B.I.A. June 2, 2010). We dismiss the petition for review in part for lack of jurisdiction with respect to Chen’s challenge to the Board’s denial of his motion to reopen and reconsider his claim for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) (2006). Finally, we dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/stats.bls.gov/cps/aa2014/cpsaat33.pdf.json	## HOUSEHOLD DATA ANNUAL AVERAGES 33. Unemployedjobseekers by sex, age, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, and active jobsearch methods used [Numbers in thousands] Characteristic 2014 Unemployed Percent of jobseekers using method Average number of methods used Total Jobseekers Contacted employer directly Sent out resumes or filled outapplications Placed or answered ads Contacted friends or relatives Public employment agency Private employment agency Other AGE AND SEX Total, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,617 8,609 50.1 57.1 16.0 27.8 18.3 8.8 15.1 1.9 16 to 19 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,106 1,049 48.0 62.0 11.1 19.2 7.5 3.4 10.0 1.6 20 to 24 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,747 1,641 51.7 59.5 14.6 24.7 16.0 6.6 14.1 1.9 25 to 34 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,224 2,000 51.7 58.9 16.6 28.2 20.5 9.6 14.0 2.0 35 to 44 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,539 1,351 48.9 57.1 16.6 28.9 21.3 9.8 16.1 2.0 45 to 54 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,507 1,300 51.1 55.1 18.4 32.5 22.9 12.2 17.1 2.1 55 to 64 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,107 954 49.1 51.8 18.9 32.3 20.7 11.1 19.0 2.0 65 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 314 44.1 42.4 14.5 32.5 13.1 7.9 18.5 1.7 Men, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,190 4,572 50.9 54.6 16.1 29.6 18.5 9.0 15.3 1.9 16 to 19 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605 571 48.1 59.8 11.2 20.7 7.9 3.7 9.6 1.6 20 to 24 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 925 50.2 57.9 14.6 26.9 16.4 6.3 13.2 1.9 25 to 34 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,185 1,038 53.5 56.0 17.1 31.3 20.9 10.3 14.5 2.0 35 to 44 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 692 50.5 53.9 16.9 29.2 21.3 9.5 16.8 2.0 45 to 54 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 782 662 53.4 51.3 18.0 34.5 24.1 12.5 17.7 2.1 55 to 64 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 511 50.2 48.9 19.8 33.6 20.8 11.4 20.5 2.1 65 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 172 42.8 42.9 13.5 33.5 12.0 10.1 20.3 1.8 Women, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,426 4,037 49.3 60.0 15.9 25.8 18.0 8.5 14.8 1.9 16 to 19 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501 478 47.8 64.6 11.0 17.3 7.0 3.0 10.5 1.6 20 to 24 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 751 715 53.6 61.5 14.6 21.9 15.4 6.9 15.3 1.9 25 to 34 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,039 961 49.7 62.0 16.0 25.0 20.1 8.8 13.6 2.0 35 to 44 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 726 659 47.2 60.4 16.3 28.7 21.2 10.2 15.3 2.0 45 to 54 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 725 638 48.7 59.0 18.8 30.4 21.6 11.8 16.6 2.1 55 to 64 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507 443 47.9 55.1 17.8 30.7 20.7 10.7 17.3 2.0 65 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 142 45.7 41.7 15.6 31.4 14.5 5.3 16.2 1.7 RACE AND HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,540 5,731 50.7 56.5 16.7 28.3 17.4 8.8 15.8 1.9 Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,572 3,071 51.8 54.2 16.8 30.2 17.7 9.1 16.0 2.0 Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,968 2,661 49.4 59.2 16.5 26.1 17.0 8.6 15.5 1.9 Black or African American. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,141 2,013 49.0 58.3 14.4 25.8 22.3 8.5 12.6 1.9 Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,091 1,019 49.8 55.0 14.6 27.4 22.2 8.5 12.5 1.9 Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,050 994 48.2 61.6 14.1 24.1 22.5 8.6 12.8 1.9 Asian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436 413 48.6 56.4 15.9 34.3 14.0 10.2 18.4 2.0 Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 236 47.0 53.8 15.1 33.9 15.0 11.3 19.5 2.0 Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 177 50.7 59.8 17.0 34.8 12.7 8.8 16.9 2.0 Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,878 1,673 52.2 51.9 11.8 32.8 19.6 9.8 14.2 1.9 Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 869 54.3 49.3 12.4 33.4 20.3 9.9 14.3 1.9 Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 804 49.9 54.8 11.2 32.0 18.8 9.7 14.1 1.9 NOTE: The jobseekers total is less than the total unemployed because it does not include persons on temporary layoff. The percent using each method will always total more than 100 because many jobseekers use more than one method. Estimates for the above race groups (white, black or African American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races. Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data. ## 1
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.arb.787297/gov.uscourts.arb.787297.12.0.pdf.json	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James E. Cross, Esq. #009063 THE CROSS LAW FIRM, P.L.C. 1850 N. Central Ave., Suite 1150 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 (602) 412-4422 jcross@crosslawaz.com Counsel for Debtor, HH Acquisition CS, LLC IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA In re: HH ACQUISITION CS, LLC , Debtor. Chapter 11 Proceedings Case No. 2:21-bk-05211-DPC DECLARATION OF PATRICK CLIFTON IN SUPPORT OF DEBTOR’S FIRST DAY MOTIONS I, Patrick Clifton, authorized representative of HH Acquisition CS, LLC (“HH” or the “Debtor”) hereby declare under penalty of perjury as follows: 1. I am a resident of Maricopa County, Arizona, I am over eighteen years of age, and am competent to make this Declaration. 2. I have been involved in various forms of real estate development andacquisitions since the 1980’s. I am currently involved in the development of several build-torent projects. Previously I have been involved in overseeing the development/acquisition ofover 4,000 apartments throughout Arizona as well as the roll-out and operation of such multiunit consumer brands such as Blockbuster Video, Boston Market, Spin Cycle, and AutoAuto Wash. Additionally, I have been an Advisor of Highland Hospitality Partners, LLC and its predecessor since 2010. 3. I make the following statements based upon my personal knowledge and the business records of the Debtor. Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4. HH Acquisition is the debtor and debtor-in-possession in the above- captioned Chapter 11 case. 5. HH Acquisition operates a hotel known as Hyatt House Colorado Springs located at 5805 Delmonico Drive, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80919 (the “Property”). 6. HH Acquisition is owned by various equity investors and is managed by Highland Hospitality Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. TGT Partners, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company is the manager of Highland Hospitality. ISB Management, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company is the manager of TGT Partners. A. HH Acquisition’s Business 7. HH Acquisition was formed in the state of Delaware as a limited liability company in February 2019, to acquire the Property, with the intention of renovating it. 8. The Property is operated by a third-party management company, Rockies Hotel Management, Inc. 9. Rockies Hotel Management, Inc. is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the Property and provides periodic reports to management of the Debtor regarding operations of the hotel. B. Factors Leading to Bankruptcy 10. On or about October 4, 2019, HH Acquisition entered into a Promissory Note with YAM Capital III, LLC (“YAM”) in the amount of $8,400,000.00, with a 9% interest rate per annum (the “YAM Note”). The purpose of the loan was to provide bridge financing until a permanent loan could be obtained to fund the planned renovations. 11. On or about October 4, 2019, HH Acquisition entered into a Promissory Note with HH CO Springs, LLC (“HHCOS”) in the amount of $1,150,000.00, with an 8% interest rate per annum (the “HHCOS Note”). The purpose of this loan was seller provided financing Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 when Debtor acquired the Property. The current amount owed on this obligation is approximately $450,000. 12. HH Acquisition was able to operate the Property and made the payments on the YAM and HHCOS Notes until March 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic caused the Property to shut down and led to the serious adverse economic impact on hospitality properties across the nation and world. As a result of the pandemic, HH Acquisition’s business took a drastic downturn, and the Debtor was unable to continue making the payments on the Notes. 13. In April 2020, HH Acquisition applied for and received a Paycheck Protection Program Loan from the Small Business Administration in the amount of $140,835 (the “First PPP Loan”) in order to continue operating its business. The Debtor has applied for forgiveness of this First PPP Loan and expects it to be fully forgiven. 14. On April 6, 2020, the Debtor and YAM entered into a Forbearance Agreement, which deferred payments on the Note through June 30, 2020. 15. On June 2, 2020, the Debtor and YAM entered into a First Amendment to Forbearance Agreement, which further deferred payments on the Note through July 31, 2020. 16. On July 2, 2020, the Debtor and HHCOS entered into a Letter Agreement, which extended the loan maturity date to August 19, 2020. 17. On July 30, 2020, the Debtor and YAM entered that certain Second Amendment to Agreement which extended the loan maturity to September 30, 2020. 18. On September 30, 2020, the Debtor and YAM entered that certain Third Amendment to Agreement which extended the loan maturity to January 1, 2020, and also increased the interest rate to accrue on the Note from 9% to 10% per annum. 19. On November 27, 2020, the Debtor sent a notice to YAM that it desired to further extend the maturity of the Loan for an additional 90 day period. Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20. YAM did not respond to the November 27, 2020, request for extension, and sent a letter on January 8, 2021, declaring a default on the Loan. 21. In February 2021, HH Acquisition applied for and received a second Paycheck Protection Loan from the Small Business Administration in the amount of $230,800 (the “Second PPP Loan”) in order to continue operating its business. The Debtor has applied for forgiveness of this Second PPP Loan and expects it to be fully forgiven. 22. The Debtor has been negotiating a sale of the Property to a third party, which sale was originally scheduled to close in mid to late August, and which would pay both YAM and HHCOS in full, as well as provide funds to pay unsecured debt related to the Property. 23. On June 8, 2021, YAM issued its Notice Regarding Cure Statement on the YAM Note, with a trustee’s sale set for July 7, 2021. The Debtor was given a deadline of July 6, 2021, at Noon to pay all outstanding amounts due on the YAM Note in the amount of $10,343,617,10. 24. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Debtor was forced to close its business at times, reopen with limited services and space, and continues to operate with limited guests. 25. Through this reorganization, the Debtor will sell the Property, pay all secured creditors in full, and provide funds to repay unsecured debt. 26. The Debtor has been in the process of attempting to close a sale to an independent third party for a sale price of $14,500,000. Now that this bankruptcy has been filed, the Debtor intends to immediately proceed forward in filing a motion for approval of a sale of the property, after appropriate notice and an opportunity for better and higher offers. C. Need for Cash Collateral Use 27. As of the Petition Date, the total payoff balance the YAM Note is $10,343,617.10. Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 4 of 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 28. As of the Petition Date, HH Acquisition owes unsecured debt but is attempting to obtain the specific amounts from its management company. 29. Without the ability to immediately use cash to fund its ongoing operations, HH Acquisition cannot operate, and will not have access to cash to pay operating expenses. In that event, Debtors’ operations will shut down, all ongoing business value will be lost, and creditors will lose any prospect for repayment. 30. The Debtor has developed a three-month budget for operations, which is submitted as Exhibit B to its motion for authority to use Cash Collateral. D. Obligation Owing to Hyatt House Franchising, LLC 31. The Debtor is a party to a franchise agreement with Hyatt House Franchising, LLC for the use of the Hyatt brand in operating the Property. Once the sale of the Property is closed, Debtor shall reject this executory contract. E. Utilities 32. The Debtor had hoped to have information to seek relief in terms of utility deposits, but at this point does not have all the information necessary for this request and shall supplement this Declaration once the information is obtained. 33. I have reviewed the “first day motions” filed on this day, and the factual statements contained therein are accurate to the best of my knowledge. DATED: July 7, 2021. HH ACQUISITION CS, LLC /s/ Patrick Clifton ___ By: Patrick Clifton, Authorized Representative COPY of the foregoing filed via the Court’s ECF system and copies mailed/emailed on July 7, 2021, to: Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 5 of 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Jennifer Giaimo OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE 230 N. First Avenue, Suite 204 Phoenix, AZ 85003-1706 Email: jennifer.a.giaimo@usdoj.gov Isaac Gabr iel, Esq. Quarles & Brady LLP Two N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85004 Email: Isaac.Gabriel@quarles.com Counsel for YAM Capital III, LLC U.S. Small Bu siness Ad ministration 2828 N. Central Ave., Ste. 800 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Colorado Department of Revenue PO Box 17087 Denver, CO 80217 Intern al Revenue Service Centralized Insolvency Operation P.O. Box 7346 Philadelphia, PA 19101-7346 Arizona Department of R even ue P.O. Box 29086 Phoenix, AZ 85038-9086 El Paso Cunty Public Trustee Attn: Cindy Simpson 1676 Garden of the Gods Rd., Ste. 2100 Colorado Springs, CO 80907 El P as o County Treas urer PO Box 2018 Colorado Springs, CO 80901 HH CO Springs, LLC 2000 High Wickham Place, Ste. 300 Louisville, KY 40245 Hyatt House Franchising, LLC Attn: General Counsel 150 N. Riverside Plaza Chicago, IL 60606 Co lorado Springs Utiliti es PO Box 340 Colorado Springs, CO 80901 Waste Management of Colorado , Inc. AS Payment Agent PO Box 7400 Pasadena, CA 91109 /s/ Kara L. Stewart Case 2:21-bk-05211-DPC Doc 12 Filed 07/07/21 Entered 07/07/21 17:35:01 Desc Main Document Page 6 of 6
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nps.gov/museum/exhibits/gettex/exb/battling_boredom/drinking_smoking/GETT31373.html.json	Bourbon BottleThis brown glass bottle held Kentucky Bourbon whiskey. Glass, paper. H 30 cm, Diam 7.5 cmGettysburg National Military Park, GETT 31373 Close This Window
text/markdown	3.017043	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/acl.gov/news-and-events/acl-blog/celebrating-50-years-architectural-barriers-act.json	Celebrating 50 Years of the Architectural Barriers Act \| ACL Administration for Community Living ![](/themes/custom/acl/images/us_flag_small.png) An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know Here’s how you know ![](/themes/custom/acl/images/icon-dot-gov.svg) Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. ![](/themes/custom/acl/images/icon-https.svg) Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. [Skip to content](#main-content)[Skip to navigation](#superfish-senior-main-nav) [Get help with up-to-date COVID-19 vaccines](https://acl.gov/covid19/vaccination-resources) [ACL's Eldercare Locator and DIAL can connect you to tests and vaccines](https://acl.gov/covid19/vaccination-resources) [Announcements](/news-and-events/announcements) [A - Z Browse](/programs/acl-programs-z) [For the Network](/node/659) Search [![ACL Administration for Community Living](/sites/default/files/logo.png)](/) - [Program and Policy Areas](/programs) - 1. [Column 1 - Programs](/programs) 1. [\\\* COVID-19 \\\](/node/4776) 2. [ACL A to Z: Programs, Networks, & Focus Areas](/programs/acl-programs-z) 3. [Overview](/programs) 4. [Aging and Disability Networks](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks) 1. [Aging and Disability Resource Centers](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/aging-and-disability-resource-centers) 2. [Americans with Disabilities Act National Network](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/americans-disabilities-act-national-network) 3. [Area Agencies on Aging](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/area-agencies-aging) 4. [Assistive Technology Network](/programs/assistive-technology/assistive-technology) 5. [Centers for Independent Living](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/centers-independent-living) 6. [Protection and Advocacy Systems](/programs/pa-programs) 7. [Senior Centers and Supportive Services for Older Adults](/programs/community-inclusion-integration-and-access/senior-centers-and-supportive-services-older) 8. [State Councils on Developmental Disabilities](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/state-councils-developmental-disabilities) 9. [State Units on Aging](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/state-units-aging) 10. [University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/national-network-university) 5. [Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia](/programs/support-people-alzheimers-disease/support-people-dementia-including-alzheimers-disease) 6. [Connecting People to Services](/programs/connecting-people-services) 1. [Aging and Disability Resource Centers Program/No Wrong Door System](/programs/connecting-people-services/aging-and-disability-resource-centers-programno-wrong-door) 2. [Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act](/programs/connecting-people-services/medicare-improvements-patients-and) 3. [State Health Insurance Assistance Program](/programs/connecting-people-services/state-health-insurance-assistance-program-ship) 7. [Consumer Choice and Control](/programs/consumer-control) 1. [Person-Centered Planning](/programs/consumer-control/person-centered-planning) 2. [Supported Decision Making](/programs/consumer-control/supported-decision-making-program) 3. [Transportation Research and Demonstration Program](/programs/transportation/transportation) 4. [Veteran Directed Care Program](/programs/veteran-directed-home-and-community-based-services/veteran-directed-home-community-based) 8. [Data Projects](/programs/research-and-development/data-collection-projects) 9. [Empowering Advocacy](/programs/empowering-advocacy) 1. [The President’s Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities](/programs/empowering-advocacy/presidents-committee-people) 10. [Employment](/programs/youth-transitions/employment) 11. [For American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians](/programs/services-native-americans-oaa-title-vi) 12. [Health & Wellness](/programs/health-wellness) 1. [Behavioral Health](/programs/health-wellness/behavioral-health) 2. [Brain Health](/brain-health) 3. [Chronic Disease Self-Management](/programs/health-wellness/chronic-disease-self-management-education-programs) 4. [Falls Prevention](/programs/health-wellness/falls-prevention) 5. [Health Promotion](/programs/health-wellness/disease-prevention) 6. [I Can Do It! (ICDI)](/programs/health-wellness/icdi) 7. [HIV/AIDS](/programs/health-wellness/hivaids) 8. [Nutrition](/programs/health-wellness/nutrition-services) 9. [Oral Health](/programs/health-wellness/oral-health) 13. [Opioid Crisis](/programs/addressing-opioid-crisis) 14. [Program Evaluations and Reports](/programs/program-evaluations-and-reports) 15. [Protecting Rights and Preventing Abuse](/programs/protecting-rights-and-preventing-abuse) 1. [Elder Abuse Prevention](/programs/protecting-rights-and-preventing-abuse/elder-justice) 2. [Elder Justice Coordinating Council](/programs/elder-justice/elder-justice-coordinating-council-ejcc) 3. [Help America Vote Act Programs](/programs/community-inclusion-integration-and-access/help-america-vote-act-programs) 4. [Legal Assistance](/programs/protecting-rights-and-preventing-abuse/legal-help) 5. [Long-Term Care Ombudsman](/programs/Protecting-Rights-and-Preventing-Abuse/Long-term-Care-Ombudsman-Program) 6. [For People with Disabilities](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/state-protection-advocacy-systems) 7. [Senior Medicare Patrol](/programs/protecting-rights-and-preventing-abuse/senior-medicare-patrol-smp) 8. [Supporting Adult Protective Services](/programs/elder-justice/supporting-adult-protective-services) 16. [Research and Development](/programs/research-and-development) 1. [Advanced Rehabilitation Research and Training (ARRT) Program](/programs/research-and-development/advanced-rehabilitation-research-and) 2. [Disability and Rehabilitation Research Program](/programs/research-and-development/disability-and-rehabilitation-research) 3. [Field-Initiated Projects Program Rehabilitation Research](/programs/research-and-development/field-initiated-projects-fip-program) 4. [Model Systems Program](/programs/research-and-development/model-systems-program) 5. [NIDILRR Annual Report](/programs/research-and-development/nidilrr-annual-report) 6. [NIDILRR External Evaluation](/programs/research-and-development/nidilrr-external-evaluation) 7. [NIDILRR Performance and Evaluation](/programs/research-and-development/nidilrr-performance-and-evaluation) 8. [Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Program](/programs/research-and-development/rehabilitation-engineering-research) 9. [Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program](/programs/research-and-development/rehabilitation-research-and-training) 10. [Small Business Innovation Research Program](/programs/research-and-development/small-business-innovation-research-program) 11. [Switzer Research Fellowship Program](/programs/research-and-development/switzer-research-fellowship-program) 17. [Retirement Planning and Pension Support](/programs/retirement-planning-support) 18. [Support to Caregivers](/programs/support-caregivers) 1. [Lifespan Respite Care Program](/programs/support-caregivers/lifespan-respite-care-program) 2. [National Family Caregiver Support Program](/programs/support-caregivers/national-family-caregiver-support-program) 3. [RAISE Family Caregiving Advisory Council](/programs/support-caregivers/raise-family-caregiving-advisory-council) 4. [Supporting Grandparents Raising Grandchildren](/programs/support-caregivers/supporting-grandparents-raising-grandchildren-0) 19. [Support for People with Limb Loss, Paralysis and TBI](/programs/post-injury-support) 1. [Limb Loss Resource Center](/programs/post-injury-support/national-limb-loss-resource-center) 2. [Paralysis Resource Center](/programs/post-injury-support/paralysis-resource-center-prc) 3. [Traumatic Brain Injury](/programs/post-injury-support/traumatic-brain-injury-tbi) 20. [Strengthening the Aging and Disability Networks](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks) 1. [Aging and Disability Evidence-Based Programs and Practices](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/aging-and-disability-evidence-based-programs) 2. [Diversity & Cultural Competency](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/diversity-and-cultural-competency) 3. [Duals Demonstration Ombudsman Program Technical Assistance](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/duals-demonstration-ombudsman-program) 4. [Improving Business Practices](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/improving-business-practices) 5. [Improving Quality of Services](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/improving-quality-services) 6. [National Resource Centers](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/national-resource-centers) 7. [Projects of National Significance](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/projects-national-significance) 8. [Person-Centered, Trauma-Informed Service](/programs/strengthening-aging-and-disability-networks/advancing-care-holocaust-survivors-older) 21. [Success Stories](/programs/success-stories) 22. [Volunteer Opportunities and Civic Engagement](/programs/volunteer-opportunities-and-civic-engagement) - [Grants](/grants) - 1. [Column 1 - Grants](/grants) 1. [ACL’s Grants Process](/grants) 2. [Applying for Grants](/grants/applying-grants) 1. [Application Tips](/grants/applying-grants/application-tips) 2. [How to Apply](/grants/applying-grants/how-apply) 3. [Funding Opportunities](/grants/open-opportunities) 1. [Closed Opportunities](/grants/closed-funding-opportunities) 4. [Grant Lifecycle](/grants/grant-lifecycle) 5. [Managing a Grant](/grants/managing-grant) - [Data, Research & Issues](/aging-and-disability-in-america "Info about older adults, people with disabilities and key aging and disability issues. Includes population data and trends, research findings from ACL's National Institute on Disability, Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research, white papers, more.") - 1. [Column 1 - Aging](/aging-and-disability-in-america) 1. [Overview](/aging-and-disability-in-america) 2. [Data and Research](/aging-and-disability-in-america/data-and-research) 1. [ACL Data](https://agid.acl.gov/) 2. [The State of the States in Developmental Disabilities](/aging-and-disability-in-america/state-states-developmental-disabilities) 3. [NIDILRR Publications and Resources](/aging-and-disability-in-america/data-and-research/nidilrr-publications-and-resources) 4. [Profile of Older Americans](/aging-and-disability-in-america/data-and-research/profile-older-americans) 3. [Issue Briefings and Other Reading](/aging-and-disability-in-america/issue-briefings) - [Newsroom](/news) - 1. [Column 1 - News](/news) 1. [Latest News](/news) 2. [Announcements](/news-and-events/announcements) 3. [ACL Blog](/news-and-events/acl-blog) 4. [Events and Observances](/news-and-events/events-and-observances) 5. [Speeches and Testimony](/news-and-events/speeches-and-testimony) 2. [Column 2 - News](/news) 1. [ACL Updates](https://acl.gov/subscribe) 2. [Ready-to-publish materials](/news-and-events/downloads-and-multimedia) 1. [ACL Logos](/news-and-events/graphics/graphics) 2. [Articles, Infographics, and Fact Sheets](/news-and-events/fact-sheets/publications-and-fact-sheets) 3. [Videos](/news-and-events/videos/videos) 3. [For Reporters](/news-and-events/for-reporters) 1. [Story Ideas](/news-and-events/story-ideas/story-ideas) 2. [Communicating with Older Adults](/news-and-events/communicating-older-adults/communication-planning-tips) 3. [FOIA](/FOIA) - [About ACL](/about-community-living) - 1. [Column 1 - About ACL](/about-acl) 1. [About Community Living](/about-community-living) 2. [About the Aging and Disability Networks](/programs/aging-and-disability-networks "The aging and disability networks are made up of local, state, and national organizations and committed advocates working to support older adults and people with disabilities. ") 3. [Mission & Vision](/about-acl) 4. [Organization](/about-acl/organization) 1. [Organizational Chart](/about-acl/organization/organizational-chart) 2. [Leadership](/about-acl/organization/leadership) 3. [Regional Offices](/about-acl/regional-offices) 5. [History](/about-acl/history) 6. [Budget](/about-acl/budget) 7. [Policy and Regulations](/about-acl/policy-and-regulations) 8. [Public Input](/about-acl/public-input) 9. [Reports to Congress and the President](/about-acl/reports-congress-and-president) 2. [Column 2 - About ACL](/about-acl) 1. [Authorizing Statutes](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes) 1. [Developmental Disabilities Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/developmental-disabilities-assistance-and-bill-rights-act-2000) 2. [Older Americans Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/older-americans-act) 3. [Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/workforce-innovation-and-opportunity-act) 4. [Elder Justice Act](/about-acl/elder-justice-act) 5. [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/health-insurance-portability-and-accountability-act-hipaa) 6. [Help America Vote Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/help-america-vote-act) 7. [Medicare Improvements for Patients & Providers Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/medicare-improvements-patients-and-providers-act-2008) 8. [Public Health Service Act](/about-acl/authorizing-statutes/public-health-service-act) 9. [Rehabilitation Act](/about-acl/rehabilitation-act) 2. [Working at ACL](/about-acl/working-acl) 3. [Contact Us](/contact) 1. [Home](/) 2. [ACL Blog](/news-and-events/acl-blog) 3. Celebrating 50 Years of the Architectural Barriers Act # Celebrating 50 Years of the Architectural Barriers Act ## Newsroom - Left Nav - - [Latest News](/news) - [ACL Updates](https://acl.gov/subscribe) - [Announcements](/news-and-events/announcements) - [ACL Blog](/news-and-events/acl-blog) - [Ready-to-publish materials](/news-and-events/downloads-and-multimedia) - [ACL Logos](/news-and-events/graphics/graphics) - [Articles, Infographics, and Fact Sheets](/news-and-events/fact-sheets/publications-and-fact-sheets) - [Videos](/news-and-events/videos/videos) - [For Reporters](/news-and-events/for-reporters) - [Story Ideas](/news-and-events/story-ideas/story-ideas) - [Communicating with Older Adults](/news-and-events/communicating-older-adults/communication-planning-tips) - [FOIA](/FOIA) - [Events and Observances](/news-and-events/events-and-observances) - [Speeches and Testimony](/news-and-events/speeches-and-testimony) September 7, 2018 Lance Robertson, Former Administrator and Assistant Secretary for Aging ![Access Board ABA Anniversary Event Panel](/sites/default/files/inline-images/Access%20Board%20ABA%20Anniversary%20Panel%20web.jpg)As chair of the U.S. Access Board, I had the privilege of participating in an event today celebrating the anniversary of the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968 and the fifty years of progress it helped spark. Before the ABA was passed, accessibility standards were often inconsistent -- and just as often ignored. The American National Standards Institute developed the first accessibility standards in 1961 with the help of Easter Seals and the research of the University of Illinois. Many states used these early standards to develop accessibility requirements in their building codes. However, other states adopted access requirements that ranged from lax to nearly nonexistent. This resulted in great discrepancies in accessible design requirements from state to state, and in some cases, from city to city. This had real life impacts. It meant that a wheelchair user could easily go to the post office in one town but not in a nearby state or community. The same problem existed with respect to sidewalks, entrances, bathroom stalls, paths of travel, signage, and everything else that makes a building accessible. The Architectural Barriers Act helped solve this problem by creating a mechanism for developing and setting clear and consistent nationwide accessibility guidelines for the federal government. It literally began to open the doors of government to Americans with disabilities like never before by requiring buildings constructed or renovated with federal funds, as well as those owned or leased by the federal government, to be accessible and usable by people with disabilities. For the first time, schools, housing, offices, courts, hospitals, stadiums, post offices, and countless other facilities were available to people with disabilities. This did far more than eliminate physical barriers. It helped level the playing field by promoting greater access and equal opportunity to public education, colleges and universities, community living, employment, health care, and more. In this way, the ABA helped pave the way for the last five decades of civil rights advances for Americans of all ages with disabilities. One of the law’s lasting legacies is the innovation in design and technology it helped spur across the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. Over the years, the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR) and the Access Board – together with many other federal agencies – have invested significant resources, time, ingenuity, and rigor in generating and effectively sharing new knowledge to improve the opportunity and ability of individuals with disabilities to access the built environment, technology, and the digital world. The quest continues and so does the return on investment. We at ACL are especially proud of the important role the Access Board and NIDILRR have played in advancing the science, discipline, and esthetic of what we now call universal design. Universal design uses a broad-spectrum of ideas and methods to design and develop buildings, products, and environments that are inherently accessible to all people of all ages and abilities. As he was signing the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act into law in 1990, President George H.W. Bush said the law would take a sledgehammer to the shameful wall of exclusion that has prevented far too many with disabilities from exercising their full rights and responsibilities. It is important to recognize and celebrate that the first blow against this wall was struck by the Architectural Barriers Act and those that made it possible. We are a better nation and a better people because of it, and we remain committed to advancing the principles behind it. Last modified on 05/07/2020*
text/markdown	1.974208	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/CRI/CRI-1983/CRI-1983-TOGO-REPUBLIC-OF/txt.json	TOGO, REPUBLIC OF Articles and editorials Benin, Togo Offer Contrasting Pictures, 25671 [23SE]
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/making-jails-productive.json	# Making Jails Productive R Miller, G E Sexton, V J Jacobsen ## Additional Details ### Downloads - PDF ## Side navigation - NIJ Journal - Podcasts - Publications Listing - Multimedia Listing - Rated Practices on CrimeSolutions - Rated Programs on CrimeSolutions - Software & Databases - Datasets - Patents ### Related Topics Adult correctional facilitiesFamilies of inmatesInmate programsCorrectional industriesInmate compensation ### Similar Publications - WATCh: Montana's In-Prison DUI Treatment Program - "The Prison System Doesn’t Make It Comfortable to Visit”: Prison Visitation From the Perspectives of People Incarcerated and Family Members - Prison Contraband: Prevalence, Impacts, and Interdiction Strategies
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nsa.gov/Portals/75/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/friedman-documents/patent-equipment/FOLDER_069/41715609075491.pdf.json	TO a Mr. Friedman, AFSA-OO'r DATB: 18 September 50 FR.OM I AFSA-O)Al SUBJBCT: The NC5 searches for isomorphs by patternizing according to one of several rules and then matches by sorting. AFSA-351 has built one stage of a continuous isomorphic patternizer which patternizes by measuring the distance to·a recurrence, which can be tested on the Tessie or ASAF 27. The presently used systems for coincidence matching involve identity after translation, plugging into a matrix, blackout, or baud identity. Your paper is the earliest seen on the subject. Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 09-12-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a # ~ '"' A"!;·~ r ...~ •'""""· ..............~-" ### : i ._: t .. ; ,, .-~ ~, ?'~ ..~ hi~~ - i ·';,~ .~ ;~ : ## i :: I~ \ ## ' ' l a. ;; t,~ ':" ... ,, : .i '1 "•t .11 •. -- .. 'C ' .. _.:/ J ....)) .. -.J
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/railroads.dot.gov/elibrary-search?f[0]=document_series:14971&f[1]=subject:14486&f[2]=subject:14501.json	- Home ## Document Type - Accidents & Fatalities(1) - Conference & Presentations(11) - Emergency & Safety(4) - Public Affairs & Policy(1) - Reports(46) - Other Reports(25) - Reports to Congress(1) - Research Results(5) - (-)Technical Reports(15) ## Subjects - Show all(2222) - Evaluation(295) - Hazardous Materials(150) - Track(147) - Track/Train Interactions(98) - Facilities & Test Equipment(97) - Highway-Rail Grade Crossings(95) - Human Factors(95) - Positive Train Control(91) - Tracks & Structures(89) - Signal and Train Control(77) - Rolling Stock(74) - Maglev(56) - Grade Crossing Technology(53) - Freight Operations(52) - Passenger Rail(51) - Rail and Infrastructure Integrity(48) - Grants & Financial Assistance(47) - High-Speed Passenger Rail(44) - Crashworthiness - Passenger Equipment(37) - Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Warning Systems(35) - Best Practices(35) - Safety Performance Measures(30) - Braking Systems(27) - Grade Crossing and Trespass Outreach/Education(24) - Safety Regulatory Analysis(23) - Locomotive Standards (Safety & Noise)(23) - Grade Crossing Modeling and Simulation(22) - Safety Advisories(20) - Amtrak(19) - Accident Reduction(18) - Train Control(18) - Technology Transfer(17) - (-)Trespasser Programs(13) - Communications(12) - Environmental Protection(10) - Testing(10) - Emergency Preparedness(9) - Work Schedule & Sleep Patterns(9) - Program Evaluation(9) - Fatigue Management(8) - Occupant Protection(8) - Crashworthiness - Tank Car(7) - Collision(7) - Trespass Countermeasures(7) - Accident Investigations(6) - Bridge and Structures Safety(6) - USDOT National Highway-Rail Crossing Inventory(6) - Railroad Employees(6) - Motive Power and Equipment(5) - Operating Practices(5) - Fiber Optic(5) - Grade Crossings(5) - Cellular Telephones/Other Electronic Devices(4) - Intelligent Railroad Systems(4) - Social & Economic Impacts(4) - Worker Protection(3) - Train Horn Noise(3) - Analysis(3) - Shared Corridor(3) - Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety(3) - Continuous Welded Rail(2) - Emergency Notification Systems(2) - Industrial Hygiene(2) - Intercity Passenger Rail Investment (2) - Occupational Noise Exposure(2) - Railroad System Issues(2) - Railroad System Oversight(2) - Sleep Disorders(2) - (-)Switching Operations(2) - Autonomous(2) - Security(2) - Automated Track Inspection Program (ATIP)(1) - Drug and Alcohol Program(1) - Enforcement(1) - Hours of Service(1) - Railroad Safety Information Management(1) - Railroad Safety Technical Training Standards(1) - Remote Control Locomotive Operations(1) - Roadway Maintenance Machine Safety(1) - Risk Assessment(1) - Crew Resource Management (CRM)(1) - Heavy Axle Load (HAL)(1) - Automation(1) - Laboratory(1) # eLibrary Search Your Selections: - Reset - (-)Technical Reports(15) - (-)Trespasser Programs(13) - (-)Switching Operations(2) The FRA eLibrary contains all the documents that are found throughout the FRA Public Website. Multiple pages on the website may link to the same eLibrary item based on its set of metatdata. Can I find All FRA Documents in the Library? Some "documents" may not appear here for the following reasons: - Document resides on an external site for the record of source, links to the document are provided in context but not in the library as FRA does not maintain this record. This document lives on another website. - Document has not yet been assigned keywords. - Document is historical and has been removed from library to avoid confusion with current publications. - Document is public affairs & policy related, such as press releases, speeches, testimony, or fact sheet. These press-related documents can now be found in the FRA Newsroom. - Document is related to rules and notices. This information can now be found on the Rulemakings search and the Notices search , respectively. To search an exact document title or key phrase, place quotations around the text. Example: "U.S. Government Grade Crossing Research & Stakeholder Engagement" Entering keywords without quotations will search the eLibrary for all occurrences of the keywords. 19Oct2020 Technical Reports Law Enforcement Strategies for Reducing Trespassing – Pilot Program AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Trespasser Programs Keywords: FRA, railroads, law enforcement, trespass, right-of-way Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-20/44OfficeRDI-23 4Sep2020 Technical Reports Trespass Risk in Quiet Zones AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Trespass Countermeasures, Trespasser Programs Keywords: FRA, railroads, light rail, transit, trespass, right-of-way, quiet zone Abstract: FRA sponsored a before-and-after research project looking at the risk of trespassing in quiet zones. Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-20/37OfficeRDI-23 20May2019 Technical Reports Effect of Grade Separation on Pedestrian Railroad Trespass Activity at Shuttlesworth Drive in Collegeville, AL AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Highway-Rail Grade Crossings, Trespasser Programs Keywords: trespass, highway railroad grade crossing, railroads, railroad overpass bridge Abstract:The Volpe Center, under the direction of FRA’s Office of Research, Development, and Technology, conducted a research study to evaluate the effects of closing and replacing the... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-19/11OfficeRDI-23 29Mar2019 Technical Reports Railroad Implemented Countermeasures to Prevent Suicide: Review of Public Information AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Grade Crossing and Trespass Outreach/Education, Trespasser Programs Keywords: Suicide, railroad, trespass, countermeasure, suicide prevention Abstract: This report discusses 14 rail carriers' suicide prevention efforts. Partnership with suicide prevention group was one of the most common strategies. Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-19/04OfficeRDI-24 1Mar2017 Technical Reports Reporting of Suicide and Trespass Incidents by Online Media in the United States AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Trespasser Programs Keywords: : Railroad, suicide, trespass, media, reporting, suicide contagion, Werther effect Abstract:: The reporting of a suicide death in the media has the potential to increase imitative suicide attempts for vulnerable individuals who read the article, a phenomenon known as... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-17/02OfficeRDI-24 # Pagination - 1 - 2 - 3 - ››› - »Last »
text/markdown	5.012927	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/ECONI/ECONI-1995-09/ECONI-1995-09-Pg14/txt.json	``` [Economic Indicators September, 1995] [Page Number 14] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT Total nonagricultural employment as measured by the payroll survey rose by 249,000 in August. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ [Thousands of wage and salary workers;\1\ seasonally adjusted] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Goods-producing industries Service-producing industries Total ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- nonagri- Manufacturing Government Period --------------------------- Transportation Finance, ----------------- cultural Total\2\ Construction Non- Total and public Wholesale Retail insurance, Services employ- Total Durable durable utilities trade trade and real Total Federal ment goods goods estate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1985......................................... 97,387 24,842 4,668 19,248 11,458 7,790 72,544 5,233 5,727 17,315 5,948 21,927 16,394 2,875 1986......................................... 99,344 24,533 4,810 18,947 11,195 7,752 74,811 5,247 5,761 17,880 6,273 22,957 16,693 2,899 1987......................................... 101,958 24,674 4,958 18,999 11,154 7,845 77,284 5,362 5,848 18,422 6,533 24,110 17,010 2,943 1988......................................... 105,210 25,125 5,098 19,314 11,363 7,951 80,086 5,514 6,030 19,023 6,630 25,504 17,386 2,971 1989......................................... 107,895 25,254 5,171 19,391 11,394 7,997 82,642 5,625 6,187 19,475 6,668 26,907 17,779 2,988 1990......................................... 109,419 24,905 5,120 19,076 11,109 7,968 84,514 5,793 6,173 19,601 6,709 27,934 18,304 3,085 1991......................................... 108,256 23,745 4,650 18,406 10,569 7,837 84,511 5,762 6,081 19,284 6,646 28,336 18,402 2,966 1992......................................... 108,604 23,231 4,492 18,104 10,277 7,827 85,373 5,721 5,997 19,356 6,602 29,052 18,645 2,969 1993......................................... 110,730 23,352 4,668 18,075 10,221 7,854 87,378 5,829 5,981 19,773 6,757 30,197 18,841 2,915 1994......................................... 114,034 23,913 5,010 18,303 10,431 7,872 90,121 6,006 6,140 20,437 6,933 31,488 19,118 2,870 1994:Aug..................................... 114,510 23,981 5,038 18,346 10,465 7,881 90,529 6,045 6,163 20,497 6,948 31,693 19,183 2,861 Sept................................... 114,762 24,030 5,077 18,355 10,481 7,874 90,732 6,048 6,181 20,565 6,942 31,789 19,207 2,863 Oct.................................... 114,935 24,081 5,088 18,398 10,513 7,885 90,854 6,061 6,195 20,580 6,935 31,888 19,195 2,858 Nov.................................... 115,427 24,175 5,144 18,439 10,550 7,889 91,252 6,092 6,210 20,703 6,937 32,035 19,275 2,854 Dec.................................... 115,624 24,230 5,166 18,472 10,574 7,898 91,394 6,121 6,229 20,759 6,931 32,135 19,219 2,853 1995:Jan..................................... 115,810 24,293 5,201 18,502 10,596 7,906 91,517 6,129 6,251 20,760 6,927 32,228 19,222 2,838 Feb.................................... 116,123 24,324 5,213 18,523 10,622 7,901 91,799 6,156 6,275 20,794 6,929 32,404 19,241 2,831 Mar.................................... 116,302 24,370 5,256 18,525 10,633 7,892 91,932 6,175 6,287 20,760 6,938 32,524 19,248 2,828 Apr.................................... 116,310 24,331 5,242 18,506 10,632 7,874 91,979 6,184 6,300 20,762 6,924 32,548 19,261 2,826 May.................................... 116,248 24,228 5,190 18,456 10,611 7,845 92,020 6,177 6,298 20,747 6,925 32,630 19,243 2,831 June................................... 116,547 24,240 5,230 18,428 10,597 7,831 92,307 6,192 6,320 20,798 6,930 32,784 19,283 2,838 Julyp.................................. 116,553 24,144 5,227 18,340 10,564 7,776 92,409 6,194 6,332 20,855 6,935 32,810 19,283 2,837 Augp................................... 116,802 24,157 5,229 18,352 10,582 7,770 92,645 6,211 6,334 20,840 6,950 32,954 19,356 2,834 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\Includes all full- and part- time wage and salary workers in nonagricultural establishments who received pay for any part of the pay period which includes the 12th of the month. Excludes proprietors, self-employed persons, domestic servants, and personnel of the Armed Forces. Total in this table not comparable with estimates of nonagricultural employment of the civilian labor force, shown on p. 11, which include proprietors, self- employed persons, and domestic servants; which count persons as employed when they are not at work because of industrial disputes, bad weather, etc., even if they are not paid for the time off; and which are based on a sample of the working-age population, whereas the estimates in this table are based on reports from employing establishments. In the series shown here, persons who work at more than one job are counted each time they appear on a payroll, in contrast to the series shown on p. 11, where persons are counted only once--as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force. \2\Includes mining, not shown separately. Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. ```
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-Transparency-Initiatives/Historical-Releases/Vietnam-Powmia-Documents/index.html?smdpage14709=5.json	An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock (lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Skip to main content (Press Enter). National Security Agency/Central Security Service Search Search Search - About - Leadership - Mission & Combat Support - Cybersecurity - Signals Intelligence - Central Security Service - Locations - Research - Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility - Cybersecurity Collaboration Center - Collaborative Partnerships - Enduring Security Framework - DIB Cybersecurity Services - Standards and Certifications - Artificial Intelligence Security Center - Press Room - Press Releases & Statements - News & Highlights - Declassification & Transparency Initiatives - Cybersecurity Advisories & Guidance - Telework and Mobile Security Guidance - DoD Microelectronics Guidance - Research Publications - Careers - Unique Pathways - Innovation - History - National Cryptologic Museum - Cryptologic History - National Cryptologic Memorial # Vietnam Prisoner of War/Missing in Action (POW/MIA) Documents HomeHelpful LinksNSA FOIADeclassification & Transparency InitiativesHistorical ReleasesVietnam Powmia Documents ## September 2014 On 13 July 1992, the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs levied a task on NSA/CSS to review SIGINT reporting for relevance to the Vietnam POW/MIA issue and possible correlation to individual POW/MIA cases. NSA/CSS provided the Committee with three Correlation Studies, produced in August 1992, September 1993, and September 1996. Most of the information mentioned in these studies is chronologically organized by Reference Number (RefNo), which is listed as case #, and includes the incident date. The Department of Defense assigned RefNos to each incident in which there was the potential loss of life or capture. There are some entries without a RefNo or case #, but do have the incident date. The earliest incident is dated 1951 and the last 1988. Over the next several months, NSA/CSS will post over 1600 additional documents related to POW/MIAs in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. The documents are NSA field site reporting, NSA end product, summary reporting, memoranda, watch officers notes, and analyst communications. For ease of searching, those documents will be accessible under links posted for each RefNo for which they contain pertinent information. The correlation studies and the documents related to the incidents have been previously released under the FOIA in the past, but they have never before been posted together, facilitating access to families and historians. In addition, the documents have been reviewed using the most current guidance, making this release the most complete of any prior releases. ###   Search Page 5 of 100 - 1 - ... - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - ... - 100 ##### NSA.GOV - About - Leadership - Cybersecurity Collaboration Center - National Cryptologic Museum - Contact NSA - Accessibility - ABA Notice - Site Policies ##### CULTURE - Core Values - Operating Authorities - Civil Liberties, Privacy, & Transparency Office - Compliance - Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, & Accessibility - General Counsel - NSA Inspector General ##### HELPFUL LINKS -   - NSA Freedom of Information Act - Privacy Act Requests - Request a Speaker - Prepublication Review - Media Inquiry - Frequently Asked Questions ##### RESOURCES - Classified Materiel Conversion - Commercial Solutions for Classified Program (CSfC) - Cryptographic Support Services - Media Destruction Guidance - NSA Open Source ##### RELATED LINKS - DNI.gov - Defense.gov - IC on the Record - Intelligence.gov - NSA.GOV - About - Leadership - Cybersecurity Collaboration Center - National Cryptologic Museum - Contact NSA - Accessibility - ABA Notice - Site Policies - CULTURE - Core Values - Operating Authorities - Civil Liberties & Privacy - Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, & Accessibility - General Counsel - NSA Inspector General - HELPFUL LINKS - NSA Freedom of Information Act - Privacy Act Requests - Frequently Asked Questions - Request a Speaker - Prepublication Review - Media Inquiry - RESOURCES - Commercial Solutions for Classified Material (CSFC) - Media Destruction Guidance - Classified Materiel Conversion - Cross Domain Services - NSA Open Source - NSA Exhibit Roadshow - RELATED LINKS - DNI.gov - Defense.gov - IC on the Record - Intelligence.gov - Privacy & Security     Links Disclaimer     Section 508     Web Policy     Plain Writing Act     DOD IG     No FEAR Act     Imagery Use     FOIA     Open GOV     Strategic Plan     USA.gov     Small Business Act     Site Map   Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/stats.bls.gov/cps/aa2012/cpsaat24.pdf.json	## HOUSEHOLD DATA ANNUALAVERAGES 24. Unemployed persons by marital status, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, age, and sex [Numbers in thousands] Marital status, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, and age Men Women Unemployed Unemployment rates Unemployed Unemployment rates 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 Total, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,684 6,771 9.4 8.2 6,063 5,734 8.5 7.9 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,671 2,274 5.8 4.9 2,031 1,915 5.6 5.3 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,186 1,005 11.1 9.4 1,420 1,286 9.7 8.7 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,827 3,492 15.1 13.7 2,612 2,533 12.5 11.8 White, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,631 4,931 8.3 7.4 4,257 3,985 7.5 7.0 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,081 1,764 5.3 4.6 1,630 1,539 5.3 5.1 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 767 10.3 8.8 1,060 947 9.2 8.3 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,648 2,399 13.4 12.2 1,567 1,499 10.5 9.9 Black or African American, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,502 1,292 17.8 15.0 1,329 1,252 14.1 12.8 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385 303 11.1 8.4 218 200 7.8 6.8 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 177 16.0 13.3 265 252 11.8 10.9 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 812 24.8 22.1 846 800 19.3 17.5 Asian, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 249 6.8 5.8 250 234 7.3 6.1 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 122 5.2 4.4 130 111 6.2 4.8 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 25 6.4 7.2 42 37 9.0 6.3 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 102 10.9 8.5 78 86 9.2 8.9 Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 16 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,527 1,383 11.2 9.9 1,102 1,130 11.8 10.9 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 606 498 8.6 6.9 421 396 10.0 8.6 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 166 10.5 9.3 217 243 10.7 11.0 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745 720 15.3 14.2 464 491 15.1 13.8 Total, 25 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,623 4,821 7.9 6.8 4,490 4,234 7.3 6.8 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,590 2,207 5.7 4.9 1,910 1,815 5.4 5.1 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,141 961 10.9 9.2 1,353 1,229 9.5 8.6 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,892 1,654 12.3 10.6 1,227 1,189 10.0 9.4 White, 25 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,137 3,555 7.1 6.1 3,181 3,003 6.5 6.1 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,013 1,710 5.3 4.5 1,528 1,459 5.1 4.9 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 737 10.2 8.6 1,009 904 9.0 8.2 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,253 1,107 10.6 9.4 645 640 7.8 7.7 Black or African American, 25 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,082 883 15.2 12.3 951 878 11.9 10.6 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378 292 11.1 8.3 207 188 7.6 6.6 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 167 15.7 13.0 254 242 11.5 10.7 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 424 20.9 17.9 490 448 15.9 14.2 Asian, 25 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 198 6.0 5.0 209 187 6.8 5.4 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 121 5.1 4.4 127 108 6.1 4.7 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 24 6.2 7.0 41 35 9.0 6.1 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 53 9.0 6.4 41 44 7.3 6.9 Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 25 years and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,068 941 9.5 8.1 788 805 10.2 9.5 Married, spouse present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582 476 8.6 6.9 386 367 9.6 8.4 Widowed, divorced, or separated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 153 10.2 8.9 203 222 10.5 10.5 Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 312 11.4 10.6 200 216 11.4 10.8 NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white, black or African American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races. Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data. ## 1
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.cadc.33599/gov.uscourts.cadc.33599.1207918599.0.pdf.json	Appeal Nos. 17-7035 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT American Society for Testing and Materials; National Fire Protection Association, Inc.; American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc., Appellees, v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Hon. Tanya S. Chutkan, Case Nos. 1:13-cv-01215-TSC-DAR and 1:14-cv-00857-TSC-DAR (consolidated) CERTIFICATE AS TO PARTIES, RULINGS, AND RELATED CASES Andrew P. Bridges FENWICK & WEST LLP 555 California Street, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 875-2300 Facsimile: (415) 281-1350 Attorneys for Respondent Public.Resource.Org, Inc., April 6, 2017 USCA Case #17-7035 Document #1669988 Filed: 04/06/2017 Page 1 of 5 1 Pursuant to the Clerk’s Order of March 7, 2017, Defendant-Appellant Public.Resource.Org, Inc. certifies as follows: A. Parties and Amici The parties who appeared below are Defendant-Appellant Public.Resource.Org, Inc. and Plaintiffs-Appellees American Society for Testing and Materials d/b/a ASTM International, National Fire Protection Association, Inc., American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers, American Educational Research Association, Inc., American Psychological Association, Inc., and National Council on Measurement in Education, Inc. All of the aforementioned parties now appear before this Court in this consolidated appeal. The amici who appeared below are the American National Standards Institute, Inc., American Society of Safety Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, North American Energy Standards Board, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., American Insurance Association, International Code Council, Inc., Public Knowledge, Knowledge Ecology International, American Library Association, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Sina Bahram, Prof. David Ardia, Prof. Stacey L. Dogan, Prof. Pamela USCA Case #17-7035 Document #1669988 Filed: 04/06/2017 Page 2 of 5 2 Samuelson, Prof. Jessica M. Silbey, Prof. Rebecca L. Tushnet, Prof. Jennifer Urban, and Prof. Jonathan Zittrain. B. Rulings Under Review Defendant-Appellant Public.Resource.Org seeks review of the following rulings by the Honorable Tanya S. Chutkan, United States District Judge for the District of Columbia: 1. American Society for Testing and Materials et al. v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 1:13-cv-01215-TSC-DAR  Dkt. No. 172, Order Denying Motion to Strike Expert Report, entered September 21, 2016.  Dkt. No. 175, Memorandum and Opinion, and Dkt. No. 176, Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Defendant’s Cross-motion for Summary Judgment, entered February 2, 2017.  Dkt. No. 182, Amended Order, entered April 3, 2017. 2. American Educational Research Association et al. v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 1:14-cv-00857-TSC-DAR  Dkt. No. 115, Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Strike Expert Declaration, entered September 21, 2016.  Dkt. No. 117, Memorandum and Opinion, and Dkt. No. 118, Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying USCA Case #17-7035 Document #1669988 Filed: 04/06/2017 Page 3 of 5 3 Defendant’s Cross-motion for Summary Judgment, entered February 2, 2017. C. Related Cases This case was consolidated with Case No. 17-7039, American Educational Research Association, et al. v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. Otherwise there are no other related cases of which counsel are aware. Dated: April 6, 2017 FENWICK & WEST LLP By: /s/ Andrew P. Bridges Andrew P. Bridges Attorneys for Respondent Public.Resource.Org, Inc., USCA Case #17-7035 Document #1669988 Filed: 04/06/2017 Page 4 of 5 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Andrew P. Bridges, hereby certify that on April 6, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing CERTIFICATE AS TO PARTIES, RULINGS, AND RELATED CASES with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit through the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will serve all Counsel who are registered CM/ECF users. Dated: April 6, 2017 FENWICK & WEST LLP 555 California Street, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 875-2300 Facsimile: (415) 281-1350 By: /s/ Andrew P. Bridges Andrew P. Bridges Attorneys for Respondent Public.Resource.Org, Inc., USCA Case #17-7035 Document #1669988 Filed: 04/06/2017 Page 5 of 5
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.gud.6668.6.0.pdf.json	Case 1:06-cr-00030 Document 6 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 1 of 2 Case 1:06-cr-00030 Document 6 Filed 08/28/2006 Page 2 of 2
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.mmc.gov/wp-content/uploads/Long_NDG_011415.pdf.json	4340 East - West Highway • Room 700 • Bethesda, MD 20814 - 4498 • T: 301.504.0087 • F: 301.504.0099 www.mmc.gov 14 January 2015 Ms. Kristy Long Office of Protected Resources National Marine Fisheries Service 7600 Sand Point Way Northeast Building 4, Room 2122 - 4 Seattle, WA 98115 Dear Ms. Long: The Marine Mammal Commission (the Commission), in consultation with its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals, has reviewed the National Marine Fisheries Service ’s (NMFS) 16 December 2014 notice of intent (79 Fed. Reg. 74710) to prepar e guidelines for safely deterring marine mammals under its jurisdiction (whales, dolphins, seals, and sea lions). The draft national guidelines would be circulated for public review and comment at a later date. Background Section 101(a)(4)(B) of the Mari ne Mammal Protection Act (the MMPA) directs NMFS to prepare guidelines for safely deterring marine mammals, including specific measures for species that are listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Subsection (C) authorizes NMFS to issue regulations prohibiting any forms of deterrence that are determined to have a significant adverse effect on marine mammals. The Commission understands that NMFS has yet to publish such guidelines or regulations regarding the use of safe deterrent methods under section 101(a)(4) but has posted guidance for some species on its various websites 1 . It is not clear whether NMFS intends to publish any regulations on prohibited deterrents in conjunction with the national guidelines that currently are unde r development. As background in preparing national guidelines, NMFS has requested input on which deterrents should be considered and evaluated for approval. Specifically, NMFS asked stakeholders to identify deterrent devices or techniques to be considered and to provide information on (1) the targeted marine mammal species or species groups, (2) the nature of the interaction and how it causes damage to gear, catch, or property or endangers humans, (3) the manner in which the deterrents are deployed or used , (4) relevant research/data on the deterrent and its effects on targeted and non - targeted species, and (5) other implementation considerations. Recommendations In previous correspondence commenting on a proposed rule regarding the use of deterrents (enclosed letter of 30 August 1995), the Commission made a number of general and specific 1 For example, http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/marine_mammals/deterring_qa.html .Ms. Kristy Long 14 January 2015 Page 2 recommendations to NMFS. S ome of those recommendations are reiterated herein to inform the development of draft guidelines , including the need to : • e xplain how imminent the perceived damage to fishing gear, catch, or private property or the threat to human safety must be before deterrence actions can be taken and how severe the dam age to property must be to warrant intervention; • l imit the use of deterrents to protect private property when pinnipeds are in well - established haul - out or rookery sites (i.e., ensure adequate protection of important marine mammal habitat before conflicts occur); • define clearly “serious injury” — as noted in the Federal Register notice, NMFS has since developed criteria for distinguishing serious from non - serious injuries; and • a ddress concerns about the unrestricted use of noisemakers and explosives as deter rence measures, including the need to specify the type and intensities of noise that may be used. Regarding the third bullet, the Commission notes that NMFS has defined a serious injury 2 as one that is more likely than not to lead to the death of the marine mammal. Although section 101(a)(4)(A) specifies that deterrence measures are acceptable “as long as they do not result in the death or serious injury of a marine mammal,” the Commissio n questions whether deterrence practices that could have up to a 50 percent likelihood of causing fatal or serious injuries satisfy the requirement under section 101(a)(4)(B) that they be “safe.” In response to NMFS’s request for input on which deterrents it should consider under the planned national guidelines, the Commission recommends that NMFS review deterrents currently in use in the United States including: • u nderwater acoustic devices (i.e., pingers in gillnet fisheries , seal scarers at fish farms, and the “Orca Saver” device in the Alaska longline fishery 3 • s eal bombs and other underwater explosives; ); • i n - air noise makers (e.g., horns, whistles, bells, sirens, and other acoustic devices ) ; • e lectrified wires and devices to prevent pinnipeds from haul ing out at dangerous or unwanted locations or from accessing fish farms and ladders ; • w ater jets, hoses, sprinklers to prevent pinnipeds from hauling out in dangerous or unwanted places; • r ubber bullets and other sub - lethal proj ectiles fired by guns, bows, s lingshots , etc.; • c rowding boards ; and • n etting and other types of physical barriers. In addition to deterrents needed to protect human safety, the Commission recommends that NMFS consider deterrents that can safely prevent endangere d or threatened marine mammals (particularly pinnipeds) from gaining access to areas where they are exposed to risks from human activities, hazardous substances, machinery, equipment, or installations that could cause physical harm or prompt behavioral modifications that lead to animals becoming nuisances . As a general 2 www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/serious_injury_policy.pdf . 3 http://mustadautoline.com/products/orcas_saver .Ms. Kristy Long 14 January 2015 Page 3 matter, the Commission believes that the guidelines should classify approved deterren t techniques into several categories relative to their availability for use and their expected effectiveness. For example, catego ries could include devices or methods which are readily available for use by the public, those requiring specific training or autho rization before deployment, those that should not be used except in cases of immediate threat of personal injury or safety, a nd those requiring further research. The Commission also recommends that NMFS undertake actions necessary to ensure adequate outreach on the use of deterrents and establish monitoring and research programs capable of rigorously assessing their effectivene ss and effects on marine mammals, particularly in the case of fisheries. For example, Palka et al. (2008) noted an increase in pinger use in the Northeast gillnet fishery as a means of reducing harbor porpoise entanglement in nets following an outreach pro gram by the regional NMFS office. In addition to outreach, observers a nd at - sea and in - port inspect ion measures should be part of monitoring compliance and proper use of acoustic devices. Observers often are the best source of reliable information on the u se of active deterrents ( particularly for pingers, seal bombs, water s pray, or other physical contact) to ensure that the deterrents are not administered in a fashion that is harmful to marine mammals. As noted in Palka et al. (2008), the use of pingers ha s proven to be very effective in reducing harbor porpoise bycatch when properly used and maintained but may be ineffective when not used as prescribed , which highlights the need for outreach and enforcement of proper use. Palka et al. (2008) indicated th at because the relationship between bycatch rates and characteristics of the marine environment and gear (e.g., mesh size) are still not fully understood, the use of deterrents merits more data collection and analysis. In addition, S chakner et al. (2013) c alled for research to determine whether deterrent stimuli that promote “anxiety” in marine mammals prompt them to learn to avoid fishing gear, rather than merely causing an immediate response to the stimulus. They also called for research to ascertain that the prescribed use of deterrents affects the targeted marine mammals in the smallest area possible and does not impede their use of alternative habitat and forage resources. For these reasons the Commission recommends that NMFS continue to focus efforts o n improved data collection (particularly observer data), analysis, and research on marine mammal deterrents. The Commission appreciates being invited to participate in the NMFS workshop on deterrents in February 2015 and looks forward to the discussion of the comments received during this process. Kindly contact me if you or your staff has questions. Sincerely, Rebecca J. Lent, Ph.D. Executive Director EnclosureMs. Kristy Long 14 January 2015 Page 4 References Palka, D.L, M.C. Rossman, A.S. VanAtten, and C.D. Orphanides. 2008. Effects of pingers on harbour porpoise ( Phocoen a phocoena ) bycatch in the U.S. Northeast gillnet fishery. Journal of Cetacean Research Management 10:217 – 226. Schakner, Z.A., and D.T. Blumstein. 2013. Behavioral biology of marine mammal deterrents: A review and prospectus. B iological Conservation 167: 380 – 389.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2021/january-links-508.pdf.json	Negotiated Rulemaking January Links – p. 1 Links active as of January 21, 2022 U.S. Department of Education Negotiated Rulemaking Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility Committee January 18-21, 2022 Links shared in the Chat during session 1 January 18, 2022, Day 1 Description Link Provided by Potential Advisor Details https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-l-halmon-mba-0311a4b8/ Brad Adams, Primary, Proprietary Institutions January 19, 2022, Day 2 Description Link Provided by House Hearing on Department of Education Priorities https://www.c-span.org/video/?512743-1/house-hearing-departmenteducation-prioritiesBrad Adams, Primary, Proprietary Institutions Framework for accountability for federal financial assistance programs (Metrics between 3 and 5 years after enrollment) https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20210603- Mats-Turner.pdf Adam Looney, Advisor, Labor Economist / Experience in Higher Education Data Cellini and Blanchard Cosmetology Programs, Accountability Policy, and the Problem of Underreported Income https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dAhIMzeVF7pYSJSU2ovwhFapJbeBOy _d/view Adam Looney, Advisor, Labor Economist / Experience in Higher Education Data College Board Trends in Student Aid Data https://research.collegeboard.org/trends/student-aid Adam Looney, Advisor, Labor Economist / Experience in Higher Education Data Negotiated Rulemaking January Links – p. 2 Links active as of January 21, 2022 Billions in TipRelated Tax Noncompliance Are Not Fully Addressed and Tip Agreements Are Generally Not Enforced Audit Report 2018 https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2018reports/201830081 fr.pdf Brad Adams, Primary, Proprietary Institutions Brookings Information Disclosure and College Choice Report https://www.brookings.edu/research/information-disclosure-andcollege-choice/Adam Looney, Advisor, Labor Economist / Experience in Higher Education Data January 20, 2022 Day 3 Description Link Provided by None January 21, 2022, Day 4 Description Link Provided by Veterans Education Projects Research Study regarding 90/10 https://veteranseducationproject.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/02/Veterans-Education-Project-ResearchStudy.pdfBrad Adams, Primary, Proprietary Institutions Law Enforcement Actions Against Predatory Colleges https://vetsedsuccess.org/law-enforcement-actions-againstpredatory-colleges/Carney King, Alternate, Students/Student Loan Borrowers
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.state.gov/reports/2016-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/bulgaria/index.html.json	HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2016 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices…Bulgaria # 2016 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Bulgaria In this section / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from: - a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings - b. Disappearance - c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment - d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention - e. Denial of Fair Public Trial - f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence - Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties, Including: - a. Freedom of Speech and Press - b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association - c. Freedom of Religion - d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons - Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process - Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government - Section 5. Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights - Section 6. Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons - Section 7. Worker Rights - a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining - b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor - c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment - d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation - e. Acceptable Conditions of Work ## EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bulgaria is a constitutional republic governed by a freely elected unitary parliament. The constitution vests legislative authority in the unicameral National Assembly. A coalition government headed by a prime minister led the country. A presidential election was held in November, and the Central Election Commission did not report any major election irregularities. Observers characterized the parliamentary elections in 2014 as complying “with the fundamental freedoms of expression, association, and assembly” but also noted pervasive allegations of vote buying and the use of racist, xenophobic, and inflammatory rhetoric throughout the election campaign. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. The marginalization of and societal intolerance towards the Romani minority remained the country’s most pressing human rights problem. A growing societal intolerance to refugees and continued deterioration of the media environment due to corporate and political dependence were also problematic. Corruption continued to be a drag on the government’s capabilities and undermined public and business confidence in the judiciary and other government institutions. Other reported human rights problems included police violence; harsh conditions in prisons and detention facilities; and long delays in the judicial system. There were reports of religious discrimination and harassment; shortcomings in refugee integration processes and policies; election fraud; gender-based violence and discrimination against women; violence against children; increasing online anti-Semitism; trafficking in persons; discrimination against persons with disabilities, ethnic minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) persons; and social stigma against persons with HIV/AIDS. Child labor and discrimination against members of minorities in employment and occupation were also reported. The government took steps to prosecute and punish officials in the security services and elsewhere who committed abuses, but their actions were insufficient, and impunity was a problem. Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from: ### a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. In June the district prosecution in Burgas closed the investigation into the shooting death of an Afghani migrant. The migrant was shot by a border police officer in October 2015 near Sredets. The prosecutor concluded the use of deadly force had occurred by accident and did not constitute a crime. The law allows police to use firearms only as a last resort while doing everything possible to preserve the life of the person who is in danger. The law prohibits the use of deadly force against nonviolent offenders who are not posing a threat. According to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), the National Protection Service Act, adopted in 2015, does not provide the same safeguards. ### b. Disappearance There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances. ### c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The constitution and law prohibit such practices, but there were reports of government officials employing degrading treatment. In 2015 the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) issued a statement concluding that police brutality was a systemic problem, based on a significant number of allegations of deliberate physical mistreatment of persons detained by police. The CPT noted that the number of allegations had not decreased since 2014 and had even increased in Sofia and Burgas. The CPT concluded that men and women (including juveniles) continued to run a significant risk of mistreatment, generally consisting of slaps, kicks, and in some cases truncheon blows, both at the time of apprehension and during subsequent questioning. There were reports that police physically mistreated migrants and asylum seekers attempting to cross the border into the country (see section 2.d., Abuse of Migrants, Refugees, and Stateless Persons). Police can detain persons for 24 hours without charging them. There were occasional reports that police arrested suspects for minor offenses and physically abused them to force confessions, especially in cases involving Romani suspects. #### Prison and Detention Center Conditions Conditions in most prisons were harsh, with inadequate sanitary, living, and medical facilities. Physical Conditions: Overcrowding remained a problem in some prisons, particularly in Burgas and Pleven. Many detention centers had cells lacking adequate access to natural light. The government initiated an improvement program to implement a minimum living area of 43 square feet per prisoner by December 1. Amendments to the Execution of Punishments and Detention in Custody Act enacted in April grant exceptions to the established prisoner distribution rules, allowing prisoners to be sent to a penitentiary institution with available space rather than the one closest to their address registration. The amendments also allow for visits to prisoners in solitary confinement. After the government made significant improvements in the asylum seeker reception and irregular migrant detention centers in 2014, independent observers and the ombudsman stated that conditions deteriorated due to negligence. They also noted inadequate hygiene and sanitation, in addition to regular interruptions in the provision of food supplies and medical and interpretation services. The ombudsman reported that the significant physical deterioration of the irregular migrant detention centers and overcrowding were problems. In January the Supreme Administrative Court revoked an Interior Ministry order providing for confinement in isolation of migrants who disturbed the internal order in detention centers, asserting that the law does not provide for such disciplinary measures. Through September there were 18 deaths reported in prisons. Most of the prison facilities dated from the early 1900s, and the government built the newest facility in 1983. In its latest report from November 2015, the CPT identified persistent problems with access to medical care, custodial staff violence against prisoners, violence between prisoners, prison overcrowding, poor material conditions in detention and prison facilities, and inadequate prison health care services and low custodial staffing levels. In October the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee reported that medical personnel did not report to the prosecution service all cases of custodial staff violence against prisoners. The October Bulgarian Helsinki Committee report criticized prison hygiene, noting that many places were infested by rodents and insects. The 2015 Prison Condition Monitoring Index published by the Center for the Study of Democracy evaluated the country’s performance on four prison condition indicators. It characterized prison living conditions, social and correctional work, security and safety, and medical services as “problematic” and access to employment as “alarming.” Physical abuse of prisoners by guards occurred but was rare. As of October, the ombudsman identified five cases of police applying excessive force out of approximately 60,000 police detentions. The ombudsman criticized the 2015 reduction of prison guard personnel by 450 persons, which not only increased the risk of violence among the prisoners, but also posed a threat to prison security. NGOs received complaints about both the quality and quantity of food. The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee reported that access to natural light was inadequate and there were problems with lighting, ventilation, and access to potable water in solitary confinement units in half of the prisons it visited in the summer. The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee criticized the prison administration for reducing medical personnel, which left 16 out of the country’s 34 jails without medical services. As a result, authorities did not have medical examinations performed on detainees following reports of police abuse, and officials rarely punished offending officers. According to the ombudsman, the prison administration systematically kept prisoners continuously chained to their beds when hospitalized in a general hospital. By law prison medical facilities are part of the health system but administered by the Ministry of Justice, which oversees prisons. The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee criticized this arrangement, claiming it created a conflict of interest and a source of corruption, since prison directors appoint the doctors and the doctors are not subject to outside monitoring. The prison administration and the Commission for Protection against Discrimination received complaints from prisoners about sanctions imposed on them, the poor quality of medical services and living conditions, and mistreatment by prison guards. To reinforce their protests, inmates occasionally went on hunger strikes. The prison administration estimated that 6.8 percent of the prison population was drug dependent, based on information provided from prison medical units. Prison authorities had trouble limiting prisoner access to narcotics and other prohibited items. The ombudsman reported that the supply of sanitary materials and hot water in the women’s prison in Sliven was irregular and that there were problems with the general water supply in the Bobov Dol prison. The ombudsman also reported that there was a lack of medical services and interpreters at detention centers for irregular migrants. Administration: All prisoners have the right to work, and two days of work reduced the prison term by one day, but the prison administration offered work to only a limited number of prisoners. Prisoners alleged the system for determining the type of work regime a prisoner received was corrupt and lacked oversight. While prisoners in principle have the right to receive visitors, in many cases a lack of space to accommodate visitors limited opportunities for visits. NGOs and the ombudsman noted that visits to the country’s only prison for women and to the only correctional facility for minors caused undue hardship because of the travel time and expense. According to the ombudsman, prisoners were awarded extended time for visits from their families, but prison guards and surveillance cameras monitored those visits. NGOs claimed prisoners had inadequate recourse against bad conditions, and even though they were able to sue the state and obtain compensation, conditions did not improve. Independent Monitoring: The government permitted monitoring of prisons by independent observers, including the CPT. Improvements: With funding from the Norwegian Financial Mechanism, the government improved the living and sanitary conditions in several prisons and detention centers, including replacing the plumbing system and installing toilets in every cell at Stara Zagora prison. With its own funding, the Justice Ministry renovated the sanitary facilities in Varna, Burgas, and Sliven and made repairs and improvements at the Kremikovtsi and Plovdiv prisons. ### d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention Although the constitution and law prohibit arbitrary arrest and detention, there were reports that police at times abused their arrest and detention authority. #### ROLE OF THE POLICE AND SECURITY APPARATUS The Ministry of Interior is responsible for law enforcement, migration, and border enforcement. The State Agency for National Security (DANS), which reports to the Prime Minister’s Office, is responsible for counterintelligence, domestic intelligence analysis, and investigating corruption and organized crime. The State Intelligence Agency under the Council of Ministers is responsible for foreign intelligence, and the Military Information Service under the defense minister is responsible for military intelligence. The National Protective Service is responsible for the security of dignitaries and answers to the president. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the police and security services. Police and the prosecution service are responsible for investigating security force killings. While the government had mechanisms to investigate and punish abuse and corruption, implementation was inadequate, and impunity was a problem. #### ARREST PROCEDURES AND TREATMENT OF DETAINEES Police normally obtained a warrant prior to apprehending an individual. Police may hold a detainee for 24 hours without charge, and a prosecutor may authorize an extension of an additional 72 hours. A court must approve detention longer than 72 hours; such detentions can last up to two years. Prosecutors may not arrest military personnel without the defense minister’s approval. Authorities generally observed these laws. The law provides for recognizance, bail, and house arrest, and these measures were widely used. The law provides for the right to counsel from the time of detention, and internal regulations instruct that detainees have access to legal counsel no later than two hours after detention and that a lawyer have access to the detainee within 30 minutes of his or her arrival at the police station. In its November 2015 report, however, the CPT identified persistent problems with notification of custody, timely access to legal representation, and provision of information on rights for persons taken into custody. In a 2015 survey, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee reported that 34 percent of prisoners had no or limited access to legal representation while under arrest. In addition, the CPT noted that ex officio lawyers did not perform their function as a safeguard against police mistreatment. In 2015 the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the CPT issued reports stating that police violated detainees’ right to a lawyer, used violence during arrest, and used force during interrogation. The CPT report noted a lack of sufficient guarantees for effectively implementing legal safeguards against police mistreatment. More than a third of prisoners interviewed by the organization reported problems accessing a lawyer; 16 percent claimed police beat them during arrest; and 22 percent stated police used physical force to obtain a confession. Another 10 percent claimed to have witnessed violence against other detainees. The law provides for government-funded legal aid for low-income defendants, and defendants could choose from a list of public defenders provided by the bar associations. A national hotline provided 15-minute free legal consultations eight hours per day. The law prohibits holding detainees in custody without indictment longer than two months for those charged with general crimes, eight months for those charged with felonies, and 18 months for those charged with crimes punishable by at least 15 years’ imprisonment. Arbitrary Arrest: There were reports of arbitrary detention. Prosecutors conducted a criminal investigation against four police officers who were identified in a July 2015 amateur video that showed six police officers from the First Precinct in Sofia stopping two persons for a document check and manhandling them during their arrest. The investigation was pending as of September. Detainee’s Ability to Challenge Lawfulness of Detention before a Court: Arrested or detained persons could seek redress in court for damages caused by judicial or law enforcement authorities as long as their arrest or detention measure has been repealed. ### e. Denial of Fair Public Trial The constitution and law provide for an independent judiciary, but corruption, inefficiency, and a lack of accountability continued to be pervasive problems. Public trust in the judicial system remained extremely low because of the perception that magistrates were susceptible to political pressure and rendered unequal justice. The Supreme Judicial Council appoints, promotes, disciplines, and dismisses judges, investigators, and prosecutors. It also investigates complaints of judicial misconduct and recommends disciplinary action. Managing magistrates can also impose minor punishments. Observers criticized the lack of clearly stated motives and justifications in the council’s disciplinary decisions. Judicial and investigative backlogs remained a problem in larger jurisdictions, and long delays for criminal trials were common. The law allowed defendants to request court dismissal of the charges against them if the prosecution has not formally indicted them for more than two years in serious crime cases and one year in petty crime cases. #### TRIAL PROCEDURES The constitution and law provide for the right to a fair public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right. The law presumes defendants are innocent until proven guilty and allows them ample time and facilities to prepare a defense. All court hearings are public except for cases involving national security, endangerment of public morals, and the privacy of juvenile defendants. Defendants have the right to be informed promptly and in detail of the charges against them, with free interpretation as necessary from the moment they are charged through all their appeals. In cases involving serious crimes, two nonprofessional judges join a professional judge. If a crime carries a sentence of more than 15 years’ imprisonment, two professional judges and three lay judges hear the case. In such circumstances, a majority vote determines verdicts. The constitution and the law give defendants the right to an attorney, provided at public expense for those who cannot afford to pay for one. A defense attorney is mandatory if the alleged crime carries a possible punishment of 10 or more years in prison; if the defendant is a juvenile, foreigner, or person with mental or physical disabilities; or if the accused is absent. Defendants have the right to be present at their trial and can demand a retrial if they were convicted in absentia, unless they were evading justice at the time of the first trial. Defendants have the right to confront witnesses, examine evidence, and present their own witnesses and evidence. Defendants are not compelled to testify or confess guilt. The law provides for the right of appeal, which was widely used. Trial procedures apply equally to all defendants. #### POLITICAL PRISONERS AND DETAINEES There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees. #### CIVIL JUDICIAL PROCEDURES AND REMEDIES While the law provides for an independent and impartial judiciary in civil matters, the same long delays in criminal cases affected civil cases. Individuals may file allegations of human rights abuses with courts and with the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, which can impose fines on violators. Individuals could appeal decisions involving alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights by the state to the European Court of Human Rights once all remedies in domestic courts have been exhausted. ### f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence The constitution and law prohibit such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these provisions. The maximum period during which wiretapping is permitted in national security-related cases is 12 months. Law enforcement agencies can access electronic data traffic only in cases related to serious crime or national security. The National Bureau for Oversight of Specialized Investigative Techniques reported significant improvement in the control of wiretapping and other intrusive techniques during the first six months of the year, noting that only 6.5 percent of the inspected cases involve violations of the law. In March 2015, the Constitutional Court annulled legislative provisions obligating service providers to retain electronic communication data for up to 24 months, which, according to the ombudsman, encroached on privacy. Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties, Including: ### a. Freedom of Speech and Press The law provides for freedom of speech and press, and the government generally respected these rights. Concerns persisted, however, that corporate and political pressure combined with the growing and nontransparent concentration of media ownership and distribution networks, as well as government regulation of resources and support for the media, gravely damaged media pluralism. According to the Association of European Journalists Bulgaria (AEJ), a “culture of pressure” was steadily restricting media pluralism. A survey conducted in 2015 by the AEJ showed that 72 percent of journalists witnessed their colleagues being subjected to pressure, 67 percent stated that politicians significantly interfered with their work, 54 percent were personally prevented from freely exercising their profession, 43 percent admitted to pressure from the government and local institutions, and 41 percent were the targets of rumor spreading and slander. In January the AEJ expressed concern that public institutions could “buy” the media and influence editorial content through a provision in the law that allows direct public procurement of media airtime without transparent selection procedures. The International Research and Exchanges Board’s (IREX) 2016 media sustainability index indicated “significant shifts on the Bulgarian media ownership scene” and “a radical increase in corporate and political propaganda.” IREX noted that the media market was defined by a growing number of quasi-media, externally funded propaganda mouthpieces and progovernment propaganda outlets leading smear campaigns against politicians, journalists, and media who “do not follow the official line.” Reports of intimidation and violence against journalists continued. Freedom of Speech and Expression: Individuals criticized the government without official reprisal. In rural areas offering fewer employment opportunities, however, individuals were more hesitant to criticize local governments. The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee expressed concern over the “deterioration of the freedom of expression, particularly the freedom and ethical standards of practicing journalism.” In June Sofia Administrative Court revoked the 100,000 lev ($56,000) fine on Economedia imposed in 2015 by the Financial Supervision Commission (FSC) over publications in Capital Daily and Dnevnik Online perceived as aiming to destabilize the banking sector. As of September, Economedia was still appealing a second 50,000 lev ($28,000) fine imposed by the FSC after Economedia outlets implicated FSC chair Stoyan Mavrodiev in a money laundering case and accused him of having connections with an organized crime figure. NGOs commented that the National Assembly, which appoints the FSC chair, and other authorities declined to address the press allegations. The penal code provides for one to four years’ imprisonment for incitement to “hate speech.” The law defines hate speech as speech that instigates hatred, discrimination, or violence based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, marital or social status, or disability. In July the Open Society Institute presented a survey highlighting “a disturbing trend of increasing public occurrence and acceptance of hate speech.” NGOs noted that hate speech escalated especially around the time of elections, turning into a common form of expression, not just for xenophobic politicians but also for media and social network commentators. Paid “trolls” populated forums and social media of all media outlets, targeting political opponents with racist and xenophobic comments. As of July prosecutors had opened 12 hate crime investigations and had pursued two indictments. Press and Media Freedoms: The media were active and expressed a wide variety of views. Laws restricting “hate speech” also applied to material appearing in the print media. According to the Reporters without Borders’ 2016 World Press Freedom Index, the press environment was “dominated by corruption and collusion between media, politicians and oligarchs” and the FSC deterred journalists from “shedding light on problems with the country’s banks and the banking regulatory system.” Following a June European Court of Human Rights ruling that publishers are obliged to control the content of their forums, some online media outlets imposed stricter policies on postings. Domestic and international organizations criticized both print and electronic media for lack of ownership and financial transparency, editorial bias, and susceptibility to economic and political influence. Violence and Harassment: In January authorities in Pomorie arrested Martin Dushev on charges of severely beating journalist Stoyan Tonchev, who was hospitalized with multiple injuries to his head and body. According to Tonchev, the attack was prompted by his online criticism of the local government. In March the court released Dushev on bail and, as of September, an investigation was in progress. Censorship or Content Restrictions: Journalists continued to privately report self-censorship, editorial prohibitions on covering specific persons and subjects, and the imposition of a political point of view by corporate leaders. In July the AEJ demanded Culture Minister Vezhdi Rashidov’s resignation following his letter to the public broadcaster BNT in which he accused Georgi Angelov, the host of a morning culture show, of encouraging criticism of the government and “advised” him to be careful what he said because the government paid his salary. On April 13, Nova TV terminated its contract with cartoonist Chavdar Nikolov and removed all his cartoons from its website following posting of his cartoon featuring the prime minister as leader of a vigilante group that captures migrants at the border. Libel/Slander Laws: Libel is illegal and punishable by a 3,000-15,000 lev ($1,700-$8,400) fine and public censure. The courts usually interpreted the law in a manner favoring journalistic expression. Journalists’ reporting on corruption or mismanagement prompted many defamation cases brought by politicians, government officials, and other persons in public positions. In September the Sofia City Court exonerated the owner and editor of the online outlet e-vestnik, Ivan Bakalov, of slander charges filed by the owner of Investbank stemming from his 2011 publications on the banking system. In May the Sofia Regional Court exonerated Bakalov of the criminal charges pressed by the Investbank owner over the same publications. As of September, a lawsuit over a 2015 e-vestnik article reporting on a company’s nine million lev (five million dollar) claim against Investbank was underway in civil court. #### INTERNET FREEDOM The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content, and there were no credible reports the government monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority. According to the National Statistics Institute, approximately 59.1 percent of households had access to the internet in 2015. The security services could access electronic data with judicial permission when investigating cyber and serious crimes and electronic data traffic in cases related to serious crime or national security (also see section 1.f.). #### ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND CULTURAL EVENTS There were no government restrictions on academic freedom or cultural events. ### b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association #### FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY The constitution and law provide for freedom of assembly, and the government generally respected this right. The law requires groups requesting a permit for gatherings to give 48 hours’ notice. The law prohibits public gatherings within a security zone (16 to 66 feet) around the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers, and presidency buildings. Mayors can prohibit, suggest an alternative site for, or dismiss (if in progress) a gathering they believe poses a threat to public order, security, or traffic. #### FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION The constitution and law provide for freedom of association. While the government generally respected these rights, the law prohibits some groups, including political parties that endangered national unity, promoted racial, national, or religious hatred, violated the rights of citizens, or sought to achieve their objectives through violent means. The government generally respected the rights of individuals and groups to establish political parties or other political organizations. According to the constitution, NGOs may not pursue political goals or engage in political activity. There was no legal limitation on NGOs participating in demonstrations, discussions, or developing and debating legislative amendments as long as those activities are not part of an election campaign. The law allows NGOs to engage in other activities, such as providing services or advocacy. On July 8, Sofia City Court judge Lilia Ilieva denied the registration of political party DOST, asserting that it is an ethnic and religious organization because the majority of its founders have Turkish names, because its name, DOST, is a Turkish word, and because there are no guarantees that it will accomplish the goals in its manifesto. On July 29, the Supreme Cassation Court allowed DOST’s registration, stating that the lower court’s judgment of the ethnic and religious character of the party was hypothetical. ### c. Freedom of Religion See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/. ### d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons The constitution and law provide for freedom of movement within the country, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights. Abuse of Migrants, Refugees, and Stateless Persons: Human rights organizations continued to report police and civilian vigilante violence against migrants and asylum seekers, including assaults, beating, and humiliation, at the country’s borders. In June the prosecution brought charges of xenophobia-motivated attempted murder against two men who attacked and stabbed an asylum seeker returning to a refugee center after a trip to the grocery store. Human rights organizations claimed that data indicated the government employed violence and forceful pushbacks to prevent access to the border. In January, Human Rights Watch released a report describing 59 cases of asylum seekers from Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan being pushed back to Turkey, with 46 of them claiming to have been robbed and beaten by border guards. On November 17, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee accused the government of indiscriminately pushing back asylum seekers and migrants and stated that between May and September it had received 33 reports of police mistreatment, including the robbing, physical violence against, and degrading treatment of more than 600 migrants. On November 24, police fired water cannon and rubber bullets at rioting migrants in the reception center near Harmanli. The camp was sealed after reports that some migrants were suffering from infectious skin diseases. A week earlier, local residents had protested and called for the camp’s closure after media reports of contagious skin diseases. Camp residents threw stones and tires at police, broke windows, and set fire to furniture. More than 400 asylum seekers were arrested after the clash, and their deportation to their countries of origin was pending at the end of the year. There were reports of vigilante groups conducting citizen arrests of migrants along the border with Turkey, and police authorities encouraged citizens to alert them when they spotted groups of migrants who entered the country illegally. A video posted online on April 10 showed Petar Nizamov, who purportedly belonged to the group Civil Squad for Protection of Women and Faith, detaining three migrants by forcing them to lie on the ground with their hands zip tied behind their backs and telling them to go back to Turkey. A similar video featured the self-proclaimed “migrant hunter” Dinko Valev who, on February 14, called the emergency line 112 to report that he had detained 16 migrants–15 adults and one child–forcing them to lie on the ground and subjecting them to death threats and verbal abuse. On April 10, the prime minister expressed gratitude to the vigilante groups because “everyone helping [the government] deserves thanks” and told journalists that he had instructed the border police leadership to award a vigilante group for its contribution to border security. On April 11, he stated he had been misquoted and noted that the government does not tolerate any violations of the law or inhuman treatment. On November 25, the Burgas district court started a trial against Nizamov for an illegal arrest and on November 15, the Sredets prosecution service opened an investigation against Valev for ethnic/nationality-based discrimination, violence, and hatred. Extreme nationalist parties used antimigrant rhetoric in their political campaigns. Negative coverage of migrants appeared in some media, claiming they were mostly criminals and terrorists and repeating negative stereotypes that encouraged societal intolerance. In September, following a brawl among asylum seekers in the Harmanli reception center, the extreme nationalist parties Patriotic Front and Ataka held a demonstration demanding the immediate closure of all reception centers and the return of their occupants to their countries of origin. The patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church stated in September that it is important “to maintain the ethnic balance on Bulgaria’s territory and the peace and security of Bulgarian citizens.” In August the UN high commissioner for human rights criticized the country for detaining all irregular migrants who have not applied for asylum and for prosecuting and jailing them “if they try to leave.” The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, and other persons of concern. #### PROTECTION OF REFUGEES Access to Asylum: The law provides for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government has established a system for protecting refugees. The president may grant asylum to persons who are persecuted for their belief or activities advocating for internationally recognized rights and freedoms. The council of ministers may provide temporary protection in case of mass influx of foreign nationals driven by an armed conflict, civil war, violence or large-scale human rights violations in their country of origin, as determined by the Council of the European Union. The State Agency for Refugees provides international protection (refugee status) under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. As of November, the overall number of asylum seekers had decreased by 37 percent compared with the same period in 2015. Independent observers had access to refugee reception centers, whose capacity was 5,130. During the first half of the year, migrants and asylum seekers were able to leave the country for destinations further west shortly after arriving. As a result of Serbia strengthening its border controls in July, migrants accumulated at the border and completely filled reception centers, while detention centers for those that did not qualify for asylum or with whom the government had security concerns were overcrowded. At various times throughout the year, the State Agency for Refugees experienced financial shortfalls, resulting in disruptions in medical and interpretation services. Humanitarian organizations and volunteers helped with food, educational, and other support. NGOs expressed concern that the government has no administrative mechanism for the early identification, referral, and provision of adequate services to vulnerable asylum seekers, such as minors, persons with disabilities, the elderly, pregnant women, and survivors of rape, torture, or other forms of severe physical or sexual violence. As of September, according to the government, approximately 95 miles of the fence along the country’s border with Turkey were complete. In February the National Assembly approved a legislative amendment allowing the government to deploy up to 1,000 military personnel to assist border police in managing the entry of migrants and asylum seekers. Human rights NGOs expressed concern that the government viewed migrants and asylum seekers more as a national security matter than as vulnerable persons in need of humanitarian assistance. Refoulement: The government provided some protection against the expulsion or return of migrants and asylum seekers to countries where their lives or freedom would be threatened due to their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. As of September authorities reported there had been more than 32,000 attempts by foreign nationals to cross the border and border police had detained approximately 12,000 persons. On October 17, the government handed over to Turkey seven Turkish nationals–three former police commissioners, a university lecturer, a newspaper journalist, a high school teacher and a shop owner–wanted for suspected ties to the exiled opposition cleric Fethullah Guillen. The seven had been detained hiding in a truck bound for Romania. According to the Interior Ministry, none of the seven had asked for protection and they were returned under the bilateral readmission agreement. In August authorities handed over to Turkey businessman Abdullah Buyuk, who was also wanted for ties to Gulen. Buyuk, whose permanent residence status in the country had expired, applied for political asylum in July. The vice president denied the application, but in June the Sofia Appellate Court refused to extradite Buyuk to Turkey. Human rights organizations accused the authorities of ignoring the court’s decision and violating due process. Access to Basic Services: In August the government adopted rules for concluding integration agreements with persons with refugee status that spell out the basic services–housing, education, language training, health services, professional qualification, and job search assistance–to which they will receive access and the obligations of the responsible institutions. As of June 13, 61 persons with refugee/humanitarian status had registered with an unemployment office, 11 found jobs, and 10 were placed in training programs. Durable Solutions: As of October 25, Bulgaria had accepted 21 refugees relocated from Greece, out of an agreed quota of 1,302 for the country. Temporary Protection: The government provided humanitarian protection to individuals who may not qualify as refugees. As of August, the government provided protection to 384 persons. Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process The constitution and law provide citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage. #### Elections and Political Participation Recent Elections: In November the country held a presidential election. The Central Election Commission (CEC) did not report any major election irregularities, and most political commentators considered the election free and fair. Transparency International Bulgaria reported that nearly 77 percent of violation reports involved bad organization, nearly 10 percent involved controlled and corporate voting, and approximately 1 percent involved vote buying. The organization attributed the violations to poor work by the electoral committees and attempts by political parties to influence voter preferences. Migration from the Middle East, Africa, and Afghanistan was a central theme of the campaign. Most candidates expressed the need for Bulgaria to improve border security and some expressed reluctance to accept refugees, but there was no overt racist or extremist rhetoric. In parliamentary elections in 2014, eight parties passed the 4 percent threshold for representation in the National Assembly. The final report of the election observation mission of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the OSCE on the elections, released in January 2015, stated that “fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly were respected” and that a new method of appointing the election commission, greater involvement of civil society, and public support by the interim government contributed to inclusiveness and public engagement. It also remarked that a new election law provided a good foundation for democratic elections, although several previous ODIHR recommendations remained unaddressed. The report also observed that “widespread and pervasive accusations of vote-buying, controlled voting and other election irregularities, from all sides, marred the campaign and negatively affected the public, confidence in the integrity of the process.” The law prohibits campaigning in languages other than Bulgarian. ODIHR has repeatedly noted that this requirement as well as the absence of official voter information in minority languages limited the ability of ethnic minority groups to understand election rules and to participate effectively in the election process. In 2015 the CEC imposed a fine on the Movement for Rights and Freedoms party leader at the time, Lyutvi Mestan, for speaking in Turkish during the local election campaign, but the Momchilgrad Regional Court subsequently reversed the CEC decision. In October the National Assembly abolished the limit on the number of polling stations that could be opened abroad during elections, but only in EU countries. The National Assembly had passed earlier in July amendments to the Electoral Code imposing a limit of 35 polling stations which could be opened in any one foreign country, but abolished some of the limits following protests and online petitions against the amendment. NGOs reported that address registration laws limited the ability of Roma occupying illegal housing to obtain identity cards, which in turn restricted their ability to register for and vote in elections. The ODIHR report noted there were no high-level prosecutions for vote buying, which contributed to a sense of impunity and a lack of accountability. A national representative survey in February showed that 10 percent of the votes in the 2015 local elections were bought or otherwise controlled. In the first six months of the year, prosecutors filed 125 cases and pursued 99 prosecutions, and the courts convicted 110 persons of election-related violations. During the presidential election and national referendum campaign in November, the prosecution service stated it had received more than 230 reports of violations aimed at committing election fraud, but dismissed 170 of them. It opened 13 cases into vote buying and document fraud. Political Parties and Political Participation: The law requires a political party to have at least 2,500 members to register officially. Even though the constitution does not allow for the establishment of political parties along ethnic lines, the prohibition did not weaken the role of some ethnic minorities in the political process, and a number of parties represented various ethnic minority groups. During the year some National Assembly members abandoned their party affiliation without losing their seats. Participation of Women and Minorities: There were no laws or customary practices that prevented women from participating in political life on the same basis as men. Women occupied 46 of 240 seats (19.2 percent) in parliament. While the ethnic Turkish minority enjoyed fair representation, Roma were underrepresented, particularly in appointed leadership positions. Ethnic Turks, Roma, and Pomaks (descendants of Slavic Bulgarians who converted to Islam under Ottoman rule) held elected positions at the local level. As of October, the Commission for Protection against Discrimination was reviewing a discrimination case against the mayor of Kyustendil, Petar Paunov, who prohibited residents of the Romani Iztok neighborhood from participating in a 2015 local referendum, asserting that the vote-buying reputation of Roma would discredit the results. Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government While the law provides criminal penalties for official corruption, the government did not implement the law effectively, and officials in all branches of government reportedly engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. Corrupt practices included bribery, conflict of interest, elaborate embezzlement schemes, procurement violations, and influence trading. DANS investigates corrupt activities of high-level government and other officials. The Anticorruption Task Force, established in March, is an interagency unit comprised of prosecutors, DANS agents, and police officers that investigates high-level government corruption. The National Anticorruption Policy Council is an interagency body that develops and implements anticorruption policies. The Center for Prevention and Combating Corruption and Organized Crime is responsible for analyzing, planning, and developing anticorruption solutions and policies. NGOs stated the government lacked sustainable anticorruption mechanisms, and the European Commission concluded that the authorities were “unable or unwilling to initiate proactive investigations” and that “serious allegations of corruption and influence peddling in the judiciary have only been followed up after internal and external pressure.” According to NGOs, government agencies did not apply a systematic approach for collaborating with civil society. Corruption: In September the Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry reported that 46 percent of its member companies admitted to having been subjected to corruption pressure, while 20 percent claimed that corruption did not pose problems for doing business. According to the Center for the Study of Democracy, there was “rule of corruption” in the country. In a July report, the center estimated that more than 22 percent of the population was affected by corruption, but that charges were brought in only 0.01 percent of all cases. The center concluded that corruption had become systematic, functioning as an additional tax on public services, and that state institutions have practically been privatized by their employees. In 2015 the National Assembly adopted amendments to the constitution to increase the transparency and independence in the management of the courts and prosecutors’ offices. According to the 2015 annual report of the prosecution service, only petty corruption is uncovered and punished, and the overall number of bribery proceedings remained small. Investigators were unable to work on high-level corruption, as senior officials hid behind collective bodies in the majority of cases. The overall quality of the investigative process was poor and the percentage of acquittals in corruption cases, at 25 percent, has increased. As of July, prosecutors had pursued 306 prosecutions and the courts convicted 162 persons, including 14 to nonsuspended prison sentences. In May the military court of appeals confirmed former national intelligence director Kircho Kirov’s 10-year prison sentence for embezzling 4.7 million lev ($2.6 million), but in November the Supreme Cassation Court asserted that the lower court had made procedural errors in assessing the evidence and returned the case for retrial by a different panel. Corruption cases also involved the judiciary and police. In April the Supreme Cassation Court passed a final judgment on Veliko Turnovo judge Slavcho Petkov’s bribery case and sentenced him to four years in prison for taking a 25,000 lev ($14,000) bribe from a defendant. In February the authorities arrested five border police officers from Svilengrad on charges of accepting bribes from smugglers who transport migrants from Turkey to Western Europe. As of September, the investigation was pending. According to the Access to Information Program watchdog organization, only 36 percent of the public institutions complied with the legal requirement to publish the conflict of interest declarations of their employees. Financial Disclosure: The law mandates that government officials publicly declare any circumstances in which they could face accusations of using their position for personal profit. The National Audit Office verified and monitored disclosures. High-level public officials who fail to submit a financial disclosure declaration can incur fines of up to 1,500 lev ($840) and up to 5,000 lev ($2,800) for a repeat violation. Public Access to Information: The law provides the right of public access to government information with a sufficiently narrow list of exceptions outlining the grounds for nondisclosure and a reasonable timeline for response and reasonable processing fees. There are administrative sanctions for noncompliance and an appeal mechanism for review of disclosure denials. Amendments to the law, which entered into effect in January, increased the number of information categories that government agencies are obliged to publish online from four to 17 and made it mandatory for the government to maintain an open data portal. NGOs complained the government did not implement the law effectively and equally. The courts allowed greater access to government information, but the government selectively complied with court decisions. NGOs continued to insist on the need for a central independent body to oversee enforcement of the law, the application of unified practices, and sanctions for noncompliance. Section 5. Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights Numerous domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. Human rights observers reported uneven levels of cooperation from various national and local government officials. There was increasing public rhetoric opposing human rights and the work of NGOs. Some political parties, civic movements, and media outlets advocated closing certain NGOs because they obtained funding from foreign donors. In 2015 prosecutors terminated a year-long financial fraud and tax and insurance evasion investigation of four Protest Network civic activists, who believed the government had taken action against them as harassment for their role in antigovernment protests. Government Human Rights Bodies: The ombudsman reviews individuals’ complaints against the government for violations of rights or freedoms. The ombudsman can request information from authorities, act as an intermediary in resolving disputes, make proposals to end existing practices, refer information to the prosecution service, and request the Constitutional Court to abolish legal provisions as unconstitutional. As of October, the ombudsman had received double the number of complaints–8,100 versus 4,069–than during the same period in 2015. The majority concerned public utility and telecommunication companies’ debt collection practices and their lack of fair process, social assistance programs, and property problems, including forced evictions. Authorities sometimes acted in response to recommendations from the ombudsman by adjusting their practices and regulations. The Commission for Protection against Discrimination is an independent specialized agency for preventing discrimination, protecting against discrimination, and ensuring equal opportunity. One permanent committee of the National Assembly oversees religious denominations and human rights. Section 6. Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons #### Women Rape and Domestic Violence: The law criminalizes rape, and authorities generally enforced its provisions when violations came to their attention. Sentences for rape range from two to eight years in prison or from three to 10 years if the victim is under 18 years of age or a lineal descendant. When rape results in serious injury or attempted suicide, sentences range between three and 15 years’ imprisonment and, when the victim is a minor, between 10 and 20 years. While authorities could prosecute spousal rape under the general rape statute, they rarely did so. According to the Alliance for Protection against Gender-based Violence, the law does not criminalize all forms of violence against women and the government does not implement consistent policies with adequate funding for prevention and protection of women against violence. Data from the National Statistics Institute showed that statutory rape convictions in 2015 dropped by 31 percent compared to 2014 and by 80 percent compared to 2011. On March 13, the fourth annual Walk a Mile in Her Shoes event took place in Sofia to raise awareness about domestic violence, sexual assault, and sexism. The law defines domestic violence as any act, or attempted act, of sexual violence or physical, psychological, emotional, or economic pressure against members of one’s family or between cohabiting persons. It empowers courts to impose fines, issue restraining or eviction orders, or require special counseling. Noncompliance with a restraining order may result in imprisonment for up to three years or a fine of 5,000 levs ($2,800). According to a September survey jointly conducted by three NGOs (the Partners Bulgaria Foundation, the Center for the Study of Democracy, and Human Rights Academy), 40 percent of police officers, and 30 percent of social workers believed that the rate of domestic violence had increased over the previous several years. A June analysis by the Gender Alternatives Foundation found that 99 percent of the prosecutions for noncompliance with restraining orders ended with convictions, but the courts imposed minimal punishments, mostly due to plea bargaining, which was perceived as downgrading the seriousness of domestic violence as an offense as well as the importance of restraining orders. According to the Center for the Study of Democracy, 70 to 80 percent of domestic violence cases remain unreported. According to an April report by the Bulgarian Gender Research Foundation, the rate was as high as 90 percent among Romani women due to fear and lack of family and institutional support. The Animus Association Foundation operated a free hotline for women in crisis, funded through a two-year government grant. As of September, the hotline had worked with 1,166 clients, including 790 survivors of domestic violence and 13 survivors of sexual violence. The hotline operator expressed concern that its future was uncertain, as funding was only available through grants and was only sufficient to operate 12 hours per day rather than around the clock. The Animus Association Foundation and other NGOs provided short-term protection and counseling to victims in 20 crisis centers and shelters throughout the country. Police and social workers referred victims of domestic violence to NGO-run shelters, but NGOs complained that local authorities rarely provided financial assistance for their operating costs. The government provided standard annual funding for crisis centers at a level of 8,251 levs ($4,600) per client and for social support centers at 2,865 levs ($1,600) per client. Women’s rights organizations continued to insist the government lacked strong gender equality and domestic violence policies, despite having an annual action plan in both areas. Sexual Harassment: The law identifies sexual harassment as a specific form of discrimination rather than a criminal offense, although prosecutors may identify cases in which harassment involves coercion. If prosecuted as coercion, sexual harassment is punishable by up to six years in prison. Harassment remained an underreported problem. The Commission for Protection against Discrimination reported seven complaints of sexual harassment as of October, an increase from the one complaint it received for the same period in 2015. In May a female police officer took Deputy Prosecutor General Borislav Sarafov to court for pressuring her due to her investigative actions, using vulgar and sexist language, and threatening her with undue punishment in front of other prosecutors and police officers. The officer subsequently withdrew her claim “in the spirit of good will and understanding,” stating that Sarafov had apologized for his insults. The Supreme Judicial Council and the Judicial Inspectorate stated they were not in a position to take disciplinary action on the case. Reproductive Rights: The government generally respected the right of couples and individuals to decide the number, spacing, and timing of their children, manage their reproductive health, and have access to the information and means to do so, free from discrimination, coercion, and violence. Women in poor rural areas and marginalized communities had less access to contraception due to poverty and lack of education. Skilled attendance at childbirth was sometimes less available due to lack of health insurance. Discrimination: While the law provides women the same legal status and rights as men, including to equal pay for equal work, women faced some discrimination in economic participation and political empowerment (see section 7.d.). In April the National Assembly passed a gender equality law that establishes equal opportunities in all spheres of public, economic, and political life, equal access to all public resources, equal treatment and exclusion of gender-based discrimination and violence, balanced representation of men and women in all decision-making authorities, and overcoming of gender-based stereotypes. The law establishes a National Council on Equality between Women and Men, headed by the minister of labor and social policy, as a consultative and coordination body between the central and local governments and civil society. Half of the ministers in the cabinet were women, but women represented only 9 percent of municipal mayors. Some Romani communities followed patriarchal traditions that restricted women’s participation in public, economic, and social life. #### Children Birth Registration: Citizenship derives from one’s parents. The law requires the registration of all births within seven days without discriminating between boys and girls. Authorities did not register children born to asylum seekers, however, until the mother received either refugee or humanitarian status. Education: While public education is universal and compulsory until the age of 16 and free through the 12th grade, authorities did not effectively enforce attendance requirements. According to the State Agency for Child Protection (SACP) and NGOs, 23.2 percent of Romani children did not attend school. Child Abuse: Violence against children continued to be a problem. In April the ombudsman reported that the number of reported cases of violence against children in schools had increased more than 100 percent in less than one year. The SACP registered the same rate of reports of child abuse in 2015 as the year before. The government has an interagency coordination mechanism for children who are either survivors or at risk of violence. The interagency mechanism is tasked with cooperating in crisis interventions but the multidisciplinary teams implementing it complained of a lack of access to social services and a lack of qualified experts in many municipalities. According to the Animus Association Foundation, discussion of sexual violence against children remained a social taboo. In January the Supreme Administrative Prosecution Service acted upon an ombudsman’s report and ordered inspections of all correctional boarding schools, uncovering cases of physical and psychological violence and of degrading treatment of children by staff. Similar inspections in 2014 revealed similar violations, and the prosecution service concluded that the measures taken by authorities have not been effective. NGOs continued to advocate closing all juvenile detention centers and reforming the juvenile justice system, which dated back to 1958. The government funded an NGO-operated 24-hour free helpline that children could call for counseling, information, and support as well as to report abuse. Due to a rising number of calls, the government increased the number of helpline consultants from three to four, which made it possible to answer every second call instead of every third. During the first eight months of the year, helpline counselors received nearly 60,000 calls and carried out 6,684 consultations, 76 percent of which were with children and the rest with parents. More than 8 percent of the calls concerned cases of violence, with most of the callers in violence cases being adults reaching out on behalf of children. Helpline consultants referred 360 cases of children at risk to the child protection administration. Approximately one third of those cases involved children from rural areas where access to community services and programs was a problem due to isolation and insufficient funding. NGOs expressed concern that, in many cases, social workers, guided by conflicting laws, preferred to send a child out of an abusive home into an institution rather than to remove the abusive parent. According to the National Institute of Statistics, the number of children registered with juvenile delinquency offices in 2015 increased 15 percent to 2,849. The most common reasons for registration were running away from home, drug abuse, vagrancy, and begging. Early and Forced Marriage: The minimum age for marriage is 18. In exceptional cases, a person can enter into marriage at 16 with permission from the regional court. According to the National Statistical Institute, in 2015 there were 481 marriages of girls under 18, or 1.7 percent of total marriages, which continued an increasing trend since 2009, when the figure was 0.6 percent. In addition, there were 2,767 children born to mothers between the ages of 15 and 17 as well as 294 to mothers under 15. As of July, courts had sentenced 68 persons over a five-year period for cohabitating with a person less than 14 years of age, which is punishable by law with two to five years in prison; 63 of the sentences were suspended, however. NGOs criticized authorities for treating early marriages and resulting early parenthood as an ethnic Romani rather than a gender problem, but acknowledged that child marriage was a pervasive problem in Romani communities and resulted in school dropouts, early childbirths, poor parenting, and spreading poverty. In February, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) published a report which noted that the number of child marriages and early births in Romani communities has decreased in the previous 10 years, but the number of Romani girls who gave birth to a second or third child, while slightly lower, remained high. The law provides for in-kind allowance payments for underage mothers in order to avert child neglect. If a minor parent continues to attend school, however, his or her family is entitled to the full amount of the allowance as a lump sum. Sexual Exploitation of Children: The penal code differentiates between forcing children into prostitution, for which it provides for two to eight years’ imprisonment and a fine of 5,000 to 15,000 levs ($2,800 to $8,400), and child sex trafficking, for which it provides for three to 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 to 20,000 levs ($5,600 to $11,100). The legal minimum age for consensual sex is 14. The law prohibits child pornography and provides for up to six years in prison and a fine of up to 8,000 levs ($4,500) for violations. Displaced Children: As of September 28, the State Agency for Refugees had received asylum applications for 1,857 unaccompanied minors and had issued refugee status to six and humanitarian status to another six. There were approximately 150 unaccompanied minors at any given time in refugee reception centers. The ombudsman reported that authorities registered unaccompanied minors as relatives of other asylum-seeking families in order to evade the legal prohibition on detaining minors alone. As a result, instead of receiving specialized assistance and protection, minors ended up in detention centers for adults. The ombudsman’s report further stated that refugee centers did not meet the minimum requirements for accommodating unaccompanied minors. Institutionalized Children: As of February, the government had closed all residential care institutions for children with disabilities. Through August the government closed six institutions for parentless children and one for medical and social care as part of a plan to close all institutions by 2025 and replace them with community-based care. NGOs criticized the system of financing new centers by paying them per child staying per day, as it motivated them to fill the center to capacity without regard to the individual needs of the child. NGOs further criticized the deinstitutionalization process, noting that the new centers recreated the atmosphere of the larger institutions, serving as “final destinations” for children rather than developing their self-reliance and social inclusion skills. A November 2015 survey showed a high rate of societal tolerance to housing children in institutions rather than integrating them in larger society as well as to stigmatizing children with intellectual disabilities. The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee was concerned that, despite its deinstitutionalization policy, the government continued to place children in institutions. Most children in government institutions were not orphans; courts institutionalized children when they determined their families were unable to provide them adequate care. The government continued to inspect both the institutions and the new centers, uncovering malpractice and mistreatment of the children placed there. For example, in February the Minister of Education and Sciences fired the director of the correctional boarding school in Podem, following up on a State Agency for Child Protection recommendation that was based on the ombudsman’s report of violence and harassment at the school. A follow-up surprise inspection by the ombudsman in September found that, despite the change in leadership, the staff continued to impose unsanctioned punishments and that there was violence among students. International Child Abductions: The country is a party to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. See the Department of State’s Annual ReportonInternational Parental Child Abduction at travel.state.gov/content/childabduction/en/legal/compliance.html. #### Anti-Semitism The 2011 census indicated there were 1,130 Jews living in the country. Local Jewish organizations estimated the actual number at 5,000. Anti-Semitic rhetoric continued to appear regularly on social networking sites and as comments under online media articles. Jewish organizations indicated that during the year there were no extreme acts of anti-Semitism but remained concerned over government inaction and political leaders’ passivity in addressing minor and symbolic acts. They complained that the relevant authorities stopped paying attention to fan groups’ displaying of Nazi symbols during soccer games or treated them as sports hooliganism instead of hate crimes. According to B’nai B’rith Bulgaria, there was pressure at high political levels to revise Holocaust history. Jewish organizations demanded an apology from Sega daily, which in September printed a page of Jewish humor that included offensive epithets and caricatures. Taking advantage of antirefugee attitudes, certain nationalist online outlets and paramilitary “migrant hunting” organizations spread allegations that the Jews were causing the refugee crisis. In February the mayor of Sofia declined to approve a rally in honor of a World War II general, Hristo Lukov, known for his anti-Semitic views and pro-Nazi activities. While the decision did not stop the event, it did limit its attendance and scope. On October 4, Dyanko Markov brought a lawsuit against journalist Yuliana Metodieva of the online human rights platform Marginaliaafter she described him as a “prominent anti-Semite” in her article, “Careful with Anti-Semites, They Can Sue You.” In February the Sofia City Court terminated a defamation suit filed in 2015 by Markov against the editorial staff and oversight council members of Marginalia. Marginalia had posted a declaration reacting to an invitation by “anti-Semitic Markov” to a European Parliament event showcasing him as “an unbreakable spirit” that opposed communism. According to the journalists, Markov was a member of the anti-Semitic organization Union of Bulgarian National Legions that supported the deportation of Jews during World War II. #### Trafficking in Persons See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/. #### Persons with Disabilities The law prohibits discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities in employment, education, transportation, health care, the judicial system, and provision of other government services. The government did not effectively enforce these provisions. The government focused most of its efforts on providing disability pensions, social services, and institutional care but lacked sufficient funds to modify infrastructure and implement active policies to improve public awareness. Specialized medical commissions (TELK) assessed a person’s health status and degree of reduced working ability in order to determine whether that person had a disability. NGOs criticized the government for lack of access for persons with disabilities to information and communications, noting that only one newscast was available with sign language interpretation and that authorities made no information available in Braille. According to the ombudsman, the government did not make enough effort to integrate persons with disabilities into society to allow them to lead independent lives. Societal discrimination against persons with disabilities persisted. The Commission for Protection against Discrimination reported receiving an increased number of complaints of accessibility and employment discrimination. While the law requires improved access to buildings for persons with disabilities, enforcement lagged in some new public works projects as well as in existing, unrenovated buildings. NGOs asserted that the public transport infrastructure was not adequately accessible, even some newly-built or renovated facilities, noting that underground passages that provide access to public transit platforms did not have elevators and that ramps were too steep. In June the Supreme Administrative Court confirmed a lower court’s decision that the National Assembly discriminated against persons with disabilities by not providing adequate access. The law promotes the employment of persons with disabilities, providing employers with subsidies covering 30 to 50 percent of the cost of insurance and the full cost of adjusting and equipping workplaces to accommodate them. According to a government report released in June, in 2015 the Agency for Social Assistance found jobs for 44 percent of those registered with permanent disabilities. NGOs criticized the TELK model and advocated for its replacement with an individual assessment of each person with disabilities’ capacity to be a contributing member of society. They asserted that the system labeled persons with disabilities as “unfit for work” and ultimately subjected them to poverty. Over the past five years, the number of persons with disability pensions has tripled and the number of children with disabilities increased, according to the National Statistics Institute. NGOs alleged that the increase in both indicators did not result from deteriorating public health but rather from corruption in how the TELK system awards disability status, which is a prerequisite for individuals to receive benefits. There were reports of discrimination in labor and employment against persons with disabilities (see section 7.d.). The country’s infrastructure did not provide persons with disabilities adequate access to education, health care, and community-level social services. Individuals with mental and physical disabilities often were housed in institutions located in remote areas, which separated them from the rest of society, made the hiring of qualified staff difficult, and limited access to medical assistance. According to the National Statistics Institute, approximately 18 percent of students with special education needs were enrolled in 64 “special schools” while the rest attended mainstream schools. Those studying in the special schools received diplomas that higher-level learning establishments did not recognize as qualifying them for further education. The education system also provided students with disabilities with “mixed” education combining mainstream courses with specifically designed courses based on the needs of individual students. According to Eurostat data, 45 percent of children with disabilities with specific education needs dropped out of school; NGOs blamed the high dropout rate on the school system not providing for their specific education needs. According to NGOs and the State Agency for Child Protection, the prevailing practice of considering childhood disability a medical issue, the lack of an inclusive social environment, and insufficient support infrastructure encouraged institutionalization. Despite some incremental improvements, conditions in the country’s 79 institutions for persons with mental, physical, and sensory disabilities remained poor. NGOs criticized the government for not moving toward an inclusive, community-oriented model of education, socialization, and health care for persons with disabilities. They also criticized the deinstitutionalization process, which moved large numbers of children and adults with disabilities from large residential institutions to small group homes but preserved the institutional approach to care. The law provides specific measures for persons with disabilities to have access to the polls, including mobile ballot boxes. NGOs noted that most buildings used as polling stations, including schools and kindergartens, continued to be inaccessible, which made those specific measures pointless. The Central Electoral Commission admitted that gaps in the law and bad planning prevented mobile ballot boxes from responding to all requests during the November 6 presidential election and referendum. The Interagency Council for Integration of Persons with Disabilities was responsible for developing policies to support persons with disabilities. The Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, through its executive agency for persons with disabilities, was responsible for protecting the rights of such persons and worked with government-supported national representative organizations to that end. Some NGOs criticized the model, suggesting that, instead of meeting formalistic criteria such as territorial representation and membership size, the government should announce competitive and transparent tenders for which NGOs could bid. They also insisted that funding for providing services should be separate from funding for advocacy and capacity building. They remained concerned that incentives prioritize obtaining national representation over effective advocacy and that the lack of transparency regarding financial and other support to the national representative organizations affected those organizations’ independence. #### National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities According to the 2011 census, there were 325,345 Roma in the country, or less than 5 percent of the population, and 588,318 ethnic Turks, or approximately 9 percent of the population. Observers asserted these figures were inaccurate, since more than 600,000 persons did not answer the census question about their ethnic origin, and officials did not conduct a proper count in most Romani communities but rather made assumptions or failed to include figures for Roma altogether. Societal discrimination and popular prejudice against Roma and other minority groups remained a problem. According to NGOs, despite Roma integration policies included in numerous official documents, such as the National Roma Integration Strategy of 2011, the government had no will, capacity, or resources to implement those policies. NGOs claimed that there were successful inclusion practices at the local level, but the government failed to adopt them at the national level. The media described Roma and other minority groups with discriminatory, denigrating, and abusive language. Nationalist parties such as Ataka and the Patriotic Front based their political campaigns on strong anti-Roma, anti-Turkish, and anti-Semitic slogans and rhetoric. NGOs accused the government of being unwilling to address anti-Roma attitudes and hate speech. According to an Open Society Institute survey presented in July, Roma were most frequently the target of hate speech, comprising 92 percent of cases. In July the Commission for Protection against Discrimination imposed a 1,000 lev ($560) fine on the Ataka newspaper’s chief editor and the author of two articles for using offensive language when writing about Roma committing crimes. NGOs criticized the decision for failing to recognize that the deliberate portrayal of Roma as criminals equated to ethnic stereotyping of criminality. Politicians and prominent opinion makers continued publically to espouse racist and xenophobic opinions. In June member of parliament, leader of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, and coleader of the Patriotic Front Krasimir Karakachanov stated that whole regions of the country suffer from the aggression of the “gypsies [who are] marauding, beating, robbing, and raping old people on a daily basis.” In March mathematics professor and frequent participant in television talk shows Mihail Konstantinov said that migrants from Syria and Iraq were not refugees but criminal offenders who “require different treatment” because they are a “different biological species” “brought up in a completely different way, with different values, if you could call them values.” The lack of prosecutions for hate crimes remained a problem, as did short and suspended sentences. On November 5, 30 year-old Ivan Nikolov killed an elderly Romani couple in their home in Pazardjik. After his arrest, Nikolov told authorities he had been inspired by a video of a patriotic song posted on social media and decided that the video was calling on him to “go out and kill gypsies.” As of December, the investigation was in progress and Nikolov remained in custody. On July 11, the Pazardjik Regional Court approved a plea bargain giving 24-year-old Angel Kaleev a suspended 11-month sentence for ethnically motivated assault. On April 18, Kaleev beat a 17 year-old Rom, Mitko Yonkov, after Yonkov told him that they were equal, despite their different ethnicities. Kaleev filmed the attack himself and posted it online. Many Roma continued to live in appalling conditions. According to a 2013 government-commissioned survey, the average Romani home was only 28 square meters (330 square feet), yet 55 percent had more than five occupants and only 4 percent had legally documented ownership. The survey further found that 28 percent had no electricity, 34 percent had no water supply, and 62 percent had no sewer connection. Several municipalities, including Stara Zagora, continued to initiate proceedings to demolish illegally built houses occupied by Roma without providing adequate alternative shelter to the occupants. In July the Stara Zagora municipal government proceeded with the eviction of approximately 150 persons and the demolition of their 26 dwellings built illegally on both municipal and private land. The mayor asserted the persons evicted were not local residents and had recently settled from other places and therefore the municipality had no commitment to them. In May a fight between three ethnic Bulgarians and four Roma in Radnevo resulted in the ethnic Bulgarians’ being hospitalized in serious condition and the Roma arrested and charged with attempted manslaughter. The fight sparked anti-Roma protests that demanded the demolition of all illegal dwellings in the city. The protesters, joined by football fans, clashed with police who had arrived to guard the Romani neighborhood, and most of the women and children residents left out of fear. Many human rights organizations condemned the demolitions, accusing authorities of only focusing on Romani dwellings despite the great number of other illegal buildings throughout the country. According to the Equal Opportunities Initiative Association, authorities did not apply an equal standard to demolitions, evicting Roma from their sole residences and demolishing the home, but razing mostly secondary, nonresidential structures such as fences or garages when owned by ethnic Bulgarians. The organization also criticized the government for failing to ensure adequate protections or to provide alternatives for those left homeless and alleged that the forced evictions were intended to harass the Romani population. The law prohibits ethnic segregation in multiethnic schools and kindergartens, but allows segregation of whole schools. Romani children often attended de facto segregated schools where they received inferior education. According to NGOs, 75 percent of Roma students studied in a segregated environment. There were cases of ethnic Bulgarian students departing desegregated schools, thereby effectively resegregating them. The law requires that schools develop integration programs targeting students from vulnerable groups to prevent early dropouts and introduces standards for intercultural education. NGO projects aimed at lowering the dropout rate among Romani students resulted in rates that in most places were less than 1 percent for elementary school students (first to fourth grade). Retaining Romani students beyond the age of 12 remained a problem for the government, which also lacked effective programs for reintegrating students who had dropped out. In July the Minister of Education and Sciences reported to the National Assembly that only 1 percent of Romani children enrolled in first grade completed 12th grade and that only 12 percent completed fifth grade. A UNICEF report in February listed early marriage as one of the main factors for dropping out of school, noting that 54 percent of married underage Romani girls have only elementary or lower-level education. Many students were demotivated and dropped out of school early due to a hostile or indifferent school environment. According to a 2015 Roma Education Fund assessment, 25 percent of teachers believed that Romani students should study in segregated schools and 20 percent were convinced that children from different ethnic backgrounds had different abilities. Roma were subject to discrimination in employment and occupation (see section 7.d.). Access to health services continued to be a problem for Roma. A 2013 government survey estimated that 30 percent of Roma had not signed up with a general practitioner (i.e., lacked health insurance) and 79 percent had no access to a dentist. In addition, the quality of medical care given to Roma was very low. The survey further found that two-thirds of Roma did not qualify for social security, which would affect their future retirement and access to health and social services. The National Network of Health Mediators continued to operate as a successful model of partnership with the national and local governments for addressing lack of Romani access to health services. As of September, local authorities employed more than 130 health mediators appointed to full-time positions in 72 municipalities to work with high-risk and vulnerable groups. #### Acts of Violence, Discrimination, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity The law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, but the government did not effectively enforce this prohibition. While reports of violence against LGBTI persons were rare, societal discrimination, particularly in employment, remained a problem. Most LGBTI persons did not reveal their sexual preferences to their families for fear of losing relationships with their loved ones. NGOs stated that it was common for persons suspected of being gay to be fired, and such individuals were reluctant to seek redress in court due to fear of being identified as belonging to the LGBTI community. On June 18, the ninth annual LGBTI pride parade took place in downtown Sofia. As in previous years, the Bulgarian Orthodox Church issued a statement “resolutely opposing the attempts to present and establish such a sinful tendency as the norm in our society, as a reason for pride and a role model.” The municipal councilors from Ataka and the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization called upon the mayor of Sofia to ban the parade as it was a “political rally with political goals that violates traditional Bulgarian values, morality, and decency and is a provocation to family values.” The parade attracted approximately 2,000 participants, but the municipality allowed an antipride counterevent of approximately 100 participants to proceed at the same time, with a route overlapping the pride parade at a few spots. In one incident, two men snuck into the pride parade and tried to rip one participant’s rainbow flag out of his hands. Three antipride protesters intimidated a couple leaving the party held after the march, one of whom used pepper spray for self-protection. Four persons, including the couple, were detained briefly by police at the police station, and pride organizers claimed police did nothing to protect the couple as they left, despite taunts and threats by a group of antipride demonstrators who had gathered outside. #### HIV and AIDS Societal Stigma According to the national program for HIV prevention and control, “despite the enormous medical progress in HIV treatment little has been achieved in terms of overcoming the stigma and discrimination [associated with HIV]. Negative societal attitudes have a strong impact on persons with HIV/AIDS. The HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination are the main challenges for the social reintegration of persons with HIV and place a significant barrier to receiving the necessary treatment, care, and support.” There were reports that patients with HIV/AIDS faced inadequate conditions in medical facilities and discrimination from doctors, who refused to provide treatment out of fear of contracting the disease. Patients typically did not contest these incidents in court because of the social stigma attached to having HIV/AIDS. Nearly one-fifth of HIV-positive patients reported hiding their condition in order to receive emergency medical care or avoid transfer to a specialized unit where they might receive inadequate help. #### Other Societal Violence or Discrimination In the morning of October 27, two men assaulted the president of the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee Krasimir Kanev in downtown Sofia. Kanev suffered minor injuries. Many human rights organizations and individuals stated the incident was the consequence of an atmosphere that permitted widespread hate speech and was conducive to violent acts and called on authorities to identify and punish the perpetrators as soon as possible. As of November, an investigation was underway. A series of antimigrant protests took place in October and November throughout the country. On October 7, more than 300 persons participated in a protest march in Sofia against “illegal migrants.” The protestors shouted “Die, refugees,” “Bulgaria, wake up,” and “Bulgaria for Bulgarians” and demanded that the government resign. Some of the participants told the media that asylum seekers loitering around the reception centers would throw stones at passing cars, were a threat to Bulgarian women and children, and that they feared that Sofia could turn into a “Baghdad in the Balkans.” On October 9, reacting to rumors that the government intended to build a refugee camp in Samokov, local residents protested on the central square expressing “concern for their security and their living.” Section 7. Worker Rights ### a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining The law provides for the right of workers to form and join independent trade unions, bargain collectively, and conduct legal strikes. The law prohibits antiunion discrimination, provides that workers may receive up to six months’ salary as compensation for illegal dismissal, and provides for the right of the employee to demand reinstatement for such dismissal. Workers alleging discrimination based on union affiliation can file complaints with the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, which had received six such complaints as of September. There are some limitations on these rights. The law prohibits employees of the Ministries of Defense and Interior, the State Agency for Intelligence, the National Protection Service, the courts, and prosecutorial and investigative authorities (collectively regarded as “judiciary” under the law) from striking. These employees are able to take the government to court to ensure due process in protecting their rights. In July the National Assembly passed amendments giving other public service employees the right to strike, with the exception of senior public servants, such as directors and chief secretaries. The law also affected transport workers’ right to strike by limiting their ability to organize their administrative activities and formulate their programs. Although the law effectively prohibits police from striking, in March police protested in several cities against planned Interior Ministry reforms that reduced the amount of retirement compensation and annual leave for new recruits. Trade unions stated the legal limitations on the right to strike and the lack of criminal liability for employers who delay salary payments are contrary to the constitution. When employers and trade unions reach a collective agreement at the sector level, they must obtain the agreement of the minister of labor to extend it to cover all enterprises in the sector. The law prohibits public servants from engaging in collective bargaining. Resources, inspections, and remediation efforts were generally adequate. Union leaders, however, stated the government did not effectively enforce the labor law. They complained that court proceedings for reinstatement of unfairly dismissed workers often took years and that fines of 250 to 2,000 levs ($140 to $1,100) in discrimination cases and compensation of up to six months’ gross remuneration for cases of unlawful dismissal were not strong deterrents to antiunion discrimination, especially for large or highly profitable enterprises. They also claimed the law does not effectively protect against interference by employers in trade union activities. Authorities generally respected freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively. Trade unions continued to report cases of employer obstruction, harassment, and pressure on employees, including relocation, firing, and demotion of union leaders and members. Labor unions also alleged that some employers failed to bargain in good faith or to adhere to agreements. Union leaders noted those employers who tried to force new employees to sign a declaration renouncing any union activity discontinued the practice after union leaders published their names. Judicial and administrative procedures were adequate in settling claims. The Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria reported that employers broke the law and eroded the value of collective bargaining by letting nonunion members take advantage of the provisions in the collective agreement. ### b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor The law prohibits all forms of forced or compulsory labor. The government lacked sufficient resources to cope with the growing number of cases of international labor trafficking, while labor inspectors lacked sufficient training to identify cases of forced labor. According to the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, the country’s institutions focused exclusively on human trafficking cases and failed to identify and prosecute cases of severe labor exploitation unless it fell under trafficking. The government, through its central and local antitrafficking commissions, held forced labor prevention campaigns and training sessions for law enforcement and volunteers. Penalties for violations range from two to 15 years in prison and were sufficiently stringent to deter violations. Law enforcement officials, however, did not have adequate capacity to investigate forced labor cases, and investigations took a long time. Victims successfully removed from forced labor situations had a high risk of being retrafficked because there were no long-term remediation programs. There were some reports of families or criminal organizations subjecting children to forced work (see section 7.c.). According to the Agency for Fundamental Rights, “children and adults with disabilities are forced into street begging and petty theft.” As of October, the National Antitrafficking Commission reported four cases of trafficking in persons for the purpose of forced labor, noting a significant decrease from 2015. NGOs claimed government mechanisms for identifying victims among at-risk groups, such as asylum seekers, were not sufficiently robust. See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/. ### c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment The law sets the minimum age for employment at 16 and the minimum age for dangerous work at 18. The government considered occupations hazardous for children if they are beyond their physical or psychological abilities; expose them to harmful agents or radiation; have a harmful effect on their health; take place in extreme temperature, noise, or vibration conditions; or expose children to hazards which they cannot comprehend or avoid due to their incomplete physical or psychological development. To employ children under the age of 18, employers must obtain a work permit from the government’s General Labor Inspectorate. Employers can hire children under the age of 16 with special permits for light work that is not risky or harmful to the child’s development and does not interfere with the child’s education or training. The General Labor Inspectorate was generally effective in inspecting working conditions at companies seeking and holding child work permits and applying sanctions regarding child labor in the formal sector. While employment of children without a work permit is a criminal offense punishable by up to six months in prison, violations occurred. The General Labor Inspectorate reported an increase in child employment, mainly due to a lack of qualified workers and an anticipated increase in job openings in the tourist industry. As of September, the inspectorate granted 2,328 requests to employ children who were 16 or 17 and 67 requests to employ children under the age of 16. As of August, the inspectorate uncovered 36 cases of illegal child employment and referred them to the prosecution service. The prosecution service refused to prosecute such cases, asserting they were insignificant offenses posing a minor public threat. The government continued programs to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, mounted educational campaigns, and intervened to protect, withdraw, rehabilitate, and reintegrate children engaged in the worst forms of child labor. NGOs continued to report the exploitation of children in certain industries (particularly small family-owned shops, textile production, restaurants, construction businesses, and periodical sales) and by organized crime (notably for prostitution, pickpocketing, and the distribution of narcotics). In addition to child sex trafficking, the worst forms of child labor present in the country included heavy physical labor and labor on family tobacco farms, a significant health hazard. The government continued to report a declining trend in the number of children detained by police for vagrancy and begging. As of October, police had identified 1,177 child runaways and vagrants. Many observers believed adults exploited these children. Police placed 209 of the apprehended children in protective custody for up to 24 hours and sent 181 to crisis centers for longer periods. ### d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation The law prohibits discrimination in employment and occupation with regard to nationality, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, race, color, age, social origin, language, political and religious beliefs, membership in trade unions and civil society organizations, family and marital status, and mental or physical disabilities. Although the government effectively enforced these laws generally, discrimination in employment and occupation occurred across all sectors of the economy with respect to gender, disability, and minority status. According to the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, the majority of discrimination complaints received throughout the year were related to employment, predominantly with regard to unfair treatment under collective bargaining agreements. Union leaders stated the government did not effectively enforce the labor law. They complained that court proceedings often took years and fines were not strong enough deterrents to antiunion discrimination. The government funded programs to encourage employers to overcome stereotypes and prejudice when hiring members of disadvantaged groups, such as persons with disabilities. In October a lawyer told the media he received complaints that some companies hire women only if they sign declarations that they will not become pregnant for at least two years. According to NGOs, for work in the same position, men received 20 percent higher pay than women in the private sector and 5 percent more in the public sector and those gaps increased with workers’ age. The law prohibits overtime work for pregnant women. Persons with disabilities and women with children up to the age of six may work overtime at the employer’s request if they provide written consent. According to Eurostat, the pay gap between women and men was 13.4 percent in 2014. Workplace discrimination against minorities continued to be a problem. General public mistrust, coupled with their low level of education, made locating work more difficult for Roma. According to a 2013 government-commissioned survey, the average income in Romani communities was 71 percent lower than the national average, mostly due to high unemployment and prevalence of low-skilled workers. The survey found that 34 percent of Roma depended on social security, living off social assistance, disability compensation, and pensions. It also found that 18 percent of Roma could not find a job because of their ethnic background. The law requires the Interior Ministry, DANS, and the State Agency for Technical Operations to allot 1 percent of their public administration positions for persons with disabilities. Enforcement was poor, however, and employers did not feel motivated to hire persons with disabilities, citing inaccessible public infrastructure, low levels of education, and lack of sufficient funding for modifying workplaces. NGOs criticized the system of evaluating persons with disabilities based on the degree of their lost ability to work, which effectively prohibited many persons with disabilities who are able to work from having a job. The Commission for Protection against Discrimination reported receiving an increased number of complaints of employment discrimination. The Agency for Persons with Disabilities estimated that 10 percent of persons with disabilities earned an income. In 2015 the law was amended to rescind the government’s authority to grant preferential public procurement contracts to specialized enterprises and cooperatives employing persons with disabilities. The privilege was rescinded because many employers fictitiously hired persons with disabilities in order to win a contract. NGOs reported that the amendment hurt companies that actually did employ persons with disabilities, and as a result the number of employed persons with disabilities decreased. ### e. Acceptable Conditions of Work The national minimum wage was 420 levs ($235) per month. In September the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria issued a report stating more than 22 percent of citizens lived under the poverty line, which it defined as 326 levs ($182) per month. The government set the official poverty line at 300 levs ($168). According to the National Statistics Institute, 22 percent of the ethnic Bulgarian population in 2015 lived in poverty, while among the Turkish population the poverty level was 36.4 percent, and among the Romani population, 67.2 percent. Among workers with a secondary education, 15.6 percent of Turks and 18.1 percent of the Roma lived in poverty, compared with 5.8 percent of ethnic Bulgarians. Ethnicity made no difference in the poverty rates of workers with less than a secondary education. The law provides for a standard workweek of 40 hours with at least one 24-hour rest period per week. The law also provides for paid holidays and annual leave. The law prohibits excessive compulsory overtime. The law prohibits overtime work for children under the age of 18. Persons undertaking continuing education may work overtime at the employer’s request if they provide written consent. The law stipulates that premium pay for overtime cannot be less than 150 percent of standard pay during workdays, 175 percent during weekends, and 200 percent during 12 official holidays. The law limits the amount of overtime a worker may work to 150 hours per year. The law allows for one-day labor contracts for unskilled jobs in agriculture. The Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria criticized the law’s provision for calculating accumulated working time, noting that it gave employers a way to abuse overtime requirements and thus hire fewer workers. A national labor safety program, with standards established by law, provides employees the right to healthy and nonhazardous working conditions. Workers can remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without jeopardizing their employment, and authorities effectively protected employees in this situation. The Ministry of Labor and Social Policy is responsible for enforcing both the minimum wage and the standard workweek. The law penalizes labor violations with fines ranging from 1,500 to 15,000 levs ($840 to $8,400), which according to trade unions failed to act as a deterrent. Besides fines, penalties may include administrative provisions, such as suspending operations and terminating the employment of those responsible for the violation. As of September, the General Labor Inspectorate conducted nearly 33,000 inspections of companies covering nearly 1.3 million employees, identifying close to 124,000 violations and imposing various sanctions, including collecting 5.4 million levs ($3 million) in fines. The inspectorate stated that many employers would replace civil contracts with the required labor contracts, which comply with all of the provisions of the law for full-time employment, as soon as a planned labor inspection campaign was announced in the media. The government annually adopts a program for occupational safety and health, which outlines goals and priorities in these areas. The General Labor Inspectorate, which has 28 regional offices, is responsible for monitoring and enforcing occupational safety and health requirements. Persons who violate safety and health regulations can be subject to a fine of 100 to 500 levs ($56 to $280), employers to a fine of 1,500 to 15,000 levs ($840 to $8,400), and employing officials to a fine of 1,000 to 10,000 levs ($560 to $5,600). As of January, there were 347 labor inspectors. Of the violations identified by the inspectorate, 50 percent involved safety and health requirements. According to the Labor Inspectorate, its activity in the past several years has resulted in increased compliance, with 84 percent of inspected companies in compliance with occupational safety and health requirements, but enforcement was generally less effective in small- and medium-sized companies than in big ones. Legal protections or government inspections did not cover informal workers in the significant grey-market economy. In September a Center for the Study of Democracy survey estimated that 17.2 percent of the labor force worked in the grey economy, but many of those employees received undeclared payments above their official wages and only 1 or 2 percent worked without a proper employment contract. The Bulgarian Industrial Capital Association stated the grey economy represented a little more than 31 percent of gross domestic product and its relatively large share of the economy was mostly due to administrative interference in the employment market. Conditions in some sectors, particularly destruction and disposal of ammunition, construction, mining, chemicals, and transportation, continued to pose risks for workers in those sectors. In the first six months of the year, there were 1,431 work-related accidents. Equipment and technology safety violations were the most common causes of occupational accidents. The government strictly enforced the law requiring companies to conduct occupational health and safety risk assessments and to adopt measures to eliminate or reduce any identified risks. Some 96 percent of the companies inspected in 2015 had such risk assessments. As of July, there were 33 work-related deaths, mainly in the construction and manufacturing sectors. In May, two workers were killed in an accident at the gunpowder-processing workshop of an arms manufacturing plant. ## View report by: ### On This Page - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from: - a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings - b. Disappearance - c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment - d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention - e. Denial of Fair Public Trial - f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence - Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties, Including: - a. Freedom of Speech and Press - b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association - c. Freedom of Religion - d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons - Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process - Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government - Section 5. Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights - Section 6. Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons - Section 7. Worker Rights - a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining - b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor - c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment - d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation - e. Acceptable Conditions of Work Tags BulgariaBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Back to Top 01 / Select a Year 02 / Select Sections - Select All Sections 03 / Select Countries You can add more than one country or area. - White House - USA.gov - Office of the Inspector General - Archives - Contact Us follow us FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery - Privacy Policy - Accessibility Statement - Copyright Information - FOIA - No FEAR Act ## U.S. Department of State #### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
text/markdown	0.107748	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/usc/118/66/10_130.json	### §130. Authority to withhold from public disclosure certain technical data (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense may withhold from public disclosure any technical data with military or space application in the possession of, or under the control of, the Department of Defense, if such data may not be exported lawfully outside the United States without an approval, authorization, or license under the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.) or the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.). However, technical data may not be withheld under this section if regulations promulgated under either such Act authorize the export of such data pursuant to a general, unrestricted license or exemption in such regulations. (b) Regulations under this section shall be published in the Federal Register for a period of no less than 30 days for public comment before promulgation. Such regulations shall address, where appropriate, releases of technical data to allies of the United States and to qualified United States contractors, including United States contractors that are small business concerns, for use in performing United States Government contracts. (c) In this section, the term "technical data with military or space application" means any blueprints, drawings, plans, instructions, computer software and documentation, or other technical information that can be used, or be adapted for use, to design, engineer, produce, manufacture, operate, repair, overhaul, or reproduce any military or space equipment or technology concerning such equipment. (Added Pub. L. 98–94, title XII, §1217(a), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 690, §140c; amended Pub. L. 99–145, title XIII, §1303(a)(3), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 738; renumbered §130 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(3), 110(d)(6), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 994, 1003; Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(3), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 284; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1484(b)(1), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1715; Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title X, §1081(b)(3)(A), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2418.) #### Editorial Notes #### References in Text The Export Administration Act of 1979, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 96–72, Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 503, which was classified principally to chapter 56 (§4601 et seq.) of Title 50, War and National Defense, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVII, §1766(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2232, except for sections 11A, 11B, and 11C thereof (50 U.S.C. 4611, 4612, 4613). The Arms Export Control Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 90–629, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1320, which is classified principally to chapter 39 (§2751 et seq.) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2751 of Title 22 and Tables. #### Amendments 2016—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 114–328 substituted "(50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.)" for "(50 U.S.C. App. 2401–2420)". 1990—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 101–510 substituted "Regulations under this section" for "(1) Within 90 days after September 24, 1983, the Secretary of Defense shall propose regulations to implement this section. Such regulations" in subsec. (b) and redesignated former subsec. (b)(2) as subsec. (c). 1987—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 100–26 inserted "the term" after "In this section,". 1986—Pub. L. 99–433 renumbered section 140c of this title as this section and substituted "Authority" for "Secretary of Defense: authority" in section catchline. 1985—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 99–145 substituted "September 24, 1983" for "enactment of this section".
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.arb.796025/gov.uscourts.arb.796025.1.0.pdf.json	Case 4:22-bk-04271-BMW Doc 1 Filed 06/30/22 Entered 06/30/22 10:05:34 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 4Case 4:22-bk-04271-BMW Doc 1 Filed 06/30/22 Entered 06/30/22 10:05:34 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 4Case 4:22-bk-04271-BMW Doc 1 Filed 06/30/22 Entered 06/30/22 10:05:34 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 4Case 4:22-bk-04271-BMW Doc 1 Filed 06/30/22 Entered 06/30/22 10:05:34 Desc Main Document Page 4 of 4
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.cbp.gov/bulletins/36indexno10.pdf.json	# # ! " # ! ! " ! $# %%"& $ ! " %% ' ( ) * + ! ! $ , - .$ /0 $ $ "$%$ !$ $ 1$ 2!! ! 3 %%4! 5" 3%%%%# #$ # 6 %% ! 5" 3 %%%%2" # 7 %%/" 3%%%% & $ $ $ + %%%%# ! 6 # ! " 0 8 0 8 /$#9 $ : 0 + ;7 ## " " 0 0! $ ! $ % $ +< U.S. G.P.O. 2002–491–793–40048
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap_docs/2023/09/20/commonwealth_v._strowhouer_d..pdf.json	IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. DAVID STROWHOUER, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 310 MAL 2023 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 20th day of September, 2023 , the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED .
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.macpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/March-2014-MACStats.pdf.json	# MACStats: Medicaid and CHIP Program Statistics # 62 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MACStats Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................... 64 T ABLE 1. Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment as a P ercentage of the U.S. Population, 2013 ............ 65 T ABLE 2. Medicaid Enrollment b y State and Selected Characteristics, FY 2011 (thousands) . . . . . . . . . 66 T ABLE 3. CHIP Enrollment b y State, FY 2013 ............................................. 68 T ABLE 4. Child Enrollment in Medicaid-Financed Co verage by State, and CHIP-Financed Coverage by State and Family Income, FY 2013 .................................... T ABLE 5. Child Enrollment in Se parate CHIP Programs by State and Managed Care Participation, FY 2013 ......................................................... T ABLE 6. Medicaid Spending b y State, Category, and Source of Funds, FY 2013 (millions) .......... 7 A%/( . 7 otal 0edicaid %eneft 6pending by 6tate and &ategory, )< millions .............. T ABLE 8. CHIP Spending b y State, FY 2013 (millions) ....................................... 7 A%/( . 0edicaid and &+,3 ,ncome (ligibility /e vels as a 3ercentage of the )ederal Poverty Level for Children and Pregnant Women by State, January 2014 ................ 80 T ABLE 10. Medicaid Income Eligibility Lev els as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level for Non-Aged, Non-Disabled, Non-Pregnant Adults by State, January 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 T ABLE 11. Medicaid Income Eligibility Lev els as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level for Individuals Age 65 and Older and Persons with Disabilities by State, 2014 ............... 86 7 A%/( . 0andator y and Optional 0edicaid %enefts ........................................ 88 T ABLE 13. Maxim um Allowable Medicaid Premiums and Cost Sharing, FY 2014 ................... T ABLE 14. F ederal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAPs) and Enhanced FMAPs (E-FMAPs) by State, Selected Periods in FY 2011–FY 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T ABLE 15. Medicaid as a Share of States’ Total Budgets and State-Funded Budgets, State FY 2012 .................................................................... T ABLE 16. National Health Expenditures b y Type and Payer, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 A%/( . +istorical and 3roMected 1ational +ealth ([penditures by 3ayer for 6elected <ears, 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE 18. Characteristics of Non-Institutionalized Individuals by Source of Health Insurance, 2013 ............................................................. 100 7 A%/( . ,ncome as a 3 ercentage of the )ederal 3overty /evel )3/ for 9arious )amily Sizes, 2014 .................................................................. 105 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 63 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # TABLE 20. Supplemental P ayments by State and Category, FY 2013 (millions) .................... 106 T ABLE 21. F ederal CHIP Allotments, FY 2013 and FY 2014 (millions) .......................... 110 T ABLE 22. F ederal CHIPRA Bonus Payments (millions) ...................................... 113 7 A%/( . 3 rovider Availability 0easures of Access to &are for 0edicaid&+,3 %enefciaries, ... 115 T ABLE 24. P arent-Reported Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Children by Source of Health Insurance, 2011–2012 ....................................... 116 T ABLE 25. P arent-Reported Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Children with Special +ealth &are 1eeds &6+&1 by 6ource of +ealth ,nsurance, 2 .............. 120 7 A%/( . 0easures of Access to &are for 1on,nstitutionali]ed ,ndividuals Age to by Source of Health Insurance, 2012 ............................................ 122 7 A%/( . 0easures of Access to &are for 1on,nstitutionali]ed 0edicaid %enefciaries Age to by 5eceipt of 6upplemental 6ecurity ,ncome 66,, 2 ............ 126 MA CStats Appendix ..................................................................... 0A &6tats Appendi[ 7able ,nde[ of Access 0easures in 0arch 0A&6tats 7ables 2 . . . . . . . . 133 # 64 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # Overview MACStats, a standing section in all Commission reports to the Congress, presents data and information on the 0edicaid and &+,3 programs that otherZise can be diffcult to fnd and are spread across multiple sources. ,n this report, 0A&6tats includes statespecifc information about program enrollment, spending, eligibility levels, and federal medical assistance percentages (FMAPs). ,t also details benefts and permissible cost sharing under 0edicaid and the dollar amounts of common federal poverty levels (FPLs) used to determine eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP. In addition, it provides information that places these programs in the broader context of state budgets and national health expenditures. 1eZ in this report are fve tables presenting access to care measures for individuals Zith 0edicaid &+,3 and other types of coverage. 7he measures refect fve access domains provider availability, connection with the health care system, contact with health professionals, timeliness of care, and receipt of appropriate care. Key points in this report include: f # 7otal 0edicaid spending greZ by about percent in fscal year )< , reaching . billion (Table 6). Total CHIP spending grew by about 8 percent, reaching $13.2 billion (Table 8). f # 7he estimated number of individuals ever covered by 0edicaid remained steady at . million in )< , compared to . million in )< 0A&3A& communication Zith Offce of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; includes about one million individuals in the U.S. territories). CHIP enrollment also remained steady at 8.4 million (Table 3). f # Medicaid as a share of state budgets varies depending on how it is measured (Table 15). Looking only at the statefunded portion of state budgets that is, the portion fnanced from their oZn revenues, 0edicaid·s share Zas . percent in state fscal year 6)< . After including federal funds in state budgets, a typical practice in other data sources, 0edicaid·s share Zas . percent in SFY 2012. f # The Medicaid and CHIP programs together accounted for 15.5 percent of national health e[penditures in calendar year , and their share is proMected to reac h percent in the ne[t decade 7ables and . f # Medicaid and CHIP eligibility levels for most child and adult populations have been converted as of to refect the application of uniform modifed adMusted gross income 0A, rules across states, and half of states are covering a new group of low-income adults (Tables and . (ligibility for individuals Zith disabilities and those age and older Zas largely unchanged (Table 11). # MAR CH 2014 \| # 65 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # TABLE 1. Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment as a P ercentage of the U.S. Population, 2013 Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment Administrative Data Survey Data (NHIS) Ever enrolled during the year Point in time Point in time Medicaid 71.7 million 1 # 58.1 million 1 # n ot available CH i P 8.4 million 5.8 million n ot available Totals for Medicaid and CH i P 80.1 million 1 # 63.9 million 1 # 52.1 million # U.S. Population Census Bureau Survey Data (NHIS) 317.1 million 316.1 million 310.2 million, excluding active-duty military and individuals in institutions # Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment as a Percentage of U.S. Population 25.3% 20.2% 16.8% Notes: e xcludes u . s . territories. Medicaid and CH i P enrollment numbers obtained from administrative data include individuals who received limited benefits (e.g., emergency ser vices only). Administrative data are estimates for fiscal year ( fy ) 2013 ( o ctober 2012 through s eptember 2013) from the President’s budget for fy 2015. b y combining administrative totals from Medicaid and CH i P, some individuals may be double-counted if they were enrolled in both programs during the year. o vercounting of enrollees in the administrative data may occur for other reasons—for example, individuals may move and be enrolled in two states’ Medicaid programs during the year. n ational Health i nterview s urvey ( n H is ) data are based on interviews conducted between January and June 2013. n H is excludes individuals in institutions, such as nursing homes, and active-duty military; in addition, surveys such as n H is generally do not count limited benefits as Medicaid/CH i P coverage and respondents are known to underreport Medicaid and CH i P coverage. The Census b ureau number in the ever-enrolled column was the estimated u . s . resident population as of d ecember 2013 (the month with the largest count); the number of residents ever living in the u nited s tates during the year is not available. The Census b ureau point-in-time number is the average estimated monthly number of u . s . residents for 2013. f or more detailed discussion of why Medicaid and CH i P enrollment numbers can vary, see Table 1 in MACPAC’s March 2012 MAC s tats. As indicated here, reasons include differences in the sources of data (e.g., administrative records versus interviews), the individuals included in the data (e.g., those receiving full versus limited benefits, those who are living in the community versus an institution such as a nursing home), and the enrollment period examined (e.g., ever during the year versus at a point in time). 1 e xcludes about one million individuals in the u . s . territories. All other figures in the table exclude individuals in the u . s . territories, but the number of excluded individuals is not available. Sources: MACPAC analysis based on the following: MACPAC communication with o ffice of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices; n ational Center for Health s tatistics analysis of n H is data for MACPAC (see Table 18); CH i P s tatistical e nrollment d ata ( seds ) data (see Table 3); and b ureau of the Census, Population estimates, National totals: Vintage 2013 . http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2013/index.html. # 66 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 66 \| MAR CH 2014Basis of Eligibility1Dual Eligible Status2All dual-eligibleenrolleesDual-eligibleenrollees withfull benefitsDual-eligibleenrollees withlimited benefitsStateTotal Child Adult Disabled Aged Total Age 65+ Total Age 65+ Total Age 65+Total67,605 32,038 19,163 9,952 6,452 10,179 6,010 7,552 4,478 2,627 1,532Alabama1,061539 184221 118212117975111566Alaska13574 3418 915815800Arizona1,283571 481139 9114886118643022Arkansas693357 115151 711286870425827California11,6904,563 5,0491,043 1,0341,2959091,2608823526Colorado762437 162103 60945569422513Connecticut785317 28377 10715510383487255delaware24397 10426 152714127158district of Columbia23282 9338 192315161075florida3,9832,010 844622 508739479387267352213georgia1,9531,139 309322 1833061791589314886Hawaii280115 11128 263725322243idaho267165 3943 1940182712136illinois2,8831,515 816323 2283722093331854024indiana1,189656 253188 9317383107576626iowa589275 18684 44884471331711kansas416236 6180 39723649262310kentucky937449 147242 9919598113588240louisiana1,292682 254238 118204116113639154Maine435129 116123 671046259274535Maryland1,036487 319149 801297284464526Massachusetts1,519384 633347 1562591342371132221Michigan2,3401,181 637374 1472911342491134222Minnesota1,106460 410137 991497913570159Mississippi781406 115170 901629084497841Missouri1,138577 239224 9819493168802613Montana13576 2323 13251317985nebraska254148 4941 173716371500nevada395239 7649 31513024162614new Hampshire171100 2431 1635152310125TABLE 2.Medicaid Enrollment by State and Selected Characteristics, FY 2011 (thousands) # MAR CH 2014 \| # 67 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 67Basis of Eligibility1Dual Eligible Status2All dual-eligibleenrolleesDual-eligibleenrollees withfull benefitsDual-eligibleenrollees withlimited benefitsStateTotal Child Adult Disabled Aged Total Age 65+ Total Age 65+ Total Age 65+new Jersey1,194629 216190 1592361482061273021new Mexico651367 16872 45744441253319newyork5,7902,127 2,321697 64684457172448112090north Carolina1,9481,007 411341 1893401852631427743northdakota8545 1812 916913732ohio2,3391,111 633401 19437418125512712053oklahoma907492 221126 6812465101532312oregon729351 212103 621096068394021Pennsylvania2,5291,107 532638 2524442403671937747Rhodeisland19990 4341 264123351964south Carolina961477 232166 8716387140742313southdakota13277 2320 13221314884Tennessee1,533795 322270 1462791441567912365Texas5,1363,258 717690 470714460435289278171utah372218 9145 173616311452vermont20168 8525 233722281686virginia1,045566 180186 113192107127746532washington1,397787 297212 10118198132764822westvirginia440208 65124 43874351263617wisconsin1,274497 461169 1472271422061292114wyoming8958 1312 61267442Notes:enrollment numbers generally include individuals ever enrolled in Medicaid-financed coverage during the year, even if for a single month; however, in the event individuals were also enrolled in CHiP-financed Medicaidcoverage (i.e., Medicaid-expansion CHiP) during the year, they are excluded if their most recent enrollment month was in Medicaid-expansion CHiP.numbers exclude individuals enrolled only in Medicaid-expansion CHiP during theyear and enrollees in the territories.due to the unavailability of several states’ Medicaidstatisticalinformationsystem (Msis) Annual Personsummary (APs) data for fiscal year (fy) 2011, which is the source used in prior editions of this table, MACPAC calculated enrollmentfrom the full Msisdata files that are used to create the APsfiles. As a result, figures shown here are not directly comparable to earlier years.for MACPAC’s analysis, Medicaid enrollees were assigned a unique national identification (id)number using an algorithm that incorporates state-specificidnumbers and beneficiary characteristics such as date of birth and gender. The state and national enrollment counts shown here are unduplicated using this nationalid.Although state-level information is not yet available, the estimated number of individuals ever enrolled in Medicaid (excluding Medicaid-expansion CHiP) is 71.2 million forfy2012 and 71.7 million forfy2013. Thesefy2012–fy2013 figures exclude about 1 million enrollees in the territories (MACPAC communication with CMsoffice of the Actuary, March 2014).1Children and adults under age 65 who qualify for Medicaid on the basis of a disability are included in the disabled category. About 706,000 enrollees age 65 and older are identified in the data as disabled; given that disability isnot an eligibility pathway for individuals age 65 and older, MACPAC recodes these enrollees as aged.2dual-eligible enrollees are covered by both Medicaid and Medicare; those with limited benefits only receive Medicaid assistance with Medicare premiums and cost sharing.Source:MACPAC analysis of Medicaidstatisticalinformationsystem (Msis) data as offebruary 2014.TABLE 2, Continued # 68 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 68 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 3.CHIP Enrollment by State, FY 2013ChildrenAdultsStateProgram Type1(as ofJanuary 1, 2014)MedicaidexpansionSeparateCHIPTotal childrenenrolled ParentsPregnantwomenTotal adultsenrolledTotal CHIPEnrollmentTotal–2,481,333 5,649,460 8,130,793 209,324 10,149 219,473 8,350,266Alabamaseparate– 113,490113,490––– 113,490AlaskaMedicaidexpansion 16,566–16,566––– 16,566Arizonaseparate– 80,23880,238––– 80,238Arkansas Combination106,413 2,888109,30110,425–10,425 119,726California Combination510,424 1,092,8591,603,283––– 1,603,283Colorado2, 3Combination– 126,169126,169– 4,8734,873 131,042Connecticutseparate– 18,99918,999––– 18,999delaware Combination79 13,10113,180––– 13,180district of ColumbiaMedicaidexpansion 9,057–9,057––– 9,057florida Combination1,072 472,343473,415––– 473,415georgiaseparate– 269,906269,906––– 269,906Hawaii Medicaidexpansion 30,979–30,979––– 30,979idaho4Combination19,881 25,51845,399392–392 45,791illinoisCombination162,134 174,963337,097––– 337,097indiana Combination105,655 46,760152,415––– 152,415iowaCombination22,159 61,51183,670––– 83,670kansasseparate– 76,16476,164––– 76,164kentucky Combination51,391 32,67884,069––– 84,069louisiana Combination140,876 9,092149,968––– 149,968MaineCombination19,071 10,64129,712––– 29,712Maryland Medicaidexpansion 135,454–135,454––– 135,454Massachusetts Combination69,113 79,606148,719––– 148,719Michigan Combination19,229 70,44189,670––– 89,670Minnesota Combination91 3,7443,835––– 3,835Mississippiseparate– 93,12093,120––– 93,120Missouri Combination55,017 37,90192,918––– 92,918Montana3Combination– 31,49631,496––– 31,496nebraska Combination53,790 1,99355,783––– 55,783nevada3Combination– 20,27720,277––– 20,277new Hampshire Medicaidexpansion 19,450–19,450––– 19,450 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 69 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 69ChildrenAdultsStateProgram Type1(as ofJanuary 1, 2014)MedicaidexpansionSeparateCHIPTotal childrenenrolled ParentsPregnantwomenTotal adultsenrolledTotal CHIPEnrollmentnew Jersey Combination90,512 116,249206,761183,717 291184,008 390,769new Mexico Medicaidexpansion 9,368–9,36814,790–14,790 24,158newyork3Combination– 490,114490,114––– 490,114north Carolina Combination81,656 201,916283,572––– 283,572northdakota Combination2,331 8,95011,281––– 11,281ohioMedicaidexpansion 286,817–286,817––– 286,817oklahoma Combination140,373 7,538147,911––– 147,911oregonseparate– 128,061128,061––– 128,061Pennsylvaniaseparate– 267,073267,073––– 267,073Rhodeisland Combination24,508 2,06926,577– 349349 26,926south Carolina Medicaidexpansion 76,191–76,191––– 76,191southdakota Combination13,357 4,27517,632––– 17,632Tennessee Combination22,906 83,567106,473––– 106,473Texasseparate– 1,034,6131,034,613––– 1,034,613utahseparate– 63,00163,001––– 63,001vermontseparate– 7,3937,393––– 7,393virginia Combination92,690 104,221196,911– 4,6364,636 201,547washingtonseparate– 44,07344,073––– 44,073westvirginiaseparate– 37,06537,065––– 37,065wisconsin Combination92,723 74,569167,292––– 167,292wyomingseparate– 8,8158,815––– 8,815Notes:enrollment numbers generally include individuals ever enrolled during the year, even if for a single month; however, in the event individuals were in multiple categories during the year (for example, in Medicaid for the firsthalf of the year but a separate CHiP program for the second half), the individual would only be counted in the most recent category. CHiP-funded coverage of childless adults was prohibited afterdecember 31, 2009.new Jerseyand Rhodeisland cover targeted low-income pregnant women under a CHiP state plan option; all other CHiP-funded coverage of adults shown in the table was permitted through waivers.data shown in the table are as of March 4,2014; states may subsequently revise their current or historical data.1under CHiP, states have the option to use an expansion of Medicaid, a separate CHiP program, or a combination of both approaches.in 2014, all states are eligible to receive CHiP funding for at least some Medicaid-enrolledchildren due to a mandatory transition of 6- to 18-year-olds between 100 and 133 percentfPlin separate CHiP programs to Medicaid, and a mandatory income disregard equal to 5 percentfPlthat effectively raises Medicaideligibility levels by 5 percentage points.see Table 9 for more information.2Colorado data are from fiscal year (fy) 2012.3Montana,nevada, andnewyork were combination programs infy2013 but did not report any Medicaid-expansion enrollees in the CHiPstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds). Colorado became a combination program infy2013 but had not yet reported anysedsdata for that year as of March 4, 2014; as a result,fy2012 data shown here do not include Medicaid-expansion enrollees.4data on adults are fromfy2012 foridaho.Sources:for numbers of children: MACPAC analysis of CHiPstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds) from Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices (CMs) as of March 4, 2014; for numbers of adults: CMsanalysis for MACPAC ofsedsas offebruary 28, 2014, as reported by states; for CHiP program type: MACPAC analysis of CHiP state plan amendments on the CMswebsite and CMs,Children’s Health Insurance Program: Plan activity as of January 1, 2014.TABLE 3, Continued # 70 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 70 \| MAR CH 2014StateMedicaid-FinancedChildren1CHIP-Financed Children(Medicaid-expansion and Separate CHIP Coverage)All incomesAt or below 200% FPLFrom 200% through250% FPLAbove 250% FPLAll incomesNumber Percentage Number Percentage Number PercentageTotal38,731,044 7,223,757 88.8% 697,169 8.6% 209,867 2.6% 8,130,793Alabama616,71891,633 80.7 15,453 13.6 6,404 5.6113,490Alaska86,92616,566 100.0––– –16,566Arizona913,27180,238 100.0––– –80,238Arkansas513,534109,301 100.0––– –109,301California5,318,0801,369,661 85.4 223,271 13.9 10,351 0.61,603,283Colorado2484,882103,468 82.0 22,701 18.0– –126,169Connecticut325,4143,577 18.8 9,646 50.8 5,776 30.418,999delaware396,91613,180 100.0––– –13,180district of Columbia91,712– – 9,057 100.0– –9,057florida2,119,324473,415 100.0––– –473,415georgia1,162,529233,303 86.4 36,603 13.6– –269,906Hawaii138,25826,375 85.1 3,426 11.1 1,178 3.830,979idaho211,60745,399 100.0––– –45,399illinois2,352,202337,097 100.0––– –337,097indiana701,804138,324 90.8 14,091 9.2– –152,415iowa318,37769,836 83.5 1,752 2.1 12,082 14.483,670kansas3237,02669,691 91.5 6,473 8.5– –76,164kentucky485,28684,069 100.0––– –84,069louisiana670,729145,012 96.7 4,956 3.3– –149,968Maine175,12829,712 100.0––– –29,712Maryland490,00939,279 29.0 90,793 67.0 5,382 4.0135,454Massachusetts544,851117,462 79.0 19,798 13.3 11,459 7.7148,719Michigan1,195,64989,670 100.0––– –89,670Minnesota505,2643,663 95.570 1.8102 2.73,835Mississippi467,91893,120 100.0––– –93,120Missouri559,26579,904 86.0 9,068 9.8 3,946 4.292,918Montana83,44731,496 100.0––– –31,496nebraska165,03855,783 100.0––– –55,783nevada3256,10920,277 100.0––– –20,277TABLE 4.Child Enrollment in Medicaid-Financed Coverage by State, and CHIP-Financed Coverage by State and Family Income, FY 2013 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 71 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 71TABLE 4, ContinuedStateMedicaid-FinancedChildren1CHIP-Financed Children(Medicaid-expansion and Separate CHIP Coverage)All incomesAt or below 200% FPLFrom 200% through250% FPLAbove 250% FPLAll incomesNumber Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentagenew Hampshire85,5627,339 37.7% 7,511 38.6% 4,600 23.7%19,450new Jersey662,198157,727 76.3 27,636 13.4 21,398 10.3206,761new Mexico380,2904,308 46.0 5,060 54.0– –9,368newyork2,309,571289,919 59.2 104,921 21.4 95,274 19.4490,114north Carolina32,517,188283,572 100.0––– –283,572northdakota50,95711,281 100.0––– –11,281ohio1,483,176286,817 100.0––– –286,817oklahoma3558,262147,911 100.0––– –147,911oregon401,721112,675 88.0 10,556 8.2 4,830 3.8128,061Pennsylvania1,309,862225,995 84.6 29,068 10.9 12,010 4.5267,073Rhodeisland112,00223,304 87.7 3,273 12.3– –26,577south Carolina3582,29376,191 100.0––– –76,191southdakota346,94817,632 100.0––– –17,632Tennessee790,92392,276 86.7 14,197 13.3– –106,473Texas43,518,8321,034,613 100.0––– –1,034,613utah283,21363,001 100.0––– –63,001vermont72,512– – 3,726 50.4 3,667 49.67,393virginia648,173196,911 100.0––– –196,911washington768,38711,934 27.1 20,731 47.0 11,408 25.944,073westvirginia260,32633,924 91.5 3,141 8.5– –37,065wisconsin542,731167,101 99.9191 0.1– –167,292wyoming58,6448,815 100.0––– –8,815Notes:enrollment numbers generally include children ever enrolled during the year, even if for a single month; however, in the event children were in multiple categories during the year (for example, in Medicaid for the first half ofthe year but in a separate CHiP program for the second half), the child would only be counted in the most recent category. The definition in this table for Medicaid-financed children may differ from that used elsewhere in this report.This table includes children with and without disabilities; in tables using Medicaid eligibility categories, children qualifying on the basis of a disability are counted in the disabled category, not the child category.in 2014, 200 percentof the federal poverty level (fPl) is $23,340 for an individual and $8,120 for each additional family member in the lower 48 states and thedistrict of Columbia.for additional information, see MACstats Table 19.data shown in thetable are as of March 4, 2014; states may subsequently revise their current or historical data.1MACPAC analysis ofstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds), as reported by states, found that 99.4 percent of Medicaid-financed children were at or below 200 percentfPl.2Colorado data are from fiscal year (fy) 2012.3inseds,delaware,nevada,north Carolina,oklahoma,south Carolina, andsouthdakota reported CHiP enrollees above 200 percentfPl, andkansas reported CHiP enrollees above 250 percentfPl; however, their CHiPprograms are reported to only cover individuals at or below these levels. The numbers here were altered to put all of these enrollees at or below 200 (250 in the case ofkansas) percentfPl.4data on Medicaid-financed children are fromfy2012 for Texas.Source:MACPAC analysis of CHiPstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds) data from CMsas of March 4, 2014. # 72 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 72 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 5.Child Enrollment in Separate CHIP Programs by State and Managed Care Participation, FY 2013StateTotal1Managed CareFee for ServicePrimary Care CaseManagementNumber Percentage Number Percentage Number PercentageTotal5,649,460 4,528,41480.2% 919,72316.3% 201,3233.6%Alabama113,490–– 113,490100.0––Alaska–––––––Arizona80,23875,60994.24,6295.8––Arkansas2,888––2,888100.0––California1,092,859977,88589.5 114,97410.5––Colorado2126,169126,169100.0––––Connecticut18,999––18,999100.0––delaware13,10112,94098.8––1611.2district of Columbia–––––––florida472,343459,38197.35,4141.17,5481.6georgia269,906255,89094.814,0165.2––Hawaii–––––––idaho25,518––––25,518100.0illinois174,9636,1563.546,26526.4 122,54270.0indiana46,76041,21288.15,54811.9––iowa61,51161,511100.0––––kansas76,16476,11899.9460.1––kentucky32,67832,55899.61200.4––louisiana9,0921,59017.54,79752.82,70529.8Maine10,641––3,27730.87,36469.2Maryland–––––––Massachusetts79,60629,25536.729,05336.521,29826.8Michigan70,44162,89589.37,54610.7––Minnesota3,7443,13883.860616.2––Mississippi93,12093,120100.0––––Missouri37,90114,91439.322,98760.7––Montana31,496––31,496100.0––nebraska1993––1,993100.0–– # MAR CH 2014 \| # 73 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 73TABLE 5, ContinuedStateTotal1Managed CareFee for ServicePrimary Care CaseManagementNumber Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentagenevada20,27717,71687.4%2,56112.6%––new Hampshire–––––––new Jersey116,249113,43797.62,8122.4––new Mexico–––––––newyork490,114489,45699.96580.1––north Carolina201,916–– 201,916100.0––northdakota8,9504,75453.1––4,19646.9%ohio–––––––oklahoma7,5381902.57,34897.5––oregon128,06114,95011.7 113,10188.3100.0Pennsylvania267,073267,073100.0––––Rhodeisland2,0692,069100.0––––south Carolina–––––––southdakota4,275––1,47734.52,79865.5Tennessee83,567––83,567100.0––Texas1,034,6131,034,613100.0––––utah63,00163,001100.0––––vermont7,393––4115.66,98294.4virginia104,22192,28488.511,93711.5––washington44,07328,35264.315,52035.22010.5westvirginia37,065––37,065100.0––wisconsin74,56961,36382.313,20617.7––wyoming8,8158,815100.0––––Notes:enrollment numbers generally include children ever enrolled during the year, even if for a single month; however, in the event children were in multiple categories during the year (for example, in Medicaid for the firsthalf of the year but in a separate CHiP program for the second half), the child would only be counted in the most recent category. Categorizations of the types of delivery system are based on states’ definitions andstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds) instructions to states. According tosedsinstructions, managed care includes arrangements under which the state contracts with a health maintenance or health insuring organization to providea comprehensive set of services; enrollees choose a plan and a primary care provider (PCP) who will be responsible for managing their care.under fee for service, providers submit claims to the state and are paid a specificamount for each service performed.under primary care case management, providers are paid generally on a fee-for-service basis, but PCPs are paid an additional flat monthly fee for each patient assigned to them for casemanagement.data shown in the table are as of March 4, 2014; states may subsequently revise their current or historical data.1because this table shows enrollment only in separate CHiP programs, these totals do not include child enrollment in Medicaid-expansion CHiP programs.2Colorado data are from fiscal year (fy) 2012.Source:MACPAC analysis of CHiPstatisticalenrollmentdatasystem (seds) data from CMsas of March 4, 2014. # 74 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 74 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 6.Medicaid Spending by State, Category, and Source of Funds, FY2013 (millions)BenefitsState Program Administration Total MedicaidStateTotal Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal StateAlabama$5,000$3,454 $1,546$217$139 $78$5,216$3,592 $1,624Alaska1,341776 56510573 331,446849 598Arizona8,4375,727 2,710233159 748,6705,886 2,784Arkansas4,1562,937 1,220272171 1014,4283,108 1,320California61,42631,501 29,9254,6312,614 2,01766,05734,115 31,942Colorado5,0482,536 2,512267167 995,3152,703 2,612Connecticut6,4153,243 3,172308177 1316,7233,420 3,303delaware1,558867 6909871 271,655938 717district of Columbia2,2761,592 68412170 522,3971,661 736florida18,41110,742 7,670820514 30619,23111,255 7,976georgia8,8885,889 2,999471307 1649,3596,196 3,163Hawaii1,586825 76111081 291,697907 790idaho1,6421,167 47512094 251,7621,262 500illinois15,4947,834 7,6601,039658 38216,5338,492 8,041indiana7,9315,349 2,582437272 1658,3675,620 2,747iowa3,6232,186 1,436183131 523,8062,317 1,489kansas2,5451,443 1,102176114 612,7211,557 1,163kentucky5,7264,047 1,680209148 615,9354,195 1,740louisiana6,8894,514 2,375293188 1057,1814,701 2,480Maine2,8271,778 1,04913292 412,9591,870 1,089Maryland7,6883,900 3,788365224 1418,0534,124 3,929Massachusetts12,9996,520 6,479687418 27013,6876,937 6,749Michigan12,3088,180 4,129662413 25012,9718,593 4,378Minnesota8,7814,440 4,342563327 2369,3444,766 4,577Mississippi4,7093,484 1,224171121 504,8793,605 1,274Missouri8,8635,504 3,359347220 1279,2105,724 3,486Montana997671 3257853 251,075725 350nebraska1,7901,000 79011679 371,9061,079 827nevada1,7971,083 71412182 391,9191,165 754new Hampshire1,189603 58510370 341,292673 619new Jersey10,4815,259 5,222663381 28211,1445,639 5,505new Mexico3,2812,303 978189134 553,4702,437 1,033newyork52,49026,473 26,0171,7031,037 66754,19327,510 26,683north Carolina11,7227,719 4,003741493 24812,4638,212 4,251northdakota775411 3656141 21836451 385ohio16,62810,615 6,014609394 21417,23711,009 6,228 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 75 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 75TABLE 6, ContinuedBenefitsState Program Administration Total MedicaidStateTotal Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal Stateoklahoma$4,482$2,916 $1,566$270$177 $94$4,752$3,092 $1,660oregon5,0713,185 1,886530308 2215,6003,493 2,107Pennsylvania20,92211,375 9,548777476 30121,69911,850 9,849Rhodeisland1,909988 92110973 372,0181,061 958south Carolina4,6903,317 1,373232157 754,9223,473 1,448southdakota758459 2996240 22820499 321Tennessee8,6785,784 2,894344220 1249,0226,005 3,018Texas27,75216,596 11,1561,334832 50229,08617,428 11,658utah2,0871,454 63314292 512,2291,546 684vermont1,452816 6363530 51,487846 641virginia7,2183,654 3,565387257 1307,6053,911 3,694washington7,8063,915 3,891602357 2448,4074,272 4,135westvirginia3,0072,169 838174120 543,1812,289 892wisconsin7,0354,222 2,812356233 1237,3914,456 2,935wyoming547279 2674833 15595312 283Subtotal (States)$431,130 $247,698 $183,432 $22,821 $14,128 $8,693 $453,952 $261,826 $192,126Americansamoa25 14111 1026 14 11guam60 33273 2163 35 28northern Marianaislands31 18142 2034 20 14Puerto Rico1,837 1,011827107 81261,944 1,091 853virginislands25 14114 2129 16 13Subtotal (States & Territories) $433,110 $248,788 $184,322 $22,938 $14,216 $8,722 $456,048 $263,003 $193,045state Medicaidfraud Controlunits (MfCus)– – – 296 22274296 222 74Medicaid survey and certification ofnursing and intermediate care facilities– – – 307 23077307 230 77vaccines for Children (vfC) program– – – – – – 3,607 3,607 -Total$433,110 $248,788 $184,322 $23,541 $14,668 $8,873 $460,2581$267,0631$193,196Notes:Total federal spending shown here ($267.063 billion) will differ from total federal outlays shown in fiscal year (fy)2013 budget documents due to slight differences in the timing of data for the states and the treatmentof certain adjustments.benefits and Administration columns do not sum to Total Medicaid due to the inclusion ofvfC in Total Medicaid.federal spending in the territories is capped; however, they report their total spendingregardless of whether they have reached their caps. As a result, federal spending shown here may exceed the amounts actually paid to the territories.state shares for MfCus and survey and certification are MACPAC estimatesbased on 75 percent federal match.state-level estimates for these items are available but are not shown here.vfC is authorized in the Medicaid statute but is operated as a separate program; 100 percent federal funding financesthe purchase of vaccines for children who are enrolled in Medicaid, uninsured, or privately insured without vaccine coverage.spending on administration is only for state programs; federal oversight spending is not included.All states had certified their CMs-64financial Management Report (fMR) submissions as offebruary 12, 2014.figures presented in this table may change if states revise their expenditure data after this date. Zeroes indicateamounts less than $0.5 million that round to zero.dashes indicate amounts that are true zeroes.1Amount exceeds the sum ofbenefits andstate Program Administration columns due to the inclusion ofvfC.Sources:for state and territory spending: MACPAC analysis of CMs-64financial Management Report (fMR) net expenditure data as offebruary 2014; for all other (MfCus, survey and certification,vfC): Centers for Medicare& Medicaidservices (CMs),fiscal year2014 justification of estimates for Appropriations Committees,baltimore, Md, http://www.cms.gov/About-CMs/Agency-information/Performancebudget/downloads/fy2014-CJ-final.pdf. # 76 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 76 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 7.Total Medicaid Benefit Spending by State and Category, FY 2013 (millions)TotalFee for ServiceManagedCare andPremiumAssistanceMedicarePremiumsandCoinsuranceCollectionsStateHospital Physician DentalOtherpractitionerClinicandhealthcenterOtheracute DrugsInstitutionalLTSSHome andcommunitybased LTSSAlabama$5,000$1,891 $360 $85 $42 $84 $481 $294 $972 $460 $116 $253 -$39Alaska1,341303 106 62 20 185 99 25 160 373 0 23 -16Arizona8,4371,467 32 4 5 122 257 5 68 6 6,301 171-0Arkansas4,156990 298 73 19 113 798 159 965 478 19 296 -50California61,42616,291 827 402 93 2,720 7,634 740 5,885 8,881 16,162 2,269 -478Colorado5,0481,713 358 122 – 131 313 166 695 872 624 100 -44Connecticut6,4151,721 314 155 101 241 432 306 1,738 1,351 2 364 -310delaware1,55851 12 33 1 40 64 60 38 101 1,130 34 -5district of Columbia2,276359 46 29 2 142 122 61 327 462 702 36 -13florida18,4115,104 1,231 257 40 223 1,585 565 3,299 1,522 3,412 1,324 -150georgia8,8882,199 375 44 35 9 766 239 1,420 907 2,642 324 -73Hawaii1,586118 1 20 0 25 4-09 108 1,288 58 -44idaho1,642506 79 0 11 160 215 56 290 266 48 42 -30illinois15,4946,498 813 178 108 323 1,366 374 2,972 1,675 964 388 -165indiana7,9311,858 277 170 10 353 267 349 1,996 935 1,589 163 -37iowa3,623793 196 58 21 71 347 105 910 760 305 142 -86kansas2,545328 47 12 3 13 79 -17 243 422 1,366 83 -33kentucky5,726457 49 2 3 106 314 32 1,055 618 2,970 215 -96louisiana6,8892,202 317 112 – 106 357 182 1,453 843 1,311 265 -258Maine2,827997 103 29 49 255 282 57 439 435 5 236 -60Maryland7,688993 93 121 18 50 793 132 1,322 1,044 2,965 249 -93Massachusetts12,9992,120 337 192 19 322 1,949 241 1,749 2,077 3,741 419 -167Michigan12,3081,722 278 81 8 207 167 263 1,798 962 6,491 411 -78Minnesota8,781603 177 29 182 39 491 103 998 2,194 3,925 177 -138Mississippi4,7091,660 216 6 25 88 386 125 1,123 296 607 204 -28Missouri8,8632,981 38 15 11 487 837 655 1,319 1,174 1,116 318 -88Montana997268 50 25 16 15184 31 191 185 7 34 -10nebraska1,790216 38 34 5 72 78 73 434 341 436 107 -43nevada1,797539 98 28 13 17 194 55 254 163 353 110 -26new Hampshire1,189156 56 20 12 36 252 33 332 276 0 30 -14new Jersey10,4811,740 46 11 3 179 598 66 2,961 1,056 3,616 331 -125new Mexico3,281366 51 13 41 35 48 -94 31 325 2,399 80 -14newyork52,4908,760 346 114 240 1,419 3,199 -1,281 10,670 8,626 21,032 1,296 -1,931north Carolina11,7223,461 896 305 86 221 1,227 739 1,660 948 1,948 425 -193northdakota775139 51 11 8 10 41 23 312 173 5 11 -9ohio16,6282,494 339 53 27 54 748 183 3,875 2,317 6,333 381 -175 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 77 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 77TABLE 7, ContinuedTotalFee for ServiceManagedCare andPremiumAssistanceMedicarePremiumsandCoinsuranceCollectionsStateHospital Physician DentalOtherpractitionerClinicandhealthcenterOtheracute DrugsInstitutionalLTSSHome andcommunitybased LTSSoklahoma$4,482$1,544 $479 $123 $38 $389 $345 $297 $746 $511 $192 $133 -$314oregon5,071348 24 1 23 57 534 66 354 1,159 2,396 148 -40Pennsylvania20,9221,726 151 43 4 111 261 -37 4,850 3,217 10,198 567 -169Rhodeisland1,909351 11 10 1 23 572 1 346 2 564 40 -11south Carolina4,6901,156 214 88 26 202 288 74 774 470 1,441 173 -216southdakota758188 62 14 2 90 53 27 167 133 2 28 -8Tennessee8,6781,171 27 166 1 42 217 290 284 700 5,478 340 -39Texas27,7524,918 1,130 93 240 35 2,855 283 3,565 2,149 12,044 1,025 -587utah2,087458 99 42 3 12 113 46 247 224 848 37 -43vermont1,45244 2 0 0 1 1,361 -67 116 8 3 7 -21virginia7,2181,011 178 139 35 52 980 27 1,292 1,229 2,118 228 -73washington7,8061,033 101 134 38 447 800 40 883 1,553 2,823 319 -366westvirginia3,007588 147 56 14 31 242 103 716 572 440 115 -17wisconsin7,035743 57 45 24 296 604 321 1,042 799 2,921 253 -71wyoming547123 48 13 18 28 27 19 135 130 0 13 -8Subtotal $431,130 $89,465 $11,676 $3,872 $1,743$10,490 $36,229 $6,599$69,478 $56,488 $137,398 $14,795 -$7,103Americansamoa2551 – – – – -26 1 – – – – –guam6014 6 1 0 0 23 13 1 0 – 1 –n. Marianaislands3112 – 2 – 6 6 3 – 1 – 0 –Puerto Rico1,837– – – – – 40 – – – 1,798 – –virginislands2512 2 0 – 5 1 3 2 – – 0 –Total$433,110 $89,555 $11,684 $3,875 $1,743$10,501 $36,273 $6,618$69,481 $56,489 $139,196 $14,797 -$7,103Percent of Total,Exclusive of Collections– 20.3% 2.7% 0.9% 0.4% 2.4% 8.2% 1.5% 15.8% 12.8% 31.6% 3.4% –Notes:includes federal and state funds.service category definitions and spending amounts shown here may differ from other Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices(CMs) data sources, such as the Medicaidstatisticalinformationsystem (Msis). The specific services included in each category have changed over time and therefore may not be directly comparable to earlier editions of MACstats.lTssis long-term services and supports.Hospital includes inpatient, outpatient, critical access hospital, and emergency hospital services, as well as related disproportionate share hospital (dsH) payments. Physician includes physician and surgical services, both regularpayments and those associated with the primary care physician payment increase.other practitioner includes nurse midwife, nurse practitioner, and other. Clinic and health center includes non-hospital outpatient clinic, rural healthclinic, federally qualified health center, and freestanding birth center.other acute includes lab/x-ray; sterilizations; abortions;early and Periodicscreening,diagnostic, and Treatment (ePsdT) screenings; emergency services forunauthorized aliens; non-emergency transportation; physical, occupational, speech, and hearing therapy; prosthetics, dentures, and eyeglasses; preventive services withu.s. Preventiveservices Taskforce (usPsTf)grade A orband Advisory Committee onimmunization Practices (ACiP) vaccines; other diagnostic screening and preventive services; school-based services; health home with chronic conditions; tobacco cessation for pregnant women;private duty nursing; case management (excluding primary care case management); rehabilitative services; hospice; and other care not otherwise categorized.drugs are net of rebates.institutionallTssincludes nursing facility,intermediate care facility for individuals with intellectual disabilities, and mental health facility. Home and community-based services includes home health, waiver and state plan services, and personal care. Managed care andpremium assistance includes comprehensive and limited-benefit managed care plans, primary care case management (PCCM), employer-sponsored premium assistance programs, and Programs of All-inclusive Care for theelderly(PACe); comprehensive plans account for about 90 percent of spending in the managed care category. Managed care also includes rebates for drugs provided by managed care plans and managed care payments associated withthe primary care physician payment increase, Communityfirst Choice option, and preventive services withusPsTfgrade A orband ACiP vaccines. Collections includes third-party liability, estate, and other recoveries. All stateshad certified their CMs-64financial Management Report (fMR) submissions as offebruary 12, 2014.figures presented in this table may change if states revise their expenditure data after this date. Zeroes indicate amounts lessthan $0.5 million that round to zero.dashes indicate amounts that are true zeroes.Source:MACPAC analysis of CMs-64financial Management Report (fMR) net expenditure data as offebruary 2014. # 78 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 78 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 8.CHIP Spending by State, FY2013 (millions)StateTotal CHIP1BenefitsState ProgramAdministration2105(g)Spending1Medicaid-expansionCHIP programsSeparate CHIPprogramsand adult coverage waiversTotal Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal State FederalAlabama$193.4$150.8 $42.6–––$186.5$145.4 $41.1$6.9$5.4 $1.5–Alaska32.821.3 11.5$31.5$20.5 $11.0–– –1.30.8 0.4 –Arizona73.956.1 17.7–– –70.653.7 17.03.32.5 0.8 –Arkansas122.895.4 27.491.172.1 19.026.019.1 6.95.64.1 1.5 –California2,126.81,382.4 744.41,046.9680.5 366.4985.4640.6 344.994.461.4 33.0 –Colorado227.3147.7 79.512.17.9 4.2205.8133.8 72.09.46.1 3.3 –Connecticut28.035.2 -7.2–– –25.216.4 8.82.81.8 1.0$17.0delaware24.617.0 7.60.30.2 0.121.815.1 6.82.41.7 0.8 –district of Columbia18.414.5 3.918.214.4 3.8–– –0.20.1 0.0 –florida520.7367.5 153.23.42.4 1.0465.6328.6 137.051.736.5 15.2 –georgia413.3313.6 99.7–– –383.2290.8 92.430.122.9 7.3 –Hawaii40.326.6 13.737.124.4 12.7–– –3.22.1 1.1 –idaho60.748.3 12.423.418.6 4.835.428.1 7.22.01.6 0.4 –illinois517.7336.4 181.3148.095.8 52.1332.1216.1 116.037.624.4 13.1 –indiana157.4121.2 36.2102.779.1 23.648.437.2 11.16.44.9 1.5 –iowa134.296.2 38.029.220.9 8.396.769.3 27.38.35.9 2.3 –kansas75.552.5 23.0–– –69.048.0 21.06.54.5 2.0 –kentucky184.8146.7 38.1116.792.6 24.064.651.3 13.33.52.8 0.7 –louisiana203.3148.1 55.2172.6125.7 46.818.313.3 5.012.59.1 3.4 –Maine37.227.5 9.721.916.2 5.713.810.2 3.61.61.2 0.4 –Maryland258.4168.0 90.4245.5159.5 85.9–– –13.08.4 4.5 –Massachusetts573.7372.9 200.8292.8190.3 102.5226.6147.3 79.354.335.3 19.0 –Michigan147.1112.5 34.719.414.8 4.6124.495.1 29.33.32.5 0.8 –Minnesota19.532.2 -12.70.10.0 0.019.112.5 6.60.40.3 0.1 19.4Mississippi207.5168.9 38.6–– –205.2167.1 38.22.31.9 0.4 –Missouri170.0124.1 45.8113.983.1 30.843.832.0 11.712.39.0 3.3 –Montana91.569.7 21.821.616.5 5.165.149.6 15.54.83.6 1.1 –nebraska70.148.2 21.959.841.1 18.77.14.9 2.23.22.2 1.0 –nevada37.226.8 10.51.81.3 0.533.223.9 9.32.31.6 0.6 –new Hampshire16.714.9 1.916.310.6 5.7–– –0.40.3 0.1 4.0new Jersey958.0586.6 371.5194.4126.4 68.1660.3397.9 262.4103.362.3 41.1 –new Mexico144.9110.0 35.067.152.6 14.575.755.8 19.92.11.5 0.5 – # MAR CH 2014 \| # 79 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 79TABLE 8, ContinuedStateTotal CHIP1BenefitsState ProgramAdministration2105(g)Spending1Medicaid-expansionCHIP programsSeparate CHIPprogramsand adult coverage waiversTotal Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal State Total Federal State Federalnewyork$959.9$624.0 $335.9$291.0$189.1 $101.8$658.4$428.0 $230.4$10.5$6.8 $3.7–north Carolina398.0302.0 96.178.459.5 18.9304.1230.7 73.415.511.8 3.8 –northdakota26.617.7 8.912.08.0 4.013.48.9 4.41.30.8 0.4 –ohio381.3284.1 97.2376.4280.5 95.9–– –4.83.6 1.2 –oklahoma172.6129.1 43.5159.0119.0 40.19.77.2 2.43.82.9 1.0 –oregon209.4154.3 55.0–– –188.4138.9 49.520.915.4 5.5 –Pennsylvania428.0291.1 136.9–– –420.3285.9 134.57.75.2 2.4 –Rhodeisland81.153.7 27.467.945.0 22.911.17.3 3.82.11.4 0.7 –south Carolina132.5105.1 27.4120.995.8 25.0–– –11.69.2 2.4 –southdakota24.617.0 7.617.812.35.56.44.4 2.00.40.3 0.1 –Tennessee259.6198.0 61.643.733.410.4209.5159.8 49.76.44.9 1.5 –Texas1,285.0918.8 366.240.428.711.71,173.9839.5 334.470.750.6 20.1 –utah68.654.0 14.6–– –62.649.3 13.36.04.7 1.3 –vermont9.013.0 -4.0–– –8.35.8 2.60.70.5 0.2$6.8virginia301.0195.7 105.4122.279.442.8166.3108.1 58.212.58.1 4.4 –washington122.995.5 27.32.21.40.8116.075.4 40.54.73.1 1.7 15.6westvirginia57.946.5 11.3–– –53.443.0 10.54.43.6 0.9 –wisconsin140.3106.2 34.158.742.116.669.950.2 19.711.78.4 3.3 5.5wyoming16.410.7 5.7–– –15.710.3 5.50.70.5 0.2 –Subtotal$12,962.4 $9,056.2 $3,906.2 $4,278.4 $2,961.8 $1,316.6 $7,996.2 $5,555.6 $2,440.6 $687.8 $470.5 $217.3 $68.3Americansamoa1.61.3 0.31.61.3 0.3–– –––– –guam6.34.5 1.86.34.5 1.8–– –––– –n. Marianaislands1.10.9 0.11.10.9 0.1–– –––– –Puerto Rico194.9133.5 61.4194.9133.5 61.4–– –––– –virginislands–– ––– ––– –––– –Total$13,166.3 $9,196.5 $3,969.8 $4,482.3 $3,102.0 $1,380.3 $7,996.2 $5,555.6 $2,440.6 $687.8 $470.5 $217.3 $68.3Notes:Components may not add to total due to rounding. As shown in Table 3, some states have waivers undersection 1115 of thesocialsecurity Act that use CHiP funds to provide coverage for adults (pregnant women andparents).federal CHiP spending on administration is generally limited to 10 percent of a state’s total federal CHiP spending for the year.states with a Medicaid-expansion CHiP program may elect to receive reimbursement foradministrative spending from Medicaid rather than CHiP funds; Medicaid funds are not shown in this table.1section 2105(g) of thesocialsecurity Act permits 11 qualifying states to use CHiP funds to pay the difference between the regular Medicaid matching rate and the enhanced CHiP matching rate for Medicaid-enrolled, Medicaidfinanced children whose family income exceeds 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Although these are CHiP funds, they effectively reduce state spending on children in Medicaid and do not require a state match within theCHiP program.in cases where the sum of 2105(g) federal CHiP spending (for Medicaid enrollees) and regular federal CHiP spending (for CHiP enrollees) exceeds total spending for CHiP enrollees, states are shown in this tableas having negative state CHiP spending (Connecticut, Minnesota, andvermont).Source:MACPAC analysis of Medicaid and CHiPbudgetexpendituresystem (Mbes/Cbes) data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices as offebruary 2014.80\|MARCH 2014\|REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP80\|MARCH 2014 # TABLE 9. Medicaid and CHIP Income Eligibility L evels as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level for Children and Pregnant Women by State, January 2014 Medicaid coverage of children under age 19 with incomes below states’ eligibility levels in effect as of March 31, 1997, continues to be financed by Medicaid. Any expansion above those levels—through expansions of Medicaid or through separate CH i P programs—is generally financed by CH i P. Adult pregnant women can receive Medicaid- or CH i P-funded services through regular state plan eligibility pathways or s ection 1115 waivers; in addition, the unborn children of pregnant women may receive CH i P-funded coverage under a state plan option. d eemed newborns are infants up to age 1 who are deemed eligible for Medicaid or CH i P—with no separate application or eligibility determination required—if their mother was enrolled at the time of their birth. # Medicaid Coverage Separate CHIP Coverage Medicaid/CHIP Coverage Infants under age 1 Age 1 through 5 Age 6 through 18 CHIP Program Type 2 # (as of January 1, 2014) Birth through age 18 Unborn children 3 # Pregnant women and deemed newborns 4 # State Medicaid funded 1 # CHIP funded 1 # Medicaid funded 1 # CHIP funded 1 # Medicaid funded 1 # CHIP funded 1 # Alabama 141% 146% 141% 146% 107% 146% s eparate 317% – 146% Alaska 159 208 159 208 124 208 Medicaid e xpansion – – 205 Arizona 147 152 141 146 104 138 s eparate 205 5 # – 161 Arkansas 142 216 142 216 107 216 Combination – 216% 214 California 6 # 208 266 142 266 108 266 Combination 321/416 7 # 313 213 Colorado 142 147 142 147 108 147 Combination 265 – 200/265 Connecticut 196 201 196 201 196 201 s eparate 323 – 263 d elaware 194 217 142 147 110 138 Combination 217 – 217 d istrict of Columbia 206 324 146 324 112 324 Medicaid e xpansion – – 324 f lorida 192 211 140 145 112 138 Combination 215 – 196 g eorgia 205 210 149 154 113 138 s eparate 252 – 225 Hawaii 191 313 139 313 105 313 Medicaid e xpansion – – 196 i daho 142 147 142 147 107 138 Combination 190 – 138 i llinois 142 147 142 147 108 147 Combination 318 205 205 i ndiana 157 213 141 163 106 163 Combination 255 – 213 i owa 240 380 167 172 122 172 Combination 307 – 380 k ansas 166 171 149 154 113 138 s eparate 250 – 171 k entucky 195 200 142 164 109 164 Combination 218 – 200 l ouisiana 142 217 142 217 108 217 Combination 255 205 138 Maine 191 196 140 162 132 162 Combination 213 – 214 Maryland 194 322 138 322 109 322 Medicaid e xpansion – – 264 Massachusetts 185 205 133 155 114 155 Combination 305 205 205 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 81 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 81TABLE 9, ContinuedMedicaid CoverageSeparate CHIPCoverageMedicaid/CHIPCoverageInfants under age1Age 1 through 5 Age 6 through 18CHIP Program Type2(as of January 1,2014)Birththroughage 18Unbornchildren3Pregnant womenand deemednewborns4StateMedicaidfunded1CHIPfunded1Medicaidfunded1CHIPfunded1Medicaidfunded1CHIPfunded1Michigan195% 200% 143% 165% 109% 165% Combination217% 190%200%Minnesota275 2888275 280 275 280 Combination– 283283Mississippi 194 199 143 148 107 138separate214–199Missouri196 201 148 153 110 153 Combination305–201Montana143 148 143 148 109 148 Combination266–162nebraska162 218 147 218 111 218 Combination– 202199nevada9159 164 159 164 122 138 Combination205–164new Hampshire 196 323 196 323 196 323 Medicaidexpansion ––201new Jersey 194 199 142 147 107 147 Combination355– 199/205new Mexico 200 305 200 305 138 245 Medicaidexpansion ––255newyork196 223 149 154 110 154 Combination405–223north Carolina 194 215 141 215 107 138 Combination216–201northdakota10147 152 147 152 111 138 Combination175–152ohio141 211 141 211 107 211 Medicaidexpansion ––205oklahoma169 210 151 210 115 210 Combination– 190138oregon185 190 133 138 133 138separate305 190 190/305Pennsylvania 215 220 157 162 119 138separate319–220Rhodeisland 261 266 261 266 109 266 Combination– 258 195/258south Carolina11194 213 143 213 107 213 Medicaidexpansion ––199southdakota 177 187 177 187 124 187 Combination209–138Tennessee12195 200 142 147 109 138 Combination255 255200Texas13198 203 144 149 100 138separate206 205203utah14139 144 139 144 105 138separate205–144vermont15237 318 237 318 237 318separate317–213virginia143 148 143 148 109 148 Combination205–148washington 207 212 207 212 207 212separate305 198198westvirginia 158 163 141 146 108 138separate305–163wisconsin188 306 186 191 101 156 Combination306 305306wyoming154 159 154 159 119 138separate205–159 # 82 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 82 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 9, ContinuedNotes:in 2014, 100 percent of the federal poverty level (fPl) in the lower 48 states and thedistrict of Columbia is $11,670 for an individual and $4,060 for each additional family member.for additional information, see MACstatsTable 19.when determining Medicaid and CHiP eligibility prior to 2014, states had the flexibility to disregard income sources and amounts of their choosing.beginning in 2014, uniform modified adjusted gross income (MAgi) rulesmust be used to determine Medicaid and CHiP eligibility for most non-disabled children and adults under age 65, including the groups shown in this table. As a result, states are now required to use MAgi-converted eligibility levelsthat account for the change in income-counting rules. The eligibility levels shown in this table reflect these MAgi-converted levels plus a mandatory income disregard equal to 5 percentfPlthat effectively raises eligibility levelsby 5 percentage points.under federal regulations, the 5 percent disregard applies to an individual’s determination of eligibility for Medicaid and CHiP overall, rather than for particular eligibility groups within Medicaid or CHiP. Allinformation is based on state decisions as offebruary 26, 2014.1The eligibility levels listed under Medicaid funded are generally the Medicaid eligibility thresholds as of March 31, 1997. Many states had different eligibility levels for children age 6 through 13 and age 14 through 18 in 1997; insuch cases, this table shows the 1997 levels for children age 6 through 13. The eligibility levels listed under CHiP funded are the income levels to which Medicaid has expanded with CHiP funding since its creation in 1997.in2014, all states are eligible to receive CHiP funding for at least some Medicaid-enrolled children due to a mandatory transition of 6- to 18-year-olds between 100 and 133 percentfPlin separate CHiP programs to Medicaid, anda mandatory income disregard equal to 5 percentfPlthat effectively raises Medicaid eligibility levels by 5 percentage points.in addition,section 2105(g) of thesocialsecurity Act permits 11 qualifying states to use CHiP fundsto pay the difference between the regular Medicaid matching rate and the enhanced CHiP matching rate for Medicaid-enrolled, Medicaid-financed children whose family income exceeds 133 percentfPl(see MACstats Table 8for states that currently claim CHiP funds under this provision).2under CHiP, states have the option to use an expansion of Medicaid, a separate CHiP program, or a combination of both approaches. Although all states will have at least some Medicaid-enrolled children who are eligible for CHiPfunding as of 2014 due to the implementation of ACA requirements, 14 states are still categorized as separate programs in this table because they did not have approved state plan amendments on the Centers for Medicare &Medicaidservices (CMs) website indicating whether they will characterize themselves as combination states.3MAgi-converted eligibility levels for the unborn child option under CHiP were not readily available forillinois,louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan,oklahoma,oregon, Tennessee, Texas, andwisconsin. Converted levels may ormay not differ from those shown here, depending in part on whether the state used a gross income counting methodology (similar to MAgi) for determining eligibility prior to 2014.4Pregnant women can be covered with Medicaid or CHiP funding.under CHiP, coverage can be through a state plan option for targeted low-income pregnant women or through asection 1115 waiver.when two values are shownin this column, the first is for Medicaid and the second is for CHiP.5Although Arizona’s separate CHiP program up to 200 percentfPl(kidsCare) has been closed to new enrollment since January 2010, thousands of children were added to the state’s CHiP-funded coverage through the state’skidsCareiiwaiver, which was in effect from May 2012 through January 2014.6during 2013, California transitioned most of its separate CHiP children into a Medicaid-expansion CHiP program.7California has a separate CHiP program in three counties that covers children up to 321 percentfPland in one county up to 416 percentfPl.8in Minnesota, infants are defined as being under age 2.only infants are eligible for the Medicaid-expansion CHiP program.9nevada’s CHiP-funded Medicaid levels include children who became eligible for Medicaid when the state eliminated the Medicaid asset test.10northdakota’s CHiP-funded Medicaid levels include children who became eligible for Medicaid when the state eliminated the Medicaid asset test.11south Carolina’s CHiP-funded Medicaid levels may include children who will become eligible for Medicaid due to the mandatory elimination of Medicaid asset tests in 2014.12Tennessee covers children with CHiP-funded Medicaid, called TennCarestandard, but thissection 1115 waiver is currently capped except for children who roll over from traditional Medicaid. This includes children with a familyincome above Medicaid income levels, but at or below 216 percentfPl, who are losing TennCare Medicaid eligibility.13Texas’s CHiP-funded Medicaid levels may include children who will become eligible for Medicaid due to the mandatory elimination of Medicaid asset tests in 2014.14utah’s CHiP-funded Medicaid levels may include children who will become eligible for Medicaid due to the mandatory elimination of Medicaid asset tests in 2014.15vermont covers children from 238 percentfPlup to 317 percentfPlwith CHiP-funded Medicaid if they have other insurance, and with separate CHiP if they are uninsured.Sources:MACPAC communication with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices (CMs) and MACPAC analysis of: CMs,Medicaid moving forward 2014, State-specific documents, MAGI conversion plansandSIPP-basedMAGI conversion results. http://www.medicaid.gov/AffordableCareAct/Medicaid-Moving-forward-2014/medicaid-moving-forward-2014.html; CMs,State Medicaid and CHIP income eligibility standards effective January 1, 2014(For MAGI groups, based on state decisions as of February 26, 2014); CMs,Children’s Health Insurance Program: Plan activity as of January 1, 2014; CHiP state plan amendments on the CMswebsite; and state websites. # MAR CH 2014 \| # 83 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \|84\|MARCH 2014\|REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP84\|MARCH 2014 # TABLE 10. Medicaid Income Eligibility L evels as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level for Non-Aged, Non-Disabled, Non-Pregnant Adults by State, January 2014 s tates are required to provide Medicaid coverage for parents (and their dependent children), at a minimum, at their 1996 Aid to f amilies with d ependent Children eligibility levels. u nder regular Medicaid state plan rules, states may opt to cover additional parents (via s ection 1931 of the s ocial s ecurity Act) and other adults under age 65 who are not pregnant, not eligible for Medicare, and have incomes at or below 138 percent of the federal poverty level (via s ection 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)( viii ) of the s ocial s ecurity Act). s tates may also provide coverage under s ection 1115 waivers, which allow them to operate their Medicaid programs without regard to certain statutory requirements. As noted in this table, the covered benefits under these waivers may be more limited than those provided under regular state plan rules and may not be available to all individuals at the income levels shown. State Parents of Dependent Children 1 # Other Adults 2 # Medicaid Expansion State 3 # Alabama 18% – n o Alaska 136 – 4 # n o Arizona 138 138 % y es Arkansas 138 138 y es California 138 138 y es Colorado 138 138 y es Connecticut 201 138 y es d elaware 138 138 y es d istrict of Columbia 221 215 y es f lorida 36 – 4 # n o g eorgia 41 – n o Hawaii 138 138 y es i daho 29 5 # – 6 # n o i llinois 138 138 y es i ndiana 25 5 # – 6 # n o i owa 138 138 y es k ansas 38 – n o k entucky 138 138 y es l ouisiana 24 5 # – 6 # n o Maine 105 – 4, 6 # n o Mar yland 138 138 y es Massachusetts 138 138 4 # y es Michigan 138 138 y es 7 # Minnesota 205 205 y es Mississippi 29 – n o Missouri 24 5 # – 6 # n o Montana 53 – 6 # n o n ebraska 64 – n o n evada 138 138 y esMARCH 2014\|85MACstats: MediCAidAndCHiP PRogRAMsTATisTiCs\|MARCH 2014\|85 # TABLE 10, Continued State Parents of Dependent Children 1 # Other Adults 2 # Medicaid Expansion State 3 # n ew Hampshire 75 % – n o n ew Jersey 138 138% y es n ew Mexico 138 138 y es n ew y ork 138 138 4 # y es n orth Carolina 51 – 4 # n o n orth d akota 138 138 y es o hio 138 138 y es o klahoma 48 5 # – 6 # n o o regon 138 138 y es Pennsylvania 38 – 4 # n o Rhode i sland 138 138 y es s outh Carolina 67 – n o s outh d akota 64 – n o Tennessee 111 – n o Texas 20 – n o u tah 56 5 # – 6 # n o v er mont 138 138 y es v irginia 54 – n o w ashington 138 138 y es w est v irginia 138 138 y es w isconsin 95 5 # 100 n o w yoming 62 – n o Notes: i n 2014, 100 percent of the federal poverty level ( f P l ) in the lower 48 states and the d istrict of Columbia is $11,670 for an individual and $4,060 for each additional family member. f or additional infor mation, see MAC s tats Table 19. w hen determining Medicaid and CH i P eligibility prior to 2014, states had the flexibility to disregard income sources and amounts of their choosing. b eginning in 2014, uniform modified adjusted gross income (MA gi ) rules must be used to determine Medicaid and CH i P eligibility for most non-disabled children and adults under age 65, including the groups shown in this table. As a result, states are now required to use MA gi -converted eligibility levels that account for the change in income-counting rules. The eligibility levels shown in this table reflect these MA gi -converted levels plus a mandatory income disregard equal to 5 percent f P l that effectively raises eligibility levels by 5 percentage points. u nder federal regulations, the 5 percent disregard applies to an individual’s determination of eligibility for Medicaid and CH i P overall, rather than for particular eligibility groups within Medicaid or CH i P. All information is based on state decisions as of f ebr uary 26, 2014. 1 i n states that use dollar amounts rather than percentages of the f P l to determine eligibility for parents, those amounts were converted to a percent of the f P l for 2013, and the highest percentage was selected to reflect eligibility level for the group. 2 i ncludes coverage under the new adult group ( s ection 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)( viii ) of the s ocial s ecurity Act) for individuals under age 65 who are not pregnant, not eligible for Medicare, and have incomes at or below 138 per cent f P l . 3 Medicaid expansion states are those that have opted to cover adults under s ection 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)( viii ) of the s ocial s ecurity Act. 4 The state covers some 19- and 20-year -olds at income levels not shown in the table: Alaska (129 percent f P l ), f lorida (31 percent f P l ), Maine (156 percent f P l ), Massachusetts (150 percent f P l ), n ew y ork (150 percent f P l ), n orth Carolina (46 percent f P l ), and Pennsylvania (33 percent f P l ). 5 R eflects parent coverage under the Medicaid state plan. The state has some additional coverage above state plan eligibility standards through a s ection 1115 demonstration or a pending demonstration proposal. The demonstration includes limitations on eligibility or benefits, is not offered to all residents of the state, or includes an enrollment cap. 6 The state has a s ection 1115 demonstration or a pending demonstration proposal that provides Medicaid coverage to some low-income adults. The demonstration includes limitations on eligibility or benefits, is not offered to all residents of the state, or includes an enrollment cap. 7 Michigan has a Medicaid expansion as of April 1, 2014. Source: MACPAC communication with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices (CM s ) and MACPAC analysis of CM s , State Medicaid and CHIP income eligibility standards effective January 1, 2014 (For MAGI groups, based on state decisions as of February 26, 2014).86\|MARCH 2014\|REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP86\|MARCH 2014 # TABLE 11. Medicaid Income Eligibility L evels as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level for Individuals Age 65 and Older and Persons with Disabilities by State, 2014 i n most states, enrollment in the s upplemental s ecurity i ncome ( ssi ) program for individuals age 65 and older and persons with disabilities automatically qualifies them for Medicaid. However, 11 (10 as of June 2014) 209(b) states may use more restrictive criteria than ssi when determining Medicaid eligibility. i n all states, additional people with low incomes or high medical expenses may be covered, at the state’s option, through pover ty level, medically needy, special income level, and other eligibility pathways. State State Eligibility Type 1 # SSI Recipients 209(b) Eligibility Levels Poverty Level 2 # Medically Needy 3 # Special Income Level 4 # Alabama 1634 74% – – – 222% Alaska 5 # ssi Criteria 59 – – – 178 Arizona 1634 74 – 100% – 222 Arkansas 1634 74 – 80 (Aged only) 11% 222 Califor nia 1634 74 – 100 62 – Colorado 1634 74 – – – 222 Connecticut 209(b) – 63% – 63 222 d elaware 1634 74 – – – 185 d istrict of Columbia 1634 74 – 100 64 222 f lorida 1634 74 – 88 19 222 g eorgia 1634 74 – – 33 222 Hawaii 209(b) – 64 100 42 – i daho s si Criteria 74 – – – 222 i llinois 209(b) – 100 100 100 – i ndiana 6 # 1634 74 – 100 – 222 i owa 1634 74 – – 50 222 k ansas s si Criteria 74 – – 49 222 k entucky 1634 74 – – 22 222 l ouisiana 1634 74 – 74 10 222 Maine 1634 74 – 100 32 222 Maryland 1634 74 – – 36 222 Massachusetts 7 # 1634 74 – 100 (Aged)/133 ( d isabled) 54 222 Michigan 1634 74 – 100 42 222 Minnesota 209(b) – 75 100 75 222 Mississippi 1634 74 – – – 222 Missouri 209(b) – 84 85 84 130 Montana 1634 74 – – 64 – n ebraska s si Criteria 74 – 100 40 – n evada s si Criteria 74 – – – 222 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 87 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 87TABLE 11, ContinuedStateState EligibilityType1SSI Recipients209(b)Eligibility Levels Poverty Level2MedicallyNeedy3Special IncomeLevel4new Hampshire209(b)–76%–61%222%new Jersey163474%–100%38222new Mexico163474–––222newyork163474–8383–north Carolina163474–10025–northdakota209(b)–82–82–ohio209(b)–61–61222oklahoma209(b)–7710077222oregonssiCriteria74–––222Pennsylvania163474–10044222Rhodeisland163474–10088222south Carolina163474–100–222southdakota163474–––222Tennessee163474–––222Texas163474–––222utahssiCriteria74–10099222vermont163474––110222virginia209(b)–748046222washington163474––73222westvirginia163474––21222wisconsin163474––61222wyoming163474–––222Notes:in 2014, the federal poverty level (100 percentfPl) is $11,670 for an individual and $4,060 for each additional family member in the lower 48 states and thedistrict of Columbia.for additional information, see MACstatsTable 19.eligibility levels shown here apply to countable income; for some eligibility pathways, states may use various income disregards that result in different amounts of countable income. The eligibility levels listed in thistable are for individuals; the eligibility levels for couples differ for certain categories.1bothsection 1634 andssi-criteria states usessicriteria for Medicaid eligibility.insection 1634 states, the federal eligibility determination process forssiautomatically qualifies an individual for Medicaid; inssi-criteriastates, individuals must submit information to the state for a separate eligibility determination.section 209(b) states may use eligibility criteria more restrictive than thessiprogram but may not use more restrictive criteriathan those in effect in the state on January 1, 1972; if they do not have a separate medically needy standard, they must also allow individuals with higher incomes to spend down to the 209(b) income level shown here bydeducting incurred medical expenses from the amount of income that is counted for Medicaid eligibility purposes.indiana is a 209(b) state until June 2014, at which point it will become a 1634 state.2under the poverty level option, states may choose to provide Medicaid coverage to persons who are aged or disabled and whose income is above thessior 209(b) level, but at or below thefPl.3under the medically needy option, individuals with higher incomes can spend down to the medically needy income level shown here by deducting incurred medical expenses from the amount of income that is counted forMedicaid eligibility purposes.five states (Connecticut,louisiana, Michigan,vermont, andvirginia) have a medically needy income standard that varies by location.in these instances, the highest income standard is listed.4under the special income level option, states have the option to provide Medicaid benefits to people who require at least 30 days of nursing home or other institutional care and have incomes up to 300 percent of thessibenefit rate (which is about 222 percentfPlin 2014). The income standard listed in this column may be for institutional services, home and community-based waiver services, or both.5The dollar amount that equals the upper income eligibility level forssidoes not vary by state; however, the dollar amount that equals thefPlis higher in Alaska (see MACstats Table 19), resulting in a lower percentage.6indiana is a 209(b) state until June 2014, at which point it will become a 1634 state. The state’s poverty level group is also effective as of June 2014.7Massachusetts provides medically needy coverage for individuals age 65 and older and those who are eligible on the basis of a disability, but the rules for counting income and spend-down expenses vary for these groups.Sources:MACPAC analysis of eligibility information from state websites and Medicaid state plans as offebruary 2014. # 88 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # TABLE 12. Mandator y and Optional Medicaid Benefits Although mandatory and optional Medicaid benefits are listed in federal statute, the breadth of coverage (i.e., amount, duration, and scope) varies by state. w hen designing a benefit, states may elect to place no limits on a benefit, or they may choose to limit a benefit by requiring prior approval of the service, restricting the place of service, or employing utilization controls or dollar caps. f or example, while most states cover dental ser vices, and some even cover annual dental exams, others limit this benefit to trauma care or emergency treatment for pain relief and infection, require that services be provided in a specific setting (such as an emergency room), require that certain services have prior approval, or place dollar caps on the total amount of services an enrollee can receive each year. The result is that the same benefit can be designed and implemented in a number of different ways across states. The table on the following page lists mandatory and optional Medicaid benefits that are described in federal statute or regulations. n o single source of information currently provides an up-to-date, comprehensive picture of the optional benefits covered by states and the circumstances under which a given benefit is covered. Readers may instead refer to a number of sources including, for example: f # Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices, u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, State Medicaid benefits matrix , d ecember 2010 and January 2011. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ Health-Plans/ s pecial n eedsPlans/ d ownloads/ s tateMedicaid b enefitsMatrix042011.zip. f # k aiser f amily f oundation, Medicaid benefits: Online database . http://medicaidbenefits.kff .org/. f # k aiser Commission on Medicaid and the u ninsured, Coverage of preventive ser vices for adults in Medicaid , s eptember 2012. http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/8359.pdf. f # s . w ilensky, and e . g ray, Coverage of Medicaid preventive services for adults – A national review , The g eorge w ashington u niversity, n ovember 2012. http://sphhs.gwu.edu/departments/ healthpolicy/publications/coverage.pdf. f # s ubstance Abuse and Mental Health s ervices Administration ( s AMH s A), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, State profiles of mental health and substance abuse services in Medicaid , January 2005. http://store.samhsa.gov/product/ s tate-Profiles-of-Mental-Health-and- s ubstanceAbuse- s ervices-in-Medicaid/ n MH05-0202; and s AMH s A, Behavioral health, United States, 2012 . http://www.samhsa.gov/data/2012 b ehavioralHealth us /2012- b H us .pdf. f # Assistant s ecretary for Planning and e valuation, u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Understanding Medicaid home and community -based services: A primer , 2010 edition. http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/2010/primer10.pdf. # MAR CH 2014 \| # 89 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # TABLE 12, Continued Mandatory Medicaid Benefits f # i npatient hospital services f # o utpatient hospital services f # Physician services f # e arly and Periodic s creening, d iagnostic, and T reatment ( e P sd T) services for individuals under age 21 (screening, vision, dental, and hearing services and any medically necessary service listed in the Medicaid statute, including optional services that are not otherwise covered by a state) f # f amily planning ser vices and supplies f # f ederally qualified health center ser vices f # f reestanding bir th center services f # Home health services f # l aboratory and x -ray ser vices f # n ursing facility services (for ages 21 and over) f # n urse midwife services (to the extent authorized to practice under state law or regulation) f # Certified pediatric or family nurse practitioner services (to the extent authorized to practice under state law or regulation) f # Rural heath clinic services f # Tobacco cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy for pregnant women f # n on-emergency transportation to medical care 1 # Optional Medicaid Benefits f # Prescribed drugs f # i ntermediate care facility services for individuals with intellectual disabilities f # Clinic services f # o ccupational therapy services f # o ptometry services f # Physical therapy services f # Targeted case management services f # Prosthetic devices f # Hospice services f # i npatient psychiatric services for individuals under age 21 f # d ental services f # e yeglasses f # s peech, hearing, and language disorder services f # i npatient hospital and nursing facility services for individuals age 65 or older in institutions for mental diseases f # e mergency hospital services in a hospital not meeting cer tain Medicare or Medicaid requirements 2 # f # d entures f # Personal care services f # Private duty nursing services f # Program of All-inclusive Care for the e lderly (PAC e ) ser vices f # Chiropractic services f # Critical access hospital services f # Respiratory care for ventilator-dependent individuals f # Primary care case management services f # s ervices furnished in a religious nonmedical health care institution f # Tuberculosis-related services f # Home and community-based services f # Health homes for enrollees with chronic conditions f # o ther licensed practitioners’ services f # o ther diagnostic, screening, preventive, and rehabilitative ser vices Notes: 1 f ederal regulations require states to provide transpor tation services; they may do so as an administrative function or as part of the Medicaid benefits package. 2 f ederal regulations define these ser vices as being those that are necessary to prevent the death or serious impairment of the health of the recipient and, because of the threat to life, necessitate the use of the most accessible hospital available that is equipped to furnish the services, even if the hospital does not currently meet Medicare’s participation requirements or the definition of inpatient or outpatient hospital services under Medicaid rules. Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices, Medicaid benefits, as of f ebr uary 2014. http://www.medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CH i P-Program- i nformation/ b y-Topics/ b enefits/Medicaid- b enefits.html. # 90 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MAR CH 2014 \| # 91 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 91TABLE 13.Maximum Allowable Medicaid Premiums and Cost Sharing, FY2014At or Below 100% FPL From 100%through 150% FPL Above 150% FPLExemptions from Premiums and Cost Sharingexempt PopulationsPopulations exempt from most types of cost sharing include most children under age 18, pregnant women,beneficiaries receiving hospice care, certain beneficiaries in institutions such as nursing facilities and intermediate carefacilities, Americanindians who are furnished a Medicaid item or service through anindian Healthservice provider orthrough a contract health service referral, and individuals eligible for Medicaid under thebreast and Cervical CancerAct pathway.except for certain pregnant women above 150%fPl, these populations are also exempt from premiums.exemptservicesemergency services, family planning services and supplies, preventive services for children regardless of family income,pregnancy-related services, and services related to provider-preventable conditions are excluded from cost sharing.Aggregate Limit on Allowable Premiums and Cost SharingAggregate limit forall populationsThe total amount of premiums and cost sharing incurred by all individuals in a Medicaidhousehold may not exceed 5% of the family’s monthly or quarterly income.Allowable Premiumsspecified populationsup to $20 per month for individuals eligible under a medically needy pathway.sliding scale based on income for individuals eligible undercertain disability pathways for children and working adults.same as rules at or below 150%fPlformedically needy and disability pathways.up to 10% of amount by whichincome exceeds 150%fPlforcertain pregnant women.All other populationsnot permittedno specific limitAllowable Cost Sharingoutpatient servicesup to $4.00up to 10% of the amountthe Medicaid agency paysup to 20% of the amountthe Medicaid agency paysinpatient staysup to $75.00up to 10% of the amountthe Medicaid agency paysup to 20% of the amountthe Medicaid agency paysnon-emergency use of theemergency departmentup to $8.00no specific limitPrescribed drugsPreferred drugs:up to $4.00non-preferred:up to $8.00Preferred drugs:up to $4.00non-preferred:up to 20% of theamount the Medicaid agency paysNotes:in 2014, the federal poverty level (100 percentfPl) is $11,670 for an individual and $4,060 for each additional family member in the lower 48 states and thedistrict of Columbia.fyis fiscal year.for additional information,see MACstats Table 19.beginningoctober 1, 2015, maximum allowable cost-sharing amounts will be increased annually by the percentage increase in the medical care component of the Consumer Priceindex for AllurbanConsumers (CPi-u). This table does not reflect amounts that states may have implemented under asection 1115 waiver.Source:Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices,u.s.department of Health and Humanservices, Medicaid and Children’s Healthinsurance Programs:essential health benefits in alternative benefit plans, eligibility notices, fairhearing and appeal processes, and premiums and cost sharing;exchanges:eligibility and enrollment;final rule,Federal Register78 (July 15): 42160, 2013. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/fR-2013-07-15/pdf/2013-16271.pdf. # 92 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 92 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 14.Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAPs) and Enhanced FMAPs (E-FMAPs) by State, Selected Periods in FY 2011–FY 2015FMAPs for MedicaidE-FMAPs for CHIPStateFirst quarterof FY20111Fourth quarterof FY20111FY2012 FY2013 FY20142FY20152FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015Alabama78.00% 68.54% 68.62% 68.53% 68.12% 68.99% 78.03% 77.97% 77.68% 78.29%Alaska62.46 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Arizona75.93 65.85 67.30 65.68 67.23 68.46 77.11 75.98 77.06 77.92Arkansas81.18 71.37 70.71 70.17 70.10 70.88 79.50 79.12 79.07 79.62California61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Colorado61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 51.01 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.71Connecticut61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00delaware64.38 53.15 54.17 55.67 55.31 53.63 67.92 68.97 68.72 67.54district of Columbia 79.29 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 79.00 79.00 79.00 79.00florida67.64 55.45 56.04 58.08 58.79 59.72 69.23 70.66 71.15 71.80georgia75.16 65.33 66.16 65.56 65.93 66.94 76.31 75.89 76.15 76.86Hawaii67.35 51.79 50.48 51.86 51.85 52.23 65.34 66.30 66.30 66.56idaho79.18 68.85 70.23 71.00 71.64 71.75 79.16 79.70 80.15 80.23illinois61.88 50.20 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.76 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.53indiana76.21 66.52 66.96 67.16 66.92 66.52 76.87 77.01 76.84 76.56iowa72.55 62.63 60.71 59.59 57.93 55.54 72.50 71.71 70.55 68.88kansas69.68 59.05 56.91 56.51 56.91 56.63 69.84 69.56 69.84 69.64kentucky80.61 71.49 71.18 70.55 69.83 69.94 79.83 79.39 78.88 78.96louisiana381.48 68.04 69.78 65.51 62.11 62.05 72.76 72.87 72.69 73.44Maine74.86 63.80 63.27 62.57 61.55 61.88 74.29 73.80 73.09 73.32Maryland61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Massachusetts61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Michigan75.57 65.79 66.14 66.39 66.32 65.54 76.30 76.47 76.42 75.88Minnesota61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Mississippi84.86 74.73 74.18 73.43 73.05 73.58 81.93 81.40 81.14 81.51Missouri74.43 63.29 63.45 61.37 62.03 63.45 74.42 72.96 73.42 74.42Montana77.99 66.81 66.11 66.00 66.33 65.90 76.28 76.20 76.43 76.13nebraska68.76 58.44 56.64 55.76 54.74 53.27 69.65 69.03 68.32 67.29nevada63.93 51.61 56.20 59.74 63.10 64.36 69.34 71.82 74.17 75.05new Hampshire61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00new Jersey61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00new Mexico80.49 69.78 69.36 69.07 69.20 69.65 78.55 78.35 78.44 78.76newyork61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00north Carolina74.98 64.71 65.28 65.51 65.78 65.88 75.70 75.86 76.05 76.12northdakota69.95 60.35 55.40 52.2750.00 50.00 68.78 66.59 65.00 65.00ohio73.71 63.69 64.15 63.58 63.02 62.64 74.91 74.51 74.11 73.85 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 93 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 93TABLE 14, ContinuedFMAPs for MedicaidE-FMAPs for CHIPStateFirst quarterof FY20111Fourth quarterof FY20111FY2012 FY2013 FY20142FY20152FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015oklahoma76.73% 64.94% 63.88% 64.00% 64.02% 62.30% 74.72% 74.80% 74.81% 73.61%oregon72.97 62.85 62.91 62.44 63.14 64.06 74.04 73.71 74.20 74.84Pennsylvania66.58 55.64 55.07 54.28 53.52 51.82 68.55 68.00 67.46 66.27Rhodeisland64.22 52.97 52.12 51.26 50.11 50.00 66.48 65.88 65.08 65.00south Carolina79.58 70.04 70.24 70.43 70.57 70.64 79.17 79.30 79.40 79.45southdakota70.80 61.25 59.13 56.19 53.54 51.64 71.39 69.33 67.48 66.15Tennessee75.62 65.85 66.36 66.13 65.29 64.99 76.45 76.29 75.70 75.49Texas70.94 60.56 58.22 59.30 58.69 58.05 70.75 71.51 71.08 70.64utah80.78 71.13 70.99 69.61 70.34 70.56 79.69 78.73 79.24 79.39vermont69.96 58.71 57.58 56.04 55.11 54.01 70.31 69.23 68.58 67.81virginia61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00washington62.94 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.03 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.02westvirginia83.05 73.24 72.62 72.04 71.09 71.35 80.83 80.43 79.76 79.95wisconsin70.63 60.16 60.53 59.74 59.06 58.27 72.37 71.82 71.34 70.79wyoming61.59 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00Americansamoa50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 68.50 68.50 68.50 68.50guam50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 68.50 68.50 68.50 68.50northern Marianaislands50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 68.50 68.50 68.50 68.50Puerto Rico50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 68.50 68.50 68.50 68.50virginislands50.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 68.50 68.50 68.50 68.50Notes:The federal government’s share of most Medicaid service costs is determined by the federal medical assistance percentage (fMAP), with some exceptions.for Medicaid administrative costs, the federal share does not varyby state and is generally 50 percent. The enhancedfMAP determines the federal share of both service and administrative costs for CHiP, subject to the availability of funds from a state’s federal allotments for CHiP.fMAPs for Medicaid are generally calculated based on a formula that compares each state’s per capita income relative tou.s. per capita income and provides a higher federal match for states with lower per capita incomes, subjectto a statutory minimum (50 percent) and maximum (83 percent). The formula for a given state is:fMAP = 1 - ((state per capita income squared /u.s. per capita income squared) x 0.45)Medicaid exceptions to this formula include thedistrict of Columbia (set in statute at 70 percent) and the territories (set in statute at 55 percent).other Medicaid exceptions apply to certain services, providers, or situations(e.g.,services provided through anindian Healthservice facility receive anfMAP of 100 percent).enhancedfMAPs for CHiP are calculated by reducing the state share under regularfMAPs for Medicaid by 30 percent.1from the first quarter of fiscal year (fy) 2009 through the third quarter offy2011, subject to certain requirements, states received a temporaryfMAP increase (P.l. 111-5 and P.l. 111-226).under the formula used to calculatethe temporary increase, states reached their highestfMAPs by the first quarter offy2011 (shown here). The temporary increase then phased down in the second and third quarters offy2011.fMAPs returned to their regularformula levels in the fourth quarter offy2011. The temporary increase did not apply to CHiP.2for certain newly eligible individuals under the Medicaid expansion beginning in 2014, there is an increasedfMAP (100 percent in 2014 through 2016, phasing down to 90 percent in 2020 and subsequent years). An increasedfMAP is also available for certain states that previously expanded eligibility to low-income parents and non-pregnant adults without children prior to enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, P.l. 111-148, asamended). (see §§1905(y) and (z) of thesocialsecurity Act.)3louisiana receives a disaster-recovery statefMAP adjustment for the fourth quarter offy2011, andfy2012-fy2014 (section 1905(aa) of thesocialsecurity Act). P.l. 112-96 and P.l. 112-141 revised the disaster reliefformula, effectiveoctober 1, 2012. As a result, thefy2013 disaster-recoveryfMAP adjustment forlouisiana that was published in theFederal Registeronnovember 30, 2011 has been revised.no state qualifies for adisaster-recoveryfMAP adjustment infy2015.Source:Federal Registernotices from theu.s.department of Health and Humanservices. # 94 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 94 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 15.Medicaid as a Share of States’ Total Budgets and State-Funded Budgets, State FY 2012Total Budget (Including State and Federal Funds)State-Funded BudgetDollars(millions)Total spending as ashare of total budget1Dollars(millions)State-funded spending as ashare of state-funded budget1StateMedicaidElementary andsecondary educationHighereducationMedicaidElementary andsecondary educationHighereducationAll states $1,644,020 23.7% 20.0% 10.5% $1,127,809 14.8% 24.1% 13.4%Alabama24,178 23.320.920.1 14,870 12.327.524.2Alaska11,789 11.613.49.3 8,772 6.515.310.5Arizona28,540 32.019.013.5 16,241 20.526.018.8Arkansas20,688 21.416.316.2 14,410 8.919.223.1California199,424 21.619.97.0 126,361 13.126.57.2Colorado28,777 20.725.39.0 21,086 16.031.410.2Connecticut27,558 21.413.910.3 24,927 23.613.29.9delaware8,942 15.924.64.5 7,165 8.927.34.6district of Columbia2––––– –––florida62,989 30.618.87.1 38,374 21.725.211.3georgia41,127 20.324.018.7 28,658 9.626.626.6Hawaii11,494 12.315.611.3 9,562 6.315.813.3idaho6,267 27.225.78.1 3,885 16.533.913.0illinois65,730 19.715.85.5 46,323 14.614.77.2indiana26,305 27.332.96.5 17,033 14.543.510.0iowa18,940 19.616.825.0 12,389 13.222.133.7kansas14,396 18.625.816.9 10,243 11.531.717.1kentucky25,649 22.519.825.7 16,962 10.024.533.5louisiana27,073 26.718.49.9 16,457 14.423.515.3Maine8,106 28.813.13.4 5,457 16.319.25.0Maryland34,877 21.519.514.5 25,819 14.422.618.3Massachusetts 59,271 20.710.79.3 43,114 12.812.012.8Michigan47,286 26.127.24.1 29,737 14.036.86.2Minnesota31,329 27.623.89.7 23,159 18.228.813.1Mississippi18,386 23.416.916.8 10,441 10.822.227.8Missouri23,364 35.022.64.7 15,825 24.926.56.9Montana5,919 16.815.59.8 3,788 8.519.614.1nebraska9,877 16.715.323.5 6,889 10.416.228.1 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 95 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 95TABLE 15, ContinuedTotal Budget (Including State and Federal Funds)State-Funded BudgetDollars(millions)Total spending as ashare of total budget1Dollars(millions)State-funded spending as ashare of state-funded budget1StateMedicaidElementary andsecondary educationHighereducationMedicaidElementary andsecondary educationHighereducationnevada$7,623 25.4% 23.6%9.7% $5,069 18.3% 30.5% 14.5%new Hampshire4,975 23.923.52.7 3,325 18.129.04.0new Jersey48,612 21.624.77.8 37,614 12.929.610.1new Mexico14,164 24.719.719.3 8,556 12.227.724.3newyork133,504 29.419.87.6 93,193 15.923.110.6north Carolina46,567 24.723.29.0 32,054 12.429.213.0northdakota6,027 12.113.817.7 4,143 7.516.322.4ohio57,921 24.420.64.2 44,786 26.121.75.3oklahoma20,931 23.916.523.1 14,213 16.319.030.5oregon27,014 18.214.02.5 19,261 9.416.33.2Pennsylvania66,948 33.218.42.8 42,771 23.323.14.4Rhodeisland7,907 25.014.213.2 5,308 17.916.719.2south Carolina22,088 21.715.921.0 12,804 10.621.030.7southdakota3,698 20.914.317.7 2,210 13.016.325.4Tennessee30,419 30.717.712.8 17,613 18.923.320.9Texas92,963 30.128.715.8 61,427 19.235.520.0utah11,822 17.524.711.9 8,234 8.629.716.9vermont5,017 25.331.11.8 3,186 17.344.62.9virginia43,425 16.216.013.1 34,213 10.416.313.1washington34,943 12.122.917.8 26,894 7.726.422.8westvirginia21,821 12.710.814.1 17,757 4.411.215.6wisconsin41,324 16.516.714.1 30,752 8.919.712.9wyoming6,026 9.53.95.5 4,479 6.23.16.8Notes:fyis fiscal year. Total budget includes federal and all other funds.state-funded budget includes state general funds, other state funds, and bonds. Medicaid, elementary and secondary education, and higher educationrepresent the largest total budget shares among functions broken out separately by thenational Association ofstatebudgetofficers (nAsbo).functions not shown here are transportation, corrections, public assistance, and allother. Medicaid spending amounts exclude administrative costs but include Medicare Partdphased-down state contribution (also referred to as clawback) payments.1Total and state-funded budget shares should be viewed with caution because they reflect varying state practices.for example, Connecticut reports all of its Medicaid spending as state-funded spending due to the directdeposit of federal funds into thestate Treasury.in addition, some functions—particularly elementary and secondary education—may be partially funded outside of the state budget by local governments.2nAsbodoes not collect information for thedistrict of Columbia.Sources:national Association ofstatebudgetofficers (nAsbo),State expenditure report: Examining fiscal 2011-2013 state spending,december 2013. http://www.nasbo.org/sites/default/files/state%20expenditure%20Report%20%28fiscal%202011-2013%20data%29.pdf. # 96 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 96 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 16.National Health Expenditures by Type and Payer, 2012Dollars (billions)Type of ExpenditureTotalMedicaidCHIPMedicarePrivateinsuranceOtherhealthinsurance1Otherthird partypayers2Out ofpocketNational health expenditures$2,793.4$421.2 $12.6 $572.5 $917.0 $91.1 $450.8 $328.2Hospital882.3156.4 3.4 239.8 320.9 49.6 82.4 29.8Physician and clinical565.045.6 3.2 128.1 258.3 20.7 54.2 54.9dental110.97.3 1.3 0.4 53.4 1.3 0.5 46.8other professional76.44.7 0.2 16.9 28.2 – 6.9 19.4Home health77.828.9 0.0 33.8 5.6 1.0 2.4 6.0other non-durable medical products53.7– – 3.1 – – 0.0 50.6Prescription drugs263.319.6 1.5 68.2 117.0 7.7 2.5 46.8durable medical equipment41.34.6 0.1 8.2 4.7 – 0.6 23.1nursing care facilities and continuing care retirement communities151.546.3 0.0 34.4 12.0 4.4 11.1 43.3other health, residential, and personal care138.272.9 0.9 5.1 6.9 3.2 41.7 7.5Administration197.934.9 2.0 34.5 109.9 3.3 13.4 –Public health activity75.0– – – – – 75.0 –investment160.0– – – – – 160.0 – # MAR CH 2014 \| # 97 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 97TABLE 16, ContinuedShare of TotalType of ExpenditureTotalMedicaidCHIPMedicarePrivateinsuranceOtherhealthinsurance1Otherthird partypayers2Out ofpocketNational health expenditures100%15.1% 0.5% 20.5% 32.8% 3.3% 16.1% 11.7%Hospital10017.7 0.4 27.2 36.4 5.6 9.3 3.4Physician and clinical1008.1 0.6 22.7 45.7 3.7 9.6 9.7dental1006.6 1.2 0.3 48.1 1.2 0.5 42.2other professional1006.2 0.3 22.2 37.0 – 9.0 25.4Home health10037.2 0.0 43.4 7.2 1.3 3.1 7.8other non-durable medical products100– – 5.8 – – 0.0 94.2Prescription drugs1007.5 0.6 25.9 44.4 2.9 0.9 17.8durable medical equipment10011.1 0.3 19.9 11.4 – 1.4 55.9nursing care facilities and continuing care retirement communities10030.6 0.0 22.7 7.9 2.9 7.3 28.6other health, residential, and personal care10052.7 0.7 3.7 5.0 2.3 30.2 5.5Administration10017.6 1.0 17.4 55.5 1.6 6.8 –Public health activity100– – – – – 100.0 –investment100– – – – – 100.0 –Notes:figures for nursing care facilities and continuing retirement communities and other health, residential, and personal care reflect new data and methods as of 2011.in prior releases, Medicaid accounted for about40percent of nursing home expenditures and about three-quarters of other personal health care expenditures.other professional includes services provided in establishments operated by health practitioners other than physiciansand dentists, including those provided by private-duty nurses, chiropractors, podiatrists, optometrists, and physical, occupational, and speech therapists, among others.other non-durable medical products includes the retailsales of non-prescription drugs and medical sundries.durable medical equipment includes retail sales of items such as contact lenses, eyeglasses, and other ophthalmic products, surgical and orthopedic products, hearingaids, wheelchairs, and medical equipment rentals.nursing care facilities and continuing care retirement communities includes nursing and rehabilitative services provided in freestanding nursing home facilities that are generallyprovided for an extended period of time by registered or licensed practical nurses and other staff.other health, residential, and personal care includes spending for Medicaid home and community-based waivers, care provided inresidential facilities for people with intellectual disabilities or mental health and substance abuse disorders, ambulance services, school health, and worksite health care. Administration category includes the administrative costof health care programs (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid) and the net cost of private health insurance (administrative costs, as well as additions to reserves, rate credits and dividends, premium taxes, and plan profits or losses).Zeroes indicate amounts less than $0.05 billion or 0.05 percent that round to zero.dashes indicate amounts that are true zeroes.1u.s.department ofdefense andu.s.department ofveterans’ Affairs.2includes all other public and private programs and expenditures except for out-of-pocket amounts.Sources:office of the Actuary (oACT), Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices,National health expenditures by type of service and source of funds: Calendar years 1960-2012,January 2014. http://www.cms.gov/Researchstatistics-data-and-systems/statistics-Trends-and-Reports/nationalHealthexpenddata/downloads/nHe2012.zip.oACT,National health expenditure accounts: Methodology paper, 2012,2014. http://www.cms.gov/Researchstatistics-data-and-systems/statistics-Trends-and-Reports/nationalHealthexpenddata/downloads/dsm-12.pdf. # 98 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 98 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 17.Historical and Projected National Health Expenditures by Payer for Selected Years, 1970–2022DollarsTotalMedicaidand CHIP MedicarePrivateinsuranceOther healthinsurance1Other thirdparty payers2Out of pocketHistorical1970$75$5$8$15$3$18$251975134131630630371980256263769105558198544541721311589961990724741102342114613919951,0271451843272719814620001,3772032254593325520220052,0353173407035735126720062,1673154047406236927720072,3033354337786639729420082,4123554688087240830120092,5043875008337940530120102,5994105208608442030620112,6934205468898943331620122,79343457291791451328Projected20132,91545060496210146832920143,0935036351,03610848732420153,2735456691,10011451133420163,4585867151,15612253634220173,6606227671,21513057035620183,8896558281,28714060937120194,1426988861,37414964639020204,4167479551,45916068341220214,7027961,0291,54917172243420225,0098471,1231,636183761458 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 99 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 99TABLE 17, ContinuedShare of TotalTotalMedicaidand CHIP MedicarePrivateinsuranceOther healthinsurance1Other thirdparty payers2Out of pocketHistorical1970100%7.1%10.2%20.6%4.4%24.2%33.4%197510010.112.222.84.522.528.0198010010.214.627.03.821.622.819851009.216.229.53.420.121.6199010010.215.232.33.020.219.1199510014.117.931.82.619.314.2200010014.816.333.32.418.514.6200510015.616.734.52.817.313.1200610014.518.634.22.817.012.8200710014.618.833.82.917.312.8200810014.719.433.53.016.912.5200910015.420.033.33.216.212.0201010015.820.033.13.216.111.8201110015.620.333.03.316.111.7201210015.520.532.83.316.111.7Projected201310015.420.733.03.516.111.3201410016.320.533.53.515.810.5201510016.720.433.63.515.610.2201610017.020.733.43.515.59.9201710017.021.033.23.615.69.7201810016.821.333.13.615.79.5201910016.821.433.23.615.69.4202010016.921.633.03.615.59.3202110016.921.932.93.615.49.2202210016.922.432.73.715.29.1Notes:Historical data were released in 2014; projected data were released in 2013 and may therefore reflect different assumptions than those used to produce the current historical data.1u.s.department ofdefense andu.s.department ofveterans’ Affairs.2includes all other public and private programs and expenditures except for out-of-pocket amounts.Sources:for historical:office of the Actuary (oACT), Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices,National health expenditures by type of service and source of funds: Calendar years 1960–2012, January 2014. http://www.cms.gov/Researchstatistics-data-and-systems/statistics-Trends-and-Reports/nationalHealthexpenddata/downloads/nHe2012.zip.for projected: MACPAC communication withoACT,february 2014, andoACT,National health expenditure (NHE) amounts by type ofexpenditure and source of funds: Calendar years 1970–2022 in projections format,september 2013. http://www.cms.gov/Research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-Trends-and-Reports/nationalHealthexpenddata/downloads/nhe65-22.zip. # 100 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 100 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 18.Characteristics of Non-Institutionalized Individuals by Source of Health Insurance, 2013All AgesAge 0–18Totalall agesPrivateMedicaid/CHIP Medicare UninsuredTotal age0–18 PrivateMedicaid/CHIP Medicare UninsuredWithin Age Group1Number of People (millions)310.2185.252.148.145.378.041.529.10.35.9Share of Population100%59.7%16.8%15.5%14.6%100%53.2%37.3%0.4%7.5%Within Insurance Coverage TypeGender (%)Male48.848.8* 44.4 44.054.451.151.4 50.5 50.0 49.9female51.251.2* 55.6 56.045.648.948.6 49.5 50.0 50.1Family Income (%)2<100% of poverty15.13.8* 47.111.727.221.63.1 47.5 34.128.4100–199% of poverty19.110.7* 32.424.5* 33.521.811.2 35.1 39.1 32.7200+% of poverty65.885.6 20.563.839.356.685.7 17.3 26.839.0Race/Ethnicity (%)Hispanic17.110.2* 29.37.534.523.812.5 36.4 40.1 39.8white, non-Hispanic63.272.8 41.678.4* 44.553.568.5 34.7 29.841.3black, non-Hispanic12.09.0* 21.19.414.313.89.1 21.2 26.311.7other races and multiple races7.77.98.04.86.88.99.97.7 –†7.2Health Status (%)excellent or very good66.273.5* 59.740.7* 57.683.789.9 75.7 68.9 77.0good23.620.4 25.332.130.714.39.2 20.8 26.1 20.3fair or poor10.16.1 15.027.211.72.00.93.5 –†2.7Place of Residence (%)3large MsA53.755.1 51.4 47.8 52.553.856.3* 50.6 47.5 52.4small MsA30.530.5 29.6 30.8 29.730.931.1 30.3 36.9 29.5not in MsA15.814.4 19.1 21.4 17.815.312.7 19.1 –†18.1 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 101 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 101TABLE 18, ContinuedAge 19–64Age 65 and OverTotal age19–64 PrivateMedicaid/CHIP Medicare UninsuredTotal age65 and overPrivateMedicaid/CHIP Medicare UninsuredWithin Age Group1Number of People (millions)189.2122.019.37.239.043.021.83.6 40.5 0.4Share of Population100%64.5%10.2% 3.8% 20.6%100%50.6%8.4% 94.1%1.0%Within Insurance Coverage TypeGender (%)Male49.048.837.245.4* 55.144.144.0* 33.643.6* 48.5female51.051.262.854.6 44.955.956.0* 66.456.4* 51.5Family Income (%)2<100% of poverty13.84.148.230.0 26.98.63.2* 37.68.232.6100–199% of poverty17.39.528.935.7 33.622.116.3* 28.522.336.1200+% of poverty68.986.422.934.3 39.569.380.5* 33.969.631.3Race/Ethnicity (%)Hispanic16.510.620.510.3 33.67.53.6* 18.96.7* 44.7white, non-Hispanic63.671.749.668.1 45.279.187.2* 54.080.6* 29.6black, non-Hispanic12.19.621.716.2 14.78.45.7* 17.28.0* 10.0other races and multiple races7.78.1 8.2 5.4 6.65.03.59.8 4.715.7Health Status (%)excellent or very good63.971.842.416.4 55.044.851.5* 23.044.829.8good25.422.230.6 28.4 32.232.631.7 32.8 32.8 30.1fair or poor10.76.027.055.2 12.822.616.8* 44.222.440.1Place of Residence (%)3large MsA54.756.4 51.944.552.449.345.8* 54.5 48.4 61.0small MsA30.430.2 29.4 32.5 29.830.131.2 24.330.424.4not in MsA15.013.418.7 23.0 17.820.623.1 21.2 21.2 14.6 # 102 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 102 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 18, ContinuedNotes:1sum of health insurance coverage types may not add to total for each age group because individuals may have multiple sources of coverage and because not all types of coverage (e.g., military) are displayed.insurancecoverage is measured at the time of the interview. Private health insurance coverage excludes plans that paid for only one type of service, such as accidents or dental care. Medicaid/CHiP also includes persons covered byother public programs, excluding Medicare (e.g., other state-sponsored health plans); nevertheless, as discussed in Table 1, survey data tend to report lower Medicaid/CHiP enrollment than administrative data.individuals weredefined as uninsured if they did not have any private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid/CHiP, state-sponsored or other government-sponsored health plans, or a military plan.individuals were also defined as uninsured ifthey had onlyindian Healthservice coverage or had only a private plan that paid for one type of service, such as accidents or dental care.2for numerous reasons, poverty status shown here may differ from levels calculated by state Medicaid and CHiP programs.while these survey results show coverage as of the time of the survey in 2013, family income is forthe prior year, 2012.in 2012, 100 percent of poverty using theu.s. Censusbureau’s poverty threshold was $18,284 for a family of three. The poverty threshold differs from the federal poverty guidelines used for Medicaidand CHiP eligibility determinations. (The family income results shown here exclude the 9.9 percent of respondents with unknown poverty status.)in addition, data from surveys such as thenational Healthinterviewsurveytend to include more income and more relatives as part of the family unit, compared to how income is counted for Medicaid and CHiP.3MsA is a metropolitan statistical area with a population size of 50,000 or more persons.large MsAs have a population size of 1,000,000 or more; small MsAs have a population size between 50,000 and 1,000,000.†sample size is not sufficient to support published estimates.difference from Medicaid/CHiP is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.Source:national Center for Healthstatistics (nCHs) analysis for MACPAC ofnational Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis) data, January 2014; the estimates for 2013 are based on data collected from January through June, based onhousehold interviews of a sample of the civilian non-institutionalized population. # MAR CH 2014 \| # 103 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # 104 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MAR CH 2014 \| # 105 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 105TABLE 19.Income as a Percentage of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) for Various Family Sizes, 2014AnnualMonthlyStatesFamily sizeAmountfor eachadditionalfamily memberStatesFamily sizeAmountfor eachadditionalfamily member12341234Lower48 statesand DC100%fPl$11,670 $15,730 $19,790 $23,850 $4,060Lower48 statesand DC100%fPl$973 $1,311 $1,649 $1,988 $338133%fPl15,521 20,921 26,321 31,721 5,400133%fPl1,293 1,743 2,193 2,643 450138%fPl16,105 21,707 27,310 32,913 5,603138%fPl1,342 1,809 2,276 2,743 467150%fPl17,505 23,595 29,685 35,775 6,090150%fPl1,459 1,966 2,474 2,981 508185%fPl21,590 29,101 36,612 44,123 7,511185%fPl1,799 2,425 3,051 3,677 626200%fPl23,340 31,460 39,580 47,700 8,120200%fPl1,945 2,622 3,298 3,975 677250%fPl29,175 39,325 49,475 59,625 10,150250%fPl2,431 3,277 4,123 4,969 846300%fPl35,010 47,190 59,370 71,550 12,180300%fPl2,918 3,933 4,948 5,963 1,015400%fPl46,680 62,920 79,160 95,400 16,240400%fPl3,890 5,243 6,597 7,950 1,353Alaska100%fPl$14,580 $19,660 $24,740 $29,820 $5,080Alaska100%fPl$1,215 $1,638 $2,062 $2,485 $423133%fPl19,391 26,148 32,904 39,661 6,756133%fPl1,616 2,179 2,742 3,305 563138%fPl20,120 27,131 34,141 41,152 7,010138%fPl1,677 2,261 2,845 3,429 584150%fPl21,870 29,490 37,110 44,730 7,620150%fPl1,823 2,458 3,093 3,728 635185%fPl26,973 36,371 45,769 55,167 9,398185%fPl2,248 3,031 3,814 4,597 783200%fPl29,160 39,320 49,480 59,640 10,160200%fPl2,430 3,277 4,123 4,970 847250%fPl36,450 49,150 61,850 74,550 12,700250%fPl3,038 4,096 5,154 6,213 1,058300%fPl43,740 58,980 74,220 89,460 15,240300%fPl3,645 4,915 6,185 7,455 1,270400%fPl58,320 78,640 98,960 119,280 20,320400%fPl4,860 6,553 8,247 9,940 1,693Hawaii100%fPl$13,420 $18,090 $22,760 $27,430 $4,670Hawaii100%fPl$1,118 $1,508 $1,897 $2,286 $389133%fPl17,849 24,060 30,271 36,482 6,211133%fPl1,487 2,005 2,523 3,040 518138%fPl18,520 24,964 31,409 37,853 6,445138%fPl1,543 2,080 2,617 3,154 537150%fPl20,130 27,135 34,140 41,145 7,005150%fPl1,678 2,261 2,845 3,429 584185%fPl24,827 33,467 42,106 50,746 8,640185%fPl2,069 2,789 3,509 4,229 720200%fPl26,840 36,180 45,520 54,860 9,340200%fPl2,237 3,015 3,793 4,572 778250%fPl33,550 45,225 56,900 68,575 11,675250%fPl2,796 3,769 4,742 5,715 973300%fPl40,260 54,270 68,280 82,290 14,010300%fPl3,355 4,523 5,690 6,858 1,168400%fPl53,680 72,360 91,040 109,720 18,680400%fPl4,473 6,030 7,587 9,143 1,557Notes:ThefPls shown here are based on theu.s.department of Health and Humanservices 2014 federal poverty guidelines. These differ slightly from theu.s. Censusbureau’s federal poverty thresholds, which are usedmainly for statistical purposes. The separate poverty guidelines for Alaska and Hawaii reflectoffice ofeconomicopportunity administrative practice beginning in the 1966–1970 period.Source:u.s.department of Health and Humanservices (HHs), Annual update of the HHspoverty guidelines,Federal Register78 (January 22): 3593, 2014. # 106 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 106 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 20.Supplemental Payments by State and Category, FY 2013 (millions)StateInpatient and Outpatient Hospitals1Mental Health Facilities2DSH paymentsNon-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas % of total DSH paymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas % of totalAll states$13,427.8 $20,598.8 $89,465.4 38.0% $2,949.5 $6,524.045.2%Alabama470.9343.2 1,891.5 43.0–67.5–Alaska7.6–302.62.514.132.343.7Arizona145.1846.3 1,466.7 67.628.030.292.6Arkansas61.0314.8990.0 38.0–159.9–California2,119.5 5,641.3 16,290.6 47.60.2531.50.0Colorado194.2787.1 1,712.8 57.3–6.2–Connecticut167.395.7 1,721.2 15.3105.6179.658.8delaware5.2–50.8 10.35.66.587.1district of Columbia49.9–359.3 13.96.514.046.3florida241.9993.9 5,104.2 24.293.1141.965.7georgia430.0125.2 2,198.9 25.2–24.3–Hawaii25.081.7117.9 90.4–––idaho23.735.0505.7 11.6–1.6–illinois371.6 1,881.9 6,498.3 34.775.5226.733.3indiana333.5201.8 1,858.0 28.84.050.18.0iowa54.632.5792.8 11.0–20.5–kansas51.321.8328.0 22.325.343.957.5kentucky178.917.8456.6 43.137.344.983.2louisiana652.0918.9 2,202.1 71.3114.8117.298.0Maine–4.7997.10.537.599.837.6Maryland41.947.7993.39.092.4184.950.0Massachusetts–591.9 2,120.2 27.9–109.3–Michigan388.0622.9 1,722.1 58.7–22.6–Minnesota46.170.0603.1 19.30.286.90.2Mississippi218.0490.5 1,660.4 42.7–74.2–Missouri496.2121.6 2,980.5 20.7207.2230.490.0Montana17.71.5268.27.2–18.1–nebraska43.7–216.1 20.21.618.98.4nevada81.4120.0539.1 37.4–45.4– # MAR CH 2014 \| # 107 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 107TABLE 20, ContinuedStateInpatient and Outpatient Hospitals1Mental Health Facilities2DSH paymentsNon-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas % of total DSH paymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas % of totalnew Hampshire$18.6– $156.3 11.9%$22.4$30.074.6%new Jersey940.7 $259.1 1,739.5 69.0357.4452.579.0new Mexico25.2123.1365.8 40.5–2.7–newyork52,766.9-854.7 8,760.0 21.8656.5 1,129.958.1north Carolina308.9 1,374.5 3,460.8 48.6308.5350.188.1northdakota0.52.0138.51.80.77.69.8ohio6555.7568.4 2,493.6 45.193.4721.013.0oklahoma41.2442.1 1,544.0 31.30.572.80.7oregon56.693.3348.3 43.020.023.087.0Pennsylvania534.5350.0 1,726.1 51.2312.6401.377.9Rhodeisland129.811.6350.7 40.3–5.6–south Carolina405.0108.3 1,156.1 44.452.2102.051.1southdakota0.72.8187.71.90.84.018.9Tennessee80.3969.5 1,171.3 89.6–33.9–Texas106.3 2,014.1 4,918.2 43.1120.5141.385.3utah27.9183.4457.6 46.20.913.37.0vermont537.4-0.044.3 84.5–0.0–virginia179.3270.6 1,011.0 44.57.2141.95.1washington238.6–1,033.4 23.1128.2153.383.6westvirginia56.5229.7588.2 48.718.9106.917.7wisconsin0.624.9743.23.4–27.9–wyoming0.516.7122.5 14.0–13.4– # 108 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 108 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 20, Continued. Supplemental Payments by State and Category, FY 2013 (millions)StateNursing Facilities and ICFs-ID3Physician and Other Practitioners4Non-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas of totalNon-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas of totalAll states$2,393.8$62,953.83.8%$846.3$13,163.56.4%Alabama–904.7––382.3–Alaska–128.2––125.7–Arizona2.837.37.5–34.8–Arkansas–804.6–33.3316.110.5California290.15,353.65.4–916.5–Colorado91.1688.313.214.2357.74.0Connecticut–1,557.9––414.8–delaware–31.6––12.6–district of Columbia–312.6––46.9–florida11.03,156.70.379.01,265.36.2georgia144.31,395.910.333.5409.38.2Hawaii–8.8––1.2–idaho81.5288.428.3–89.9–illinois–2,745.0––894.7–indiana461.61,946.323.7109.9286.838.3iowa–889.6––210.0–kansas2.3198.61.215.649.931.3kentucky0.41,010.00.06.250.712.3louisiana–1,336.3–42.5316.713.4Maine–339.1––131.9–Maryland–1,137.5––107.6–Massachusetts1.41,640.20.128.0355.67.9Michigan339.61,775.019.1125.0283.344.1Minnesota–910.6–21.7332.06.5Mississippi62.51,049.06.0–218.5–Missouri–1,089.1––47.9–Montana–173.1––65.2–nebraska–414.9––42.3–nevada–208.3–3.4109.13.1new Hampshire–302.0––63.2–new Jersey–2,508.5––48.2–new Mexico–28.1–14.191.115.5newyork5172.59,540.31.832.6585.55.6 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 109 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 109TABLE 20, ContinuedStateNursing Facilities and ICFs-ID3Physician and Other Practitioners4Non-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas of totalNon-DSHsupplementalpaymentsTotal MedicaidpaymentsSupplementalpaymentsas of totalnorth Carolina–$1,309.9–$67.3$912.67.4%northdakota$1.7304.60.6%–55.2–ohio6-82.13,153.6-2.6–365.1–oklahoma–673.4–0.0513.90.0oregon–331.3––45.3–Pennsylvania713.64,448.916.0–153.9–Rhodeisland–339.9––11.6–south Carolina22.2671.83.332.8237.413.8southdakota–163.1––64.2–Tennessee–250.3––27.7–Texas–3,424.2–83.11,358.26.1utah5.0233.72.227.9102.027.3vermont50.1116.20.1–1.9–virginia4.11,149.60.424.1213.411.3washington–729.2–24.2138.617.5westvirginia–608.7–28.0158.017.7wisconsin39.61,013.73.9–78.4–wyoming28.6121.423.6–62.7–Notes:includes federal and state funds.excludes payments made under managed care arrangements. All amounts in this table are as reported by states in CMs-64 data during the fiscal year to obtain federal matching funds;they include expenditures for the current fiscal year and adjustments to expenditures for prior fiscal years that may be positive or negative. Amounts reported by states for any given category (e.g., inpatient hospital) sometimesshow substantial annual fluctuations. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaidservices (CMs) only began to require separate reporting of non-disproportionate share hospital (dsH) supplemental payments in fiscal year (fy) 2010and is continuing to work with states to standardize this reporting. As a result, the information presented may not reflect a consistent classification of supplemental payment spending across states. Reporting is expected toimprove over time. All states had certified their CMs-64finanical Management Report (fMR) submissions as offebruary 12, 2014.figures presented in this table may change if states revise their expenditure data after this date.Zeroes indicate amounts less than 0.05 million that round to zero.dashes indicate amounts that are true zeroes.1includes inpatient, outpatient, critical access hospital, and emergency hospital categories in the CMs-64 data. The CMs-64 instructions to states note thatdsH payments are those made in accordance withsection 1923 ofthesocialsecurity Act.non-dsH supplemental payments are described in the CMs-64 instructions to states as those made in addition to the standard fee schedule or other standard payment for a given service. They includepayments made under institutional upper payment limit rules and payments to hospitals for graduate medical education.2includes inpatient psychiatric services for individuals under age 21 and inpatient hospital or nursing facility services for individuals age 65 or older in an institution for mental diseases. The CMs-64 instructions to states notethatdsH payments are those made in accordance withsection 1923 of thesocialsecurity Act.states are not instructed to break out non-dsH supplemental payments for mental health facilities.3includes nursing facility and intermediate care facility for persons with intellectual disabilities (iCf-id).non-dsH supplemental payments are described in the CMs-64 instructions to states as payments that are made in additionto the standard fee schedule or other standard payment for a given service, including payments made under institutional upper payment limit rules.4includes the physician and other practitioner categories in CMs-64 data; excludes additional categories (e.g., dental, nurse midwife, nurse practitioner) for which states are not instructed to break out supplemental payments.The CMs-64 instructions to states describe supplemental payments as those that are made in addition to the standard fee schedule payment.unlike for institutional providers, there is not a regulatory upper payment limit forphysicians and other practitioners.5newyork andvermont reported negative non-dsH supplemental payments for inpatient hospitals.6ohio reported negative non-dsH supplemental payments foriCfs-id, creating a negative percentage.Source:MACPAC analysis of CMs-64financial Management Report (fMR) net expenditure data as offebruary 2014. # 110 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # TABLE 21. F ederal CHIP Allotments, FY 2013 and FY 2014 (millions) State FY 2013 CHIP Allotments FY 2014 Allotment Increase Factor FY 2014 Federal CHIP Allotments A B C = A x B Alabama $162.8 1.0627 $173.1 Alaska 20.6 1.0627 21.8 Arizona 25.4 1.0650 27.0 Arkansas 103.1 1.0636 109.7 California 1,296.0 1.0627 1,377.3 Colorado 131.8 1.0658 140.5 Connecticut 41.3 1.0627 43.9 d elaware 15.7 1.0637 16.7 d istrict of Columbia 14.9 1.0969 16.3 f lorida 359.0 1.0647 382.3 g eorgia 282.7 1.0642 300.9 Hawaii 25.8 1.0641 27.5 i daho 36.0 1.0627 38.2 i llinois 275.6 1.0627 292.8 i ndiana 144.9 1.0627 153.9 i owa 92.5 1.0627 98.3 k ansas 55.4 1.0627 58.9 k entucky 147.9 1.0627 157.2 l ouisiana 171.9 1.0643 182.9 Maine 31.5 1.0627 33.5 Maryland 160.5 1.0627 170.5 Massachusetts 330.9 1.0627 351.6 Michigan 54.8 1.0627 58.2 Minnesota 32.1 1.0627 34.1 Mississippi 176.9 1.0627 188.0 Missouri 122.9 1.0627 130.7 Montana 59.4 1.0627 63.1 n ebraska 42.5 1.0666 45.3 n evada 31.5 1.0650 33.5 n ew Hampshire 18.2 1.0627 19.3 n ew Jersey 640.2 1.0627 680.3 n ew Mexico 124.2 1.0627 132.0 n ew y ork 579.8 1.0627 616.1 n orth Carolina 304.2 1.0642 323.7 n orth d akota 17.3 1.0853 18.8 o hio 336.1 1.0627 357.1 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 111 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # State FY 2013 CHIP Allotments FY 2014 Allotment Increase Factor FY 2014 Federal CHIP Allotments A B C = A x B o klahoma $114.2 1.0678 $121.9 o regon 143.9 1.0627 152.9 Pennsylvania 305.7 1.0627 324.9 Rhode i sland 39.5 1.0627 42.0 s outh Carolina 98.3 1.0658 104.7 s outh d akota 19.4 1.0681 20.8 Tennessee 200.2 1.0635 212.9 Texas 891.5 1.0721 955.8 u tah 62.5 1.0696 66.8 v er mont 13.0 1.0627 13.9 v irginia 186.6 1.0630 198.3 w ashington 96.9 1.0654 103.3 w est v irginia 48.3 1.0627 51.3 w isconsin 103.0 1.0627 109.5 w yoming 10.8 1.0705 11.5 Subtotal $8,799.9 $9,365.7 American s amoa 1.3 1.0627 1.4 g uam 4.5 1.0627 4.8 n . Mariana i slands 0.9 1.0627 1.0 Puerto Rico 132.7 1.0627 141.0 v irgin i slands – 1.0627 – Total $8,939.4 $9,513.9 Notes: f or even-numbered years (e.g., fiscal year ( fy ) 2014), federal CH i P allotments are calculated as the sum of last year’s allotment and any shortfall payments (e.g., contingency funds), increased by a state-specific growth factor. i n fy 2013, there were no contingency fund payments. f or even-numbered years, a state can also have its allotment increased to reflect a CH i P eligibility or benefits expansion; some states have applied for these allotment increases, but the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices (CM s ) has not named them nor finalized their additional allotment amounts, if any. Source: MACPAC communication with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid s ervices (CM s ), f ebr uary 2014. # TABLE 21, Continued # 112 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MAR CH 2014 \| # 113 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 113TABLE 22.Federal CHIPRA Bonus Payments (millions)FY 2009CHIPRAbonuspaymentsFY 2010CHIPRAbonuspaymentsFY 2011CHIPRAbonuspaymentsFY 2012CHIPRAbonuspaymentsPreliminaryFY 2013CHIPRAbonuspaymentsFY 2013 Outreach and Enrollment Efforts Among 23 States Receiving CHIPRA Bonus PaymentsState12 months ofcontinuouseligibilityLiberalizationof assetrequirementsEliminationof in-personinterviewJointapplication andrenewal formAutomatic,administrativerenewalPresumptiveeligibilityExpressLanePremiumassistanceTotal $37.1 $167.2 $303.5 $318.3 $307.3 15 22 23 23 17 13 5 5Al11.5 5.7 20.4 15.8 11.599 9 99– ––Ak0.7 4.9 5.7 4.1 2.699 9 99– ––Co– 18.2 32.9 47.5 58.5 –99 99 9 99CT– – 5.2 3.0 1.7 –99 99 9– –gA– – 4.9 2.2 –id– 0.9 0.5 1.4 5.499 9 99– –9il9.5 15.3 15.3 13.3 6.399 9 99 9– –iA– 7.7 10.0 11.4 10.699 9 9–9 9–ks1.2 5.5 6.0 12.8 10.999 9 99 9– –lA1.5 3.7 1.9 – –Md– 11.4 28.0 37.5 43.5 –99 99–9–Mi4.7 8.4 6.9 4.4 1.699 9 9–9– –MT– – 5.0 7.2 7.0 –99 99 9– –nJ3.1 8.8 17.6 24.4 22.4 – –9 99 99–nM5.4 9.0 5.2 2.7 1.799 9 99 9– –nC– – 11.6 18.6 11.699 9 99– ––nd– – 3.2 2.7 1.199 9 99– ––ny2–––0.6 13.199 9 9–9–oH– 13.1 20.9 19.0 10.899 9 9–9– –ok– – 0.5 – –oR1.6 10.6 22.3 25.9 24.499 9 99– ––sC– – 2.7 2.9 17.599 9 9–9 9–uT– – – 9.9 5.3 –99 99 9– –vA– – 24.6 20.0 18.0 –99 99– –9wA7.9 20.7 19.0 13.8 7.899 9 9– ––9wi– 23.4 33.3 17.1 13.9 –99 99– –9wv– – 0.1 – –Notes:CHiPRA is the Children’s Healthinsurance Program Reauthorization Act.each of these outreach and enrollment efforts is described in MACPAC’s March 2011 report (pp. 68–69).some fiscal year (fy) 2012 bonuspayments have been revised based on final enrollment figures.1originally, Alabama’s bonus payments were $40 million forfy2009 and $55 million forfy2010. A preliminary audit conducted by CMsand the state revealed an error in the state’s calculation of qualifying children.for somestates, preliminary bonus payments may be revised to reflect final figures showing growth in children’s enrollment in Medicaid.2newyork qualified forfy2012 bonus payment after reconciliation of final enrollment figures.Sources:u.s.department of Health and Humanservices (HHs),CHIPRA performance bonuses: A history (FY 2009 – FY 2013),december 2013. http://www.insurekidsnow.gov/professionals/eligibility/pb-2013-chart.pdf; andHHs,FY 2013 CHIPRA performance bonus awards. http://www.insurekidsnow.gov/professionals/eligibility/fy2013-pb-table.pdf. # 114 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIPMARCH 2014\|115MACstats: MediCAidAndCHiP PRogRAMsTATisTiCs\|MARCH 2014\|115 # TABLE 23. Provider Availability Measures of Access to Care for Medicaid/CHIP Beneficiaries, 2012 Physicians in Primary Care Specialties Measure Number 1 # All Primary Care Physicians 2 # General pediatrics General, family or internal medicine Provider Availability Primary care physician (PCP) is accepting new patients by source of payment 3 # P1 n ew Medicaid/CH i P patients 67.4% 79.5% ^ # 62.6% ^† # n ew Medicare patients 75.1* – 4 # 87.5 ^ # n ew privately insured patients 85.2 94.7 ^ # 81.8 ^† # Percentage of the PCP's patient care revenue that comes from Medicaid/CH i P (categories sum to 100%) 5 # P2 n one 27.3 19.2 ^ # 30.6 ^† # 1 to 9 percent of revenue 18.5 10.0 ^ # 22.0 ^† # 10 to 25 percent of revenue 27.5 20.9 ^ # 30.2 ^† # 26 to 50 percent of revenue 17.9 27.5 ^ # 14.0 ^† # More than 50 percent of revenue 8.8 22.4 ^ # 3.2 ^† # Notes: d ata in this table are drawn from the 2012 n ational e lectronic Health Records s urvey, a component of the n ational Ambulatory Medical Care s urvey ( n AMC s - ne HR s ). The 2012 n AMC s - ne HR s draws on a national multistage probability sample of practicing physicians in office-based settings, defined as a physician office where non-federa lly employed physicians provide direct patient care. This includes community health centers, HM o s, and faculty practices that refer patients to academic health centers and excludes outpatient hospital departments. Physicians in the specialties of anesthesiology, pathology, and radiology are excluded. * d ifference from percentage accepting new Medicaid patients is statistically significant at the 0.01 level. ^ d ifference from all primary care physicians (PCPs) is statistically significant at the 0.01 level. † d ifference from PCPs in general pediatrics is statistically significant at the 0.01 level. 1 Measure number cor responds to the index of access measures in the MAC s tats Appendix. s ee the appendix for additional details on each measure. 2 PCP s include physicians in general pediatrics, general medicine, family medicine, and internal medicine. o bstetrician-gynecologists are not included in the table. 3 Physicians who do not accept any new patients are considered not to be accepting any new Medicaid, Medicare, or privately insured patients. 4 The percentage of pediatricians accepting new Medicare patients is omitted due to ver y low Medicare participation by this group. Source: n ational Center for Health s tatistics analysis for MACPAC of the 2012 n ational e lectronic Health Records s urvey, a component of the 2012 n ational Ambulatory Medical Care s urvey ( n AMC s - ne HR s ).116\|MARCH 2014\|REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP116\|MARCH 2014 # TABLE 24. P arent-Reported Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Children by Source of Health Insurance, 2011–2012 Children with Selected Sources of Insurance 2,3 # Measure Number 1 # All Children 2 # Medicaid/ CHIP 4 # Private/ Other 5 # Uninsured 6 # Connection to the health care system (past 12 months) Has a usual source of care 8 # s 1 95.4% 96.8 % 98.0 %* 65.9 %* Had same usual source of medical care 12 months ago (all children) 8 # s 2 88.8 90.0 91.9 * 64.3* Has a personal doctor or nurse 7 # s 3 90.3 87.8 94.5 * 64.5* Access barrier is reason for having no usual source of care 8,9 # s 4 1.4 0.4 0.2 18.1 * Had trouble finding a doctor 8,10 # s 5 3.7 4.8 2.2 * 4.5 Had usual source of care barrier or trouble finding a doctor 8,11 # s 6 4.9 5.1 2.4 * 20.8* Receipt of effective care coordination 7,12 # s 7 P arent did not receive all care coordination needed 14.3 16.4 12.9 14.6 Parent received all care coordination needed 27.8 27.1 29.9* 12.2* d id not need care coordination 57.9 56.5 57.3 73.1* Contact with health care professionals (past 12 months) Had at least one office visit 8,13 # C1 90.7 91.6 92.7 63.1* s aw a general doctor 8 # C2 81.8 82.4 84.6* 50.3* s aw a general doctor, nurse practitioner, PA, midwife, or o b- g yn 8,14 # C3 83.6 83.7 86.3* 54.5* Had at least one preventive dental visit (age 2–17) 7 # C4 80.7 76.9 86.3* 49.5* Timeliness of care (past 12 months) d elayed medical care due to an access barrier 8,15 # T1 11.5 13.4 7.3* 23.6* Any time when needed health care was delayed or not received 7 # T2 Medical care 3.4 4.4 1.8* 13.2* Mental health care 0.8 1.0 0.7* 1.4 d ental care 2.6 3.0 1.7* 10.7* v ision 0.9 1.0 0.5* 4.4* # MAR CH 2014 \| # 117 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 117TABLE 24, ContinuedChildren with Selected Sources ofInsurance2,3MeasureNumber1All Children2Medicaid/CHIP4Private/Other5Uninsured6unmet need for selected types of care due to cost8T3Medical care1.8%0.9% 0.8% 10.5%Mental health care or counseling, age 2–181.00.80.72.7dental care5.64.23.2* 21.7Prescription drugs2.21.91.3 7.2eyeglasses2.02.01.1 7.2Had problem getting referrals (of children needing referrals)7T420.824.9 15.9 43.5Receipt of appropriate care (past 12 months)doctors and other providers spend enough time with child7,16A177.568.8 85.6 47.4Received at least one preventive medical visit (age 0–17)8A280.282.7 82.1 46.1Children age 0–589.788.4 92.8* 62.5Children age 6–1177.981.2 79.5 45.1Children age 12–1773.076.2 75.8 40.8Received selectedePsdT services (of children needing service)7,17A3vision screening in last 2 years (age 5–17) or ever (age 0–4)67.663.4 71.5 57.6Mental health care (children needing mental health care, age 2–17)61.159.2 66.1 41.9Therapy services (children with autism or developmental delays)87.986.7 90.0 77.7Received coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical home7A454.443.9 64.0 27.8Had at least one hospital emergency room (eR) visit8A518.024.9 13.3 12.9eR visit was related to a serious health problem1810.013.17.9 5.4eR visit was related to an access barrier, not a serious problem186.69.84.2 5.5Had two or moreeR visits8A65.99.93.2 3.8* # 118 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 118 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 24, ContinuedNotes:data in this table are drawn from national samples of children based on two different surveys, the 2012national Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis) and the 2010–2011nationalsurvey of Children’s Health (nsCH). ThenHisandnsCH apply different sampling methodologies, and data are collected from different time periods.in addition, the surveys have different questions on health insurance coverage.for these reasons, measures from different surveysshould not be directly compared. The table is intended to compare populations with different coverage sources within each measure. Responses to access and use questions are based on the previous 12 months, during which timethe individual may have had different coverage than that shown in the table. As a result, experiences with access barriers and service use in part may be due to periods with other coverage or no coverage in the past year.difference from Medicaid/CHiP is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.1Measure number corresponds to the index of access measures in the MACstats Appendix.see the appendix for additional details on each measure.2fornHismeasures, the population is children age 0–18 who were insured or uninsured for the entire year.fornsCH measures, the population is all children age 0–17.3The population in each column differs somewhat based on the data source, as described in the footnotes on individual columns. Children covered by Medicare (generally childrenwith end-stage renal disease) are not separatelyshown.4fornHismeasures, the Medicaid/CHiP population consists of children age 0–18 with Medicaid/CHiP at the time of interview and is limited to children insured for the entire year, including children who switched coveragesources during the year.fornsCH measures, the Medicaid/CHiP population consists of children age 0–17 with Medicaid/CHiP at the time of interview, including children who were uninsured during the past year.nHismeasures exclude a small number of children with Medicaid/CHiP who are also covered by private, Medicare, or other state-sponsored and government-sponsored insurance at the time of interview, whilensCH measuresinclude any children with Medicaid/CHiP and additional sources of public or private coverage.5fornHismeasures, the private/other population is limited to children age 0–18 insured for the entire year and includes children who switched coverage sources during the year, whilensCH measures include children age 0–17who were uninsured during the past year. The private/other population fornHismeasures consists of children with employer-sponsored insurance, other private plans, and military health plans at the time of the interview andincludes children with both private insurance and Medicaid/CHiP or other coverage.fornsCH measures, the privately insured/other population consists of children who were covered by any insurance other than Medicaid/CHiPat the time of the interview. These children primarily have employer-sponsored insurance, other private plans, and military health plans, but this population also includes a small number of children with other state-sponsored orother government-sponsored insurance.6fornHismeasures, the uninsured population is children age 0–18 who did not have any health insurance coverage at the time of interview and who were uninsured for the entire year. Children withindian Healthservicecoverage only or a private plan that paid for one type of service, such as accidents or dental care, were classified as uninsured.fornsCH measures, the uninsured population is children age 0–17 who did not have any type ofhealth insurance coverage at the time of interview and includes children who had a source of coverage sometime in the past year.7Measure is constructed from the 2011–2012nsCH.8Measure is constructed from the 2012nHis.9Reasons given by those who reported no usual place of care that were classified as access barriers include: too expensive/cost, previous doctor not available, parent does not know where to go, and speaks a differentlanguage.10Parent reported one of these barriers in the past 12 months: trouble finding a doctor or provider, doctor’s office/clinic did not accept child’s insurance coverage, or office/clinic did not accept child as a new patient.11Reported any experiences captured in measures4 ands5.12Children are classified as needing care coordination if they received two or more services or the parent reported needing care coordination. The criteria for receipt of effective care coordination were that the family receivedsome type of help with care coordination, and the family was very satisfied with doctors’ communication with other health care providers, school, and other programs, if those services were needed. The denominator for eachstatistic is all children.13Parents may report encounters with a broad range of health professionals (e.g., speech therapist or social worker) but the question is limited to visits in a doctor’s office or clinic.14PA is physician assistant.ob-gyn is obstetrician-gynecologist, and these visits were limited to females age 15–18.15Reasons given for delayed care classified as access barriers include cost, transportation, and provider-related reasons (parent couldn’t get an appointment, had to wait too long to see doctor, couldn’t go when open, couldn’tget through on phone, and parent speaks a different language).16defined as the percentage of children whose parents reported the providers usually or always spend enough time with child.17early and Periodicscreening,diagnostic, and Treatment (ePsdT) services are a mandatory Medicaid benefit. The denominator for vision screening is all children. The denominator for mental health care is children whoseparents report the child needed mental health care. The denominator for therapy services is children with autism or a developmental delay. These measures do not capture children with an undiagnosed need or whose parentsare not aware the child needs services.18based on questions about the most recent emergency room (eR) visit. The most recenteR visit is classified as related to a serious health problem if the parent reported that the visit resulted in a hospital admission or reasonfor the visit was taken by ambulance, advised by doctor to go, or problem too serious for doctor’s office/clinic. TheeR visit is classified as related to an access barrier if the parent reported that the visit occurred at night or on aweekend, or the reason for the visit was that doctor’s office/clinic was closed, excluding visits for a serious health problem. These categories do not capture all visits.Source:MACPAC analysis of the 2012national Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis) and the 2011–2012nationalsurvey of Children’s Health (nsCH). # MAR CH 2014 \| # 119 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # 120 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 120 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 25.Parent-Reported Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Children with Special Health Care Needs (CSHCN) bySource of Health Insurance, 2009–2012CSHCN2with Selected Sourcesof Insurance3MeasureNumber1All CSHCN2Medicaid/CHIP4Private/Other5Uninsured6Connection to the health care system (past 12 months)Has a personal doctor or nurse7s392.8%90.3% 95.8% 75.3%Receipt of effective care coordination7,8s7Parent did not receive all care coordination needed33.134.3 32.1 38.2Parent received all care coordination needed42.941.8 45.5 18.9did not need care coordination23.924.0 22.4 42.8family had one or more unmet needs for support services9,10s87.28.84.6* 18.1Contact with health professionals (past 12 months)Had at least one preventive dental visit (age 2–17)7C484.480.1 90.1 49.7Received care from a specialist doctor9C545.640.4 50.0 31.9Timeliness of care (past 12 months)Had unmet need for selected types of care9T5specialist care4.46.22.5 15.3Prescription drugs2.63.41.4 15.9Mental health care and counseling5.67.34.0 14.9non-preventive dental5.47.13.7 20.8Physical, occupational, or speech therapy4.75.13.8 8.0vision care or eyeglasses2.12.81.3 8.2Had 2 or more unmet needs for 14 specific services9,11T68.811.95.3 33.6Receipt of appropriate care (past 12 months)doctors and other providers spend enough time with child7,12A179.774.2 85.8 54.3Had at least one preventive medical visit9A290.491.5 91.1 70.3Children less than age 297.897.5 98.3–13Children age 2–494.692.9 96.6 93.5Children age 5–1189.388.1 93.1* 52.6Children age 12–1790.490.2 90.2 64.5Received coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical home9A446.840.6 53.2* 25.8Had two or moreeR visits9A621.633.0 12.8 23.5* # MAR CH 2014 \| # 121 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 121TABLE 25, ContinuedNotes:data in this table are drawn from national samples of children based on two different surveys, the 2010–2011nationalsurvey of Children’s Health (nsCH) and the 2009–2010nationalsurvey of Children withspecial Health Careneeds (ns-CsHCn). Measures are for children age 0–17, unless otherwise noted. ThensCH andns-CsHCnapply different methods to sample children, and data are collected from different time periods.in addition, the surveys havedifferent questions on health insurance coverage.for these reasons, measures from different surveys should not be directly compared. The table is intended to compare populations with different coverage sources within each measure.Responses to access and use questions are based on the previous 12 months, during which time the individual may have had different coverage than that shown in the table. As a result, experiences with access barriers and service usemay be due partly to periods with other coverage or no coverage in the past year.not separately shown are children covered by Medicare (generally children with end-stage renal disease).see additional notes.difference from Medicaid/CHiP is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.1Measure number corresponds to the index of access measures in the MACstats Appendix.see the appendix for additional details on each measure.2CsHCnis children with special health care needs.in both thensCH andns-CsHCn, CsHCnare identified using a five-item, parent-reported tool that identifies children across the range and diversity of childhood chronicconditions and special needs and who currently experience one or more of five common health consequences due to a physical, mental, behavioral, or other type of health condition lasting or expected to last at least 12months.see Child and Adolescent Health Measurementinitiative (CAHMi),fast facts:Children with special health care needs screener(Portland,oR: CAHMi, 2007). http://childhealthdata.org/docs/cshcn/cshcn-screenercahmi-quickguide-pdf.pdf.3The population in each column differs somewhat based on the data source.see additional notes for the selected populations.4CHiP isstate Children’s Healthinsurance Program.for all measures, the Medicaid/CHiP population is children with Medicaid or CHiP at the time of interview and includes children who were uninsured during the past year orwho switched coverage sources during the year.fornsCH measures, Medicaid/CHiP includes a small number of children with additional sources of public or private coverage.forns-CsHCnmeasures, Medicaid/CHiP islimited to children with Medicaid or CHiP only at the time of interview and excludes children with additional sources of public or private coverage.5fornsCH measures, the private/other population consists of children who were covered by any insurance other than Medicaid/CHiP at the time of the interview. These children primarily have employer-sponsored insurance,other private plans, and military health plans, but this population also includes a small number of children with other state-sponsored or other government-sponsored insurance.for thens-CHsCnmeasures, the private/other population is limited to children with private health insurance only, defined as insurance through an employer, purchased directly from an insurance company, or any military health plan.for bothnsCH andns-CsHCnmeasures, the private/other population includes children insured at the time of interview who were uninsured during the year or who switched coverage sources during the year.6for bothnsCH andns-CHsCnmeasures, the uninsured population consists of children who did not have any health insurance coverage at the time of interview and includes children who had a source of coverage sometime inthe past year.forns-CHsCnmeasures, parents who indicated the child was insured by a source other than Medicaid/CHiP were asked a follow-up question of whether the insurance covered doctor visits and hospital stays.ifnot, these children also were classified as uninsured.in addition, thens-CsHCninstructed parents not to count dental, vision, school, or accident insurance as coverage.7Measure is constructed from the 2011–2012nsCH (see source noted below).8Children are defined as needing care coordination if they received two or more services or the parent reported needing care coordination. The criteria for receipt of effective care coordination were that the family received sometype of help with care coordination, and the family was very satisfied with doctors’ communication with other health care providers, school, and other programs, if those services were needed. The denominator for each statisticis all children.9Measure is constructed from the 2009–2010ns-CsHCn(see source noted below).10The family needed one or more family supports (respite care, genetic counseling, or family mental health care or counseling) but did not receive all the help they needed.11in addition to the services listed in the table, this includes unmet need for dental, home health care, substance abuse treatment or counseling, durable medical equipment, genetic counseling, and respite care.12The percentage of children whose parents reported the providers usually or always spend enough time with child.13data not shown due to small sample size.Source:MACPAC analysis of the 2011–2012nationalsurvey of Children’s Health (nsCH) and the 2009–2010nationalsurvey of Children withspecial Health Careneeds (ns-CsHCn). # 122 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 122 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 26.Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Individuals Age 19 to 64 by Source of Health Insurance, 2012Adults with Selected Sourcesof InsuranceMeasureNumber1All Adults2Medicaid3Private4Uninsured5Connection to the health care system (past 12 months)Has a usual source of care when sick or needs advices979.6%87.1% 89.9% 41.7%Access barrier is reason for having no usual source of care6s118.43.11.4 34.5Had trouble finding a doctor7s123.14.51.5 6.3Had usual source of care barrier or trouble finding a doctor8s1313.311.65.1 38.4Contact with health professionals (past 12 months)Had at least one office visit9C677.584.9 84.7 46.6saw a selected health professional (any setting)10saw a nurse practitioner, physician assistant (PA), or midwifeC719.122.3 20.79.0saw a medical doctor, nurse practitioner, PA, or midwife11C876.781.7 84.2 45.7saw a mental health professional (adults withsMionly)12C939.545.9 38.9 24.2saw a dental professionalC1061.350.7 74.2* 28.1saw any health professional, excluding dental13C1182.488.6 89.1 53.4saw any health professional, including dental13C1288.892.8 94.9* 62.3Timeliness of care (past 12 months)delayed medical care due to an access barrier (any below)14T721.822.9 14.7 37.9because of costs13.07.96.0 32.4Provider-related reasons1410.314.69.5 8.4did not have transportation1.96.00.6 2.5unmet need for selected types of care due to costT8Medical care9.96.13.4 28.1Mental health care or counseling3.02.21.2 7.1did not take medication as prescribed to save money15T914.312.88.0 28.6Had any barriers to finding a doctor, delayed care, or unmet need16T1034.133.5 21.8 65.3* # MAR CH 2014 \| # 123 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 123TABLE 26, ContinuedAdults with Selected Sourcesof InsuranceMeasureNumber1All Adults2Medicaid3Private4Uninsured5Receipt of appropriate care (past 12 months)Received any preventive visit or counseling, all individuals17A784.1%89.1%90.3%57.3%individuals age 19 to 4980.787.8 87.8 54.2individuals age 50 to 6491.293.3 94.6 68.0individuals with a chronic condition or pregnant, all ages92.796.3 96.0 73.9Had cholesterol checked by health professional, all individualsA857.360.9 64.9* 27.2Men age 35 to 6465.467.4 73.8 28.6individuals with health-related risk of heart disease (CHd)1865.669.2 75.6 33.3All individuals at increased risk of CHd63.566.8 72.6 30.0Had a flu shot, all individualsA931.631.3 37.3 13.0individuals age 50 to 6442.842.6 46.4 19.3individuals with a chronic condition or pregnant40.538.8 46.5* 18.5All individuals at high-risk of influenza complications1939.138.1 44.2 17.4Had professional counseling about smoking (current smokers)A1049.259.0 55.0 28.8Had any test for colorectal cancer (age 50 to 64)A1122.824.7 25.16.3Men age 50 to 6424.922.1 27.55.9women age 50 to 6420.926.4 22.86.7Had Pap smear or test for cervical cancer (women age 21 to 60)A1259.361.6 65.8 33.6Had more than 15 office visitsA135.39.65.0 1.9Had at least one hospital emergency room (eR) visitA1418.835.9 14.9 17.1eR visit was related to a serious health problem2012.123.89.7 8.9eR visit was related to an access barrier, not a serious problem204.98.74.0 5.0four or moreeR visitsA152.07.20.8 2.0* # 124 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 124 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 26, ContinuedNotes:Measures in this table are based on national samples of adults from the 2012national Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis). Measures are for adults age 19–64, unless otherwise noted. The population in this table is limited toindividuals insured for the entire year or uninsured for the entire year and excludes individuals insured for only part of the year and uninsured part of the year. Responses to access and use questions are based on the previous 12months, during which time the individual may have had a different source of coverage than that shown in the table.not separately shown are individuals covered by Medicare.difference from Medicaid/CHiP is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.1Measure number corresponds to the index of access measures in the MACstats Appendix.see the appendix for additional details on each measure.2in addition to individuals in the Medicaid, private, and uninsured columns, includes individuals dually covered by Medicare and Medicaid and covered by Medicare only.3Medicaid includes a small number of individuals covered by other state-sponsored health plans.individuals with both Medicaid and Medicare or other public coverage at the time of interview were excluded.4Private health insurance coverage includes individuals with employer-sponsored coverage, other private plans, and military health plans at the time of interview and includes individuals with both private insurance and Medicaid/CHiP, Medicare, or other public coverage.5uninsured includes individuals who did not have any health insurance coverage at the time of interview (individuals were also classified as uninsured if they had onlyindian Healthservice coverage or had only a private plan thatpaid for one type of service, such as accidents or dental care).6Reasons given by those who reported no usual place of care that were classified as access barriers include: too expensive/cost, previous doctor not available, respondent does not know where to go, and respondent speaks adifferent language.7individual reported one of these barriers in the past 12 months: trouble finding a doctor or provider, doctor’s office/clinic did not accept the individual’s insurance coverage, or office/clinic did not accept individual as a newpatient.8Reported any experiences captured in measuress11 ands12.9Respondents may report encounters with a broad range of health professionals (e.g., a chiropractor or physical therapist) but the question is limited to visits in a doctor’s office or clinic.10Respondents may not limit encounters with health professionals to visits in a doctor’s office or clinic.11Medical doctor includes general doctor, obstetrician-gynecologist, medical specialist, and eye doctor, but excludes other health professionals (e.g., a chiropractor, podiatrist or foot doctor, or physical therapist).12sMiis serious mental illness.individuals were defined as havingsMiif they reported a limitation due to a mental health or behavioral problem or received a score over 30 (out of 40) on thekessler Psychologicaldistressscale(k10) in thenHis.for more information on thekessler Psychologicaldistressscale, see R.kessler, P.barker,l. Colpe, et al.,screening for serious mental illness in the general population,Archives of General Psychiatry60,no. 2 (2003): 184–189.13C11 is a global measure of professional contact and includes all encounters in C8, all encounters with a mental health professional (not just those in C9 by individuals withsMi), and encounters with other health professionalsnot counted elsewhere (e.g. chiropractor, podiatrist or foot doctor, or physical therapist). C12 adds to C11 all dental professional visits. Responses to questions about specific types of health professionals may not align withreported office visits in C6 due to differences in question wording, respondent interpretation, and recall.14Reasons given for delayed care classified as access barriers include: cost, transportation, and provider-related reasons (respondent couldn’t get an appointment, had to wait too long to see doctor, couldn’t go when open,couldn’t get through on phone, and speaks a different language).15individuals reporting unmet need because of cost for prescription drugs, and individuals who took specific actions to save money on medications (skipped doses, took less medicine, and delayed filling a prescription).16Measure T10 is all individuals with an access problem reported ins13 and T7–T9.17includes all preventive services in measures A8–A12 and other services reported in thenHis: health professional talked to you about diet, blood pressure checked by health professional, and screening for breast cancer.includes individuals who reported receiving the service, but who are not in a high-risk group or of a recommended age for the service.18individuals of any age or sex reporting hypertension, diabetes, and who currently smoke.see details in MACstats Appendix.19based on common risk factors that can be measured in thenHis.see details in MACstats Appendix.20based on responses to questions about the most recent emergency room (eR) visit. Most recenteR visit is classified as related to a serious health problem if the individual reported that the visit resulted in a hospital admission,or reason for the visit was either taken by ambulance, advised by doctor to go, or problem too serious for doctor’s office/clinic.visit is classified as related to an access barrier if the individual reported the visit occurred at nightor on weekend, or reason for the visit was doctor’s office/clinic was closed, and excludes individuals reporting a serious health problem.Source:MACPAC analysis of the 2012national Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis). # MAR CH 2014 \| # 125 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| # 126 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # 126 \| MAR CH 2014TABLE 27.Measures of Access to Care for Non-Institutionalized Medicaid Beneficiaries Age 19 to 64 by Receipt of Supplemental SecurityIncome (SSI), 2009–2011Adult Medicaid Enrollees byReceipt of SSIMeasureNumber1Received SSI Did not receive SSIConnection to the health care system (past 12 months)Has a usual source of care when sick or needs advices991.0%87.3%Had same usual source of care 12 months ago (all adults)s1083.881.0Contact with health care professionals (past 12 months)Had at least one office visit2C687.982.2saw a selected health professional (any setting)3saw a nurse practitioner, physician assistant (PA), or midwifeC722.817.1saw a medical doctor, nurse practitioner, PA, or midwife4C886.481.1saw a mental health professionalC932.912.5saw an obstetrician-gynecologist (women)C1332.549.9saw other specialist, not an obstetrician-gynecologistC1436.522.0Timeliness of care (past 12 months)delayed medical care due to an access barrier (any below)5T729.421.8because of costs8.27.2Provider-related reasons516.614.7did not have transportation14.95.5unmet need for selected types of care due to costT8Medical care6.35.7Mental health care or counseling4.82.8Prescription drugs12.29.1dental care20.018.3eyeglasses12.59.9Receipt of appropriate care (past 12 months)Had more than 15 office visitsA1317.08.8four or more hospital emergency room (eR) visitsA1511.65.7* # MAR CH 2014 \| # 127 MAC s t ats: M e di C A i d A n d CH i P P R o g R AM s T AT i s T i C s \| MAR CH 2014 \| # 127TABLE 27, ContinuedNotes:Measures in this table are based on national samples of adults from thenational Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis) using 2009–2011 data. Measures are for adults age 19–64, unless otherwise noted. All individuals in thistable were covered by Medicaid at the time of interview. The population is limited to individuals who were insured for the entire year and includes individuals who switched coverage sources during the year. Medicaid includesa small number of persons covered by other state-sponsored health plans at the time of interview.individuals with both Medicaid and other coverage (private, Medicare, or other public insurance) at the time of interview wereexcluded from the table.ssiissupplementalsecurityincome. Adults withssiare individuals with little or no income and assets whose ability to work is limited by a physical or mental disability that can be expected to resultin death or last for at least 12 months. Thessigroup does not capture all persons with a disability. Responses to recent-care questions are based on the previous 12 months, during which time the individual may have haddifferent insurance than that shown in the table.*difference from adults who receivedssiis statistically significant at the 0.05 level.1Measure number corresponds to the index of access measures in the MACstats Appendix.see the appendix for additional details on each measure.2Respondents may report encounters with a broad range of health professionals (e.g., a chiropractor or physical therapist) but the question is limited to visits in a doctor’s office or clinic.3Respondents may not limit encounters with health professionals to visits in a doctor’s office or clinic.4Medical doctor includes general doctor, obstetrician-gynecologist, medical specialist, and eye doctor, but excludes other health professionals (e.g., a chiropractor, podiatrist or foot doctor, or physical therapist).5Reasons given for delayed care classified as access barriers include cost, transportation, and provider-related reasons (respondent couldn’t get an appointment, had to wait too long to see doctor, couldn’t go when open,couldn’t get through on phone).Source:MACPAC analysis of three years of pooled 2009–2011 data from thenational Healthinterviewsurvey (nHis). # 128 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MACStats Appendix # 130 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # MAR CH 2014 \| # 131 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # MACStats Appendix )ive neZ tables 7ables 2 presenting measures of access to care have been added to the 0arch edition of 0A&6tats. 0easures refect the conceptual frameZorN for access to care that 0A&3A& frst presented in its March 2011 report to Congress, which stresses timely receipt of care in an appropriate setting. 1 # (ach measure in 7ables 2 is assigned a measure number that corresponds to a detailed description in the table (MACStats Appendix Table) contained in this appendix. Access Domains. A total of 54 measures were selected to represent 5 access domains: provider availability, connection to the health care system, contact with health care professionals, timeliness of care, and receipt of appropriate care. Populations. 7able presents data on provider availability for 0edicaid&+,3 benefciaries. 7ables and 26 present data for children and adults under age 65, respectively, and compare access measures for these individuals based on insurance status. Table 25 presents data on children with special health care needs &6+&1 and compares access measures for these children based on insurance status. 7able presents data for adult 0edicaid benefciaries under age and compares access measures for these individuals based on receipt of Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The SSI population is comprised of individuals with little or no income and assets whose ability to work is limited by a physical or mental disability that can be e[pected to result in death or last for at least months. Although this defnition does not capture all individuals with disabilities, receipt of SSI is used as a proxy to identify individuals with a diverse range of severe disabilities and complex needs. Data Sources. Measures are drawn from four federal surveys with the broadest available scope of access measures. The surveys and years of data presented in this report are: f # National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey-National Electronic Health Records Survey (2012 NAMCSNEHRS); 2 # f # 1ational +ealth ,ntervieZ 6urvey 1+,6, and pooled 2 1+,6 data 3 # f # National Survey of Children’s Health (2011–2012 NSCH); 4 # and f # 1ational 6urvey of &hildren Zith 6pecial +ealth &are 1eeds 2 16&6+&1. 5 # Measurement Approach. All measures represent national estimates. The data are drawn from surveys that apply different sampling methods, are collected from different time periods, and have different questions on health insurance coverage. For these reasons, measures from different surveys should not be directly compared. Limitations. Interpretation of measures should consider the limitations of survey data. Particular weaknesses associated with household survey data include: f # Survey data are based on a respondent’s recall of events, which tend to omit some health care encounters documented by other sources such as medical records or administrative data. # 132 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # f # Parents reporting experiences for their children may feel pressure to provide answers that are socially desirable rather than factually accurate. f # Survey data are based on subjective perceptions that might not align with objective criteria (for example, individuals may not be aware of services they or their children need). 0oreover, interpretation of measures should consider the defnition of each population and its characteristics: f # Responses about recent experiences with access to care and service use are based on the previous 12 months, during which some individuals had a different source of coverage than that shown in the table. f # Comparison of measures are unadjusted for differences between populations in age, health, income, ethnicity, race, family and household characteristics known to explain much but not all differences in access and use observed between individuals with different insurance experience. 6 # f # Finally, measures might be interpreted differently based on the needs of each population. For example, people with severe disabilities need more help with transportation than other individuals, so one might e[pect that 0edicaid benefciaries receiving 66, Zould report more problems getting timely care because they did not have transportation. # Endnotes 1 # Medicaid and CHIP P ayment and Access Commission (MACPAC), Report to the Congress on Medicaid and CHIP, March 2011 (Washington, DC: MACPAC, 2011). http://www.macpac.gov/reports. 2 # National Center for Health Statistics , Ambulatory health care data (Atlanta, GA: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 8.6. 'epartment of +ealth and +uman 6ervices, . httpZZZ.cdc.govnchsahcdneZBahcd.htm. 3 # Nat ional Center for Health Statistics, National Health Interview Survey: About the National Health Interview Survey (Atlanta, GA: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). http://www.cdc.gov/ nchsnhisaboutBnhis.htm. 4 # National Center for Health Statistics , State and Local Area Telephone Integrated Survey: 2011–2012 National Survey of Children’s Health quick facts (Atlanta, GA: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/slaits/nsch.htm. 5 # National Center for Health Statistics , State and Local Area Telephone Integrated Survey: 2009–2010 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs quick facts and additions (Atlanta, GA: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/slaits/cshcn.htm. 6 # K enney, G.M., and Coyer, C., National fndings on access to health care and service use for children enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP (MACPAC Contractor Report No. 1) (Washington, DC: MACPAC, 2012). http://www.macpac.gov/publications; Long, S.K., Stockley, K., Grimm, E., and C. Coyer. National fndings on access to health care and service use for non-elderly adults enrolled in Medicaid (MACPAC Contractor Report No.2) (Washington, DC: MACPAC, 2012). http://www.macpac.gov/publications. # MAR CH 2014 \| # 133 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # Provider Availability Measures Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection P1. Primary care physician acceptance of new patients by source of payment Percentage of office-based physicians who reported currently accepting new patients into their practice with a type of payment of Medicaid/CH i P, Medicare, and private insurance, respectively. Pediatricians and other primary care physicians n AMC s ne HR s 2012 This measure is one method of identifying physicians participating in Medicaid or CH i P. Change in the proportion accepting new Medicaid/CH i P patients could indicate a change in Medicaid workforce capacity. P2. Percentage of the primary care physician’s patient care revenue that comes from Medicaid/CHIP This measure shows the distribution of responses for Medicaid/CH i P by office-based physicians to the question: “Roughly, what percent of your patient care revenue at the reporting location comes from the following: Medicare? Medicaid/ CH i P? Private insurance? All other sources?” Pediatricians and other primary care physicians n AMC s ne HR s 2012 b ecause many physicians see only a small number of Medicaid or CH i P patients, this alternative measure of physician participation in Medicaid/CH i P is based on the amount of revenue they receive from Medicaid/CH i P. A change in this revenue distribution could indicate a change in Medicaid/CH i P workforce capacity. # Connection to the Health Care System — Children Measures for Children Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection S1. Has a usual source of care when sick or needs advice Percentage of children whose parents report that child had a usual place to go when sick or needs health advice (not the emergency department). Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 Having a usual source of care is a common measure of potential access to health care and represents the interim step between provider availability and utilization with potential for timely access. S2. Had same usual source of medical care 12 months ago Percentage of children whose parents report that child had the same usual place of care 12 months ago. d enominator is all children. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 The foundation of a medical home is having an ongoing source of care. Having an ongoing source of care is o bjective AH s -5.2 of Healthy People 2020 (HP2020). The HP2020 target is 100 percent of all children ages 17 and under. 1 # S3. Has a personal doctor or nurse Percentage of children whose parents reported having one or more persons they think of as the child’s personal doctor or nurse. Children and C s HC n 2 # with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 This measure is a higher bar for potential access than having a usual source of care. Having a personal doctor or nurse is one of the criteria for receiving care in a medical home. s ee measure A4. S4. Access barrier is reason for having no usual source of care Percentage of children whose parents reported child had no usual source of medical care for reasons: too expensive, no insurance, or cost; doesn’t know where to go; previous doctor not available/moved; or speaks a different language. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 w hen children have no usual source of care, primary and preventive care may be missed. Measure is limited to reasons for having no usual source of care that can be affected by health plan supports or other program features. This percentage is expected to be small, but reflects a gap in outreach for children enrolled the full year. S5. Had trouble finding a doctor Percentage of children whose parents reported one of three barriers during the past 12 months: trouble finding general doctor/provider who would see them; doctor’s office/clinic would not accept child as new patient; doctor’s office/clinic did not accept child’s health care coverage. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 This is an alternative measure for barriers to access. Problems finding a doctor can be affected by provider behavior, plan recruitment of providers, payment, and other factors. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE. Index of Access Measures in March 2014 MACStats Tables 23–27 # 134 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # Connection to the Health Care System — Children Measures for Children Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection S6. Had usual source of care barrier or trouble finding a doctor Composite of children facing barriers in s 4 or s 5. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 This measure captures the extent to which children experience barriers to connecting to the health system across measures. S7. Receipt of effective care coordination 3 # Children were classified as needing care coordination if the child received two or more services or the parent reported they needed help coordinating care. 3 # The criteria for “received all care coordination needed” were that the family has some type of help with care coordination and was very satisfied with doctors’ communication with other health care providers, school or other programs, if those services were needed. o therwise children were classified as “did not receive all care coordination needed.” Children and C s HC n with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 e ffective care coordination is one component of the medical home summary measure reported as A4. C s HC n often require care coordination among multiple providers. l ack of coordination may result in duplication of services and missed opportunities for better care. S8. Family had one or more unmet needs for support services Percentage of children whose parents reported that their family needed one or more family supports (respite care, genetic counseling, or family mental health care or counseling) but did not receive them. C s HC n with Medicaid/ CH i P, children with private insurance, uninsured children ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 These three specific family support services are services a family member of C s HC n might need because of the child’s medical, behavioral, or other conditions. # Connection to the Health Care System — Adults Measures for Adults Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection S9. Has a usual source of care when sick or needs advice Percentage of adults who reported currently having a place they usually go when they are sick or need advice about their health (not the emergency department). Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured; Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 n H is 2009–2011 Having a usual source of care is a common measure of potential access to health care and represents the interim step between provider availability and utilization with potential for timely access. S10. Had same usual source of medical care 12 months ago Percentage of adults who reported having the same usual place of care 12 months ago. Medicaid ssi -related and non- ssi -related adults n H is 2009–2011 A higher bar for potential access than having a usual source of care, this measure indicates an established relationship with a provider important for patient-centered, quality care. S11. Access barrier is reason for having no usual source of care Percentage of adults who reported one of the access-related reasons for having no usual place of medical care as listed in s 4. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 Problems navigating the provider network, lack of consumer information, language barriers, cost and distance all are barriers to providers with factors that can be addressed by health plan outreach, payment, and other factors. S12. Had trouble finding a doctor Percentage of adults who reported facing one of three barriers during the past 12 months as listed in s 5. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 This is an alternative measure of barriers to access. Trouble finding a doctor can be addressed by provider behavior, health plan recruitment of providers, payment, and other factors. S13. Had usual source of care barrier or trouble finding doctor Composite of adults who reported barriers in s 11 or s 12. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 Captures extent to which adults experienced barriers to connecting to the health system across measures. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued. Index of Access Measures in March 2014 MACStats Tables 23–27 , Continued # MAR CH 2014 \| # 135 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # Contact with Health Professionals — Children Measures for Children Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection C1. Had at least one office visit Percentage of children whose parent reported they had seen a doctor or other health care professional at a doctor’s office, clinic, or other place (not including hospitalization, e R visits, dental visits, or telephone calls) during the past 12 months. Children with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 This measure is commonly used to ascertain a minimal threshold of contact in an office or clinic setting and allows comparison between populations and data sources. C2. Saw a general doctor Percentage of children whose parent reported they had seen or talked to a general doctor who treats a variety of illnesses (a doctor in general practice, pediatrics, family medicine, or internal medicine) during the past 12 months. Children with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 Contact with a general doctor is commonly used to ascertain a minimal threshold of contact with a physician and allows comparison between populations. C3. Saw a general doctor, nurse practitioner, PA, midwife, or Ob-Gyn Percentage of children whose parent reported the child had seen a general doctor, nurse practitioner, physician assistant (PA), midwife, or obstetrician-gynecologist ( o b- g yn) during the past 12 months. o b- g yn encounters are limited to females age 15–18. Children with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 This measure contributes to the interpretation of C2 by including mid-level clinicians and obstetrician-gynecologists. C3 more accurately gauges primary care contact that Medicaid enrollees may have at community clinics and through reproductive health care for adolescents. C4. Received at least one preventive dental visit Percentage of children whose parent reported that child had seen a dentist for preventive care, such as check-ups and dental cleanings, during the past 12 months. Children and C s HC n with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 This measure monitors contact with the oral health care system and also is a measure of receipt of appropriate care. This question is not asked of children in the n H is . C5. Received care from a specialist doctor Percentage of C s HC n whose parent reported that child received care from a specialist doctor during the past 12 months. C s HC n with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 s pecialists can play a critical role in the care of C s HC n . # Contact with Health Professionals — Adults Measures for Adults Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection C6. Had at least one office visit Percentage of adults who reported seeing a doctor or other health care professional at a doctor’s office, clinic, or other place (not including hospitalization, e R visits, dental visits, or telephone calls) during the past 12 months. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 This measure is commonly used to ascertain a minimal threshold of contact in an office or clinic setting and allows comparison between populations and data sources. s urvey respondents may recall having an office visit but not know or recall which type of professional they saw. C7. Saw a nurse practitioner (NP), physician assistant (PA), or midwife Percentage of adults who reported seeing a nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or midwife in any setting during the past 12 months. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 Mid-level clinicians are expected to play a role in expanding access to health care for Medicaid enrollees, yet little is known about the degree to which adults encounter these clinicians. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued # 136 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # Contact with Health Professionals — Adults Measures for Adults Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection C8. Saw a medical doctor, nurse practitioner, PA, or midwife Percentage of adults who reported seeing or talking to any of these selected practitioners during the past 12 months: medical doctor, nurse practitioner, physician assistant (PA), midwife, and includes obstetrician-gynecologist, specialist, or eye doctor. f or Medicaid adults with and without ssi , obstetrician-gynecologists and other specialists are presented separately in C13 and C14. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 This measure emphasizes contact with a medical doctor or advanced practice clinician in any setting. Counting mid-level clinicians may increase contact levels observed in shortage areas. C9. Saw a mental health professional (individuals with SMI) 4 # Percentage of adults with serious mental illness ( s M i ) who reported seeing or talking to a mental health professional (psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse, or clinical social worker) during the past 12 months. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 This measure monitors contact with the mental health system. The denominator for this measure is based partly on active symptoms and will miss some adults who no longer have symptoms because they are receiving successful treatment. C10. Saw a dental professional Percentage of adults who reported at least one visit to a dentist, dental specialist, or dental hygienist during the past 12 months. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 This measure monitors contact with the oral health care system. C11. Saw any health professional, excluding dental Percentage of adults who reported at least one visit in C8 or reported seeing a mental health professional (not limited to just those with s M i as in C9). The measure also includes encounters with health professionals not captured elsewhere (e.g. chiropractor, podiatrist or foot doctor, or physical therapist). Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 e xpands C8 to include mental health professionals, a major source of care for adults, and other health professionals to provide a global measure of contact. This percentage may not align with reported office visits in C6 due to differences in question wording, respondent interpretation, and recall. C12. Saw any health professional, including dental Composite measure of adults with at least one visit in C11 or C10, including visits to a dental professional. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 Much of the difference in contact between Medicaid and private patients is due to dental visits, so the summary measure is reported with and without visits to dental professionals in C12 and C11, respectively. d ental services are an optional Medicaid benefit. C13. Saw an obstetrician-gynecologist Percentage of Medicaid adults who reported seeing or talking with an obstetriciangynecologist during the past 12 months. l imited to women. Medicaid adults with and without ssi n H is 2012 This measure is a subset of C8 that highlights specialists, who can play a critical role in the care of individuals with disabilities. C14. Saw other specialist, not an obstetriciangynecologist Percentage of Medicaid adults who reported seeing or talking with a specialist other than an obstetrician-gynecologist during the past 12 months. Medicaid adults with and without ssi n H is 2012 This measure is a subset of C8 that highlights specialists, who can play a critical role in the care of individuals with disabilities. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued. Index of Access Measures in March 2014 MACStats Tables 23–27 , Continued # MAR CH 2014 \| # 137 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # Timeliness of Care — Children Measures for Children Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection T1. Delayed medical care due to an access barrier Percentage of all children whose parents reported the child needed health care during the past 12 months that was delayed due to a cost barrier, transportation, or provider-related reasons (couldn't get appointment, had to wait too long to see doctor, couldn't go when open or get through on phone, and speaks a different language). e ach barrier is separately reported. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 d elayed care is a common measure, but this measure limits the definition to delays for reasons that could reasonably be influenced by providers, health plans, and program services and supports. d elays for reasons that primarily reflect parents’ motivation (i.e.,“put it off”) are excluded. T2. Selected types of care were delayed or not received Percentage of all children whose parents reported child needed but delayed or did not receive a service during the past 12 months. Medical care, mental health care, dental care, and vision are separately reported. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 This measure provides information on specific services for which parents are reporting delayed or unmet needs. The measure does not capture reasons for delay or unmet need. Question wording is not comparable to n H is measure of delayed care (T1). T3. Unmet need for selected types of care due to cost Percentage of all children whose parents reported a time in the past 12 months when their child needed a service but didn’t get it because they couldn’t afford it: medical care, mental health care or counseling, dental care, prescription drugs, eyeglasses. s ervices are separately reported. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 These measures track access to service domains in the mandatory e arly and Periodic s creening, d iagnostic, and Treatment ( e P sd T) Medicaid benefit for children, but not unmet need due to barriers other than cost that can impact Medicaid disproportionately. o ther barriers are presumably captured in measure T2. T4. Had a problem getting referrals (children needing referrals) 3 # Percentage of children whose parents reported that getting referrals was a big or small problem. The denominator of this measure is children whose parents reported that the child needed a referral to see a doctor or receive services during the past 12 months. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 d ifficulty getting referrals from primary care providers or health plans can lead to delays obtaining timely diagnosis and treatment critical to child development. T5. Unmet need for selected types of care Percentage of children whose parents reported needing the service and did not receive all the care needed or received no care. The six types of care are: specialist; prescription drugs; mental health care; non-preventive dental; physical, occupational or speech therapy; vision care or eyeglasses. C s HC n with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 The ns -C s HC n provides measures of unmet need for a wide array of services that are needed by children with severe mobility, cognitive, and sensory disabilities. All of these services fall under the e P sd T benefit. u nmet need for many of these services is not collected in the n H is or the ns CH. T6. Had 2 or more unmet needs for 14 specific services i n addition to types of care in T5, this measure captures unmet need for dental, mobility aids or devices, communication aids or devices, home health care, substance abuse treatment or counseling, durable medical equipment, genetic counseling, and respite care. C s HC n with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 b y measuring unmet need for particular services, this measure helps determine if unmet need is a significant problem for a small proportion of C s HC n with particular service needs. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued # 138 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # Timeliness of Care — Adults Measures for Adults Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection T7. Delayed medical care due to an access barrier Percentage of adults who reported they needed medical care during the past 12 months and that it was delayed because of selected reasons as listed in T1. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 n H is 2009–2011 Medicaid beneficiaries primarily report barriers to care other than cost. Reasons for these delays are segmented to help identify where in the health care system the barriers exist. T8. Unmet need for selected types of care due to cost Percentage of adults who reported a time in the past 12 months when they needed a type of care but didn’t get it because they couldn’t afford it. f or all adults, this measure repor ts on unmet need for medical care and mental health care or counseling. o ther services reported for Medicaid adults with and without ssi are dental care, prescription drugs, and eyeglasses. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 n H is 2009–2011 These measures track access to two mandatory service groups for adult beneficiaries, but do not capture barriers to service unrelated to cost. T9. Did not take medication as prescribed to save money Percentage of adults who reported one of the following in past 12 months: unmet need for prescription medicines because of cost; skipped medication doses to save money; took less medicine to save money; or delayed filling a prescription to save money. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 This measure expands the well-known definition of “unmet need for prescriptions due to cost” to include individuals who took specific actions to save money. s ome actions, such as “asked for a generic drug” were not included. T10. Reported any barriers to care, delayed care, or unmet need Composite of adults who reported any barriers in measures in measure s 13 (had usual source of care barrier or trouble finding doctor), T7–T9 (delayed care due to an access barrier, unmet need due to cost, reported not taking medication as prescribed to save money). Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 Provides a gauge for the overall reach and potential impact of all barriers to timely care in the population. u nmet need for dental care and eyeglasses are excluded due to the very limited Medicaid benefit available. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued. Index of Access Measures in March 2014 MACStats Tables 23–27 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 139 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # Receipt of Appropriate Care — Children Measures for Children Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection A1. Doctors and other providers spend enough time with child Percentage of children whose parents reported doctors or other health care providers usually or always spend enough time with the child. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 This measure is one of the criteria for receiving care in a medical home. A2. Received at least one preventive medical visit Percentage of children whose parents reported that child saw a doctor, nurse, or other provider for preventive medical care such as a physical exam or well-child checkup during the past 12 months. Presented for selected age ranges. Children and C s HC n with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 ns CH 2011–2012 The e P sd T benefit in Medicaid states that children should receive one or more preventive or well-child visits, dependent on the age group. This measure sets a low bar well below the number of preventive visits recommended for 0–3 year olds. A3. Received selected EPSDT services (children needing services) Among children whose parents reported that their child needed a specific type of e P sd T service, the percentage who received it: mental health services (children age 2–17 with a problem needing treatment), therapy services (children with autism or developmental delay), and vision screening (age 2–17). Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured ns CH 2011–2012 These measures capture receipt of appropriate care for common e P sd T services. The denominator for each measure is limited to children needing the service based on parent-reported condition and/or eligible for screening based on age. A4. Received coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical home 3, 5 # Percentage of children who have met all criteria for receiving care in a medical home based on a series of questions. C s HC n with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 This measure reflects a core outcome chosen by the Maternal and Child Health b ureau for the community-based system of services required for all C s HC n under Title v of the s ocial s ecurity Act. 6 # i ncreasing the propor tion of C s HC n receiving care in a medical home is an HP2020 objective. The HP2020 target is 51.8 percent. 7 # A5. Had an ER visit in past 12 months and most recent ER visit was related to a serious health problem or an access barrier Percentage of children whose parents reported the child had an e R visit in the past 12 months, and the most recent e R visit is related to either serious health problem 8 # (e.g., admitted to hospital) or an access barrier, excluding serious health problems. Children with Medicaid/ CH i P, private insurance, uninsured n H is 2012 e R visits due to access barriers (e.g. doctor’s office wasn’t open) may reflect poor access to primary care or a need for more education about the importance of using primary care providers when possible, rather than the e R. A6. Had 2 or more ER visits during the past 12 months Percentage of children whose parents reported that the child went to a hospital e R 2 or more times in past 12 months. Children and C s HC n with Medicaid/CH i P, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 ns -C s HC n 2009–2010 High use of e R services may signify complex health needs, poor access to primary care, or a need for parent education. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued # 140 \| MAR CH 2014 \| REPOR T TO THE CONGRESS ON MEDICAID AND CHIP # Receipt of Appropriate Care — Adults Measures for Adults Population Subgroups Data Source Rationale for Measure Selection A7. Received any preventive visit or counseling Percentage of adult beneficiaries who reported receipt of prevention services, including any service in measures A8–A12, talking with a health professional about diet, having blood pressure checked by health professional, or screening for breast cancer. i ncludes individuals not in a high-risk group or of a recommended age who received the preventive service. Adults age 19–49, 50–64, pregnant or have chronic condition with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 This measure is a global indicator that adults received some aspect of recommended prevention services. Physicians and patients may prioritize preventive services based on a patient’s risk of complications or a patient’s health goals and care preferences. A8. Had cholesterol checked by health professional (at-risk groups) Percentage of adults at high-risk for coronary heart disease who reported having their blood cholesterol checked by a doctor, nurse, or other professional during the past 12 months. s elected at-risk groups with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 The u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce ( us P s T f ) recommends routine screening for men ages 35 and over for lipid disorders, and others at increased risk of coronary heart disease. 9 # The HP2020 target for the proportion of adults who have their blood cholesterol checked within preceding 5 years is 82.1 percent. 10 # A9. Had an influenza vaccine or flu shot Percentage of adults who reported having an influenza shot in the past 12 months is presented for all individuals and for three vaccination priority groups whose percentages should be higher as the result of flu shot campaigns. s elected high-risk groups with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 The Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C) recommends annual vaccination of persons at risk of severe complications from influenza. Priority is given to these high-risk groups when supply is short. v accination rates of wider populations will fluctuate with supply . 11 # A10. Had professional counseling about smoking (current smokers) Percentage of currently smoking adults who reported that a doctor or other health professional talked to them about their smoking during the past 12 months. Current smokers with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 This measure captures preventive counseling for smoking for a targeted population but will miss persons who reported using tobacco products other than cigarettes or who quit during the past 12 months, possibly as the result of counseling. A11. Had any test for colorectal cancer (CRC) Percentage of adults who reported having any test done for colon cancer during the past 12 months using a single item. l imited to individuals in the recommended age group 50–64. Men and women age 50 to 64 with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 The HP2020 target for the proportion of adults age 50 to 75 receiving regular CRC screening is 70.5 percent. 12 # b ecause the periodicity of screening recommended by us P s T f has been increased to 5 years, 13 # the proportion in annual surveys will be lower than the HP2020 target. A12. Had Pap smear or test for cervical cancer (women age 21 to 60) 14 # Percentage of women who reported having a Pap smear or Pap test during the past 12 months. This measure omits women over age 60 who are least likely to be eligible for screening. w omen age 21–60 with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 b ecause screening is recommended every 3 or 5 years, the proportion in annual surveys will be lower than the HP2020 target (93 percent for women age 21 to 64). 15 # A13. Had more than 15 office visits Percentage of adults who reported more than 15 office visits as defined in C6. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 n H is 2009–2011 i ndividuals with over 15 office visits may have very high needs or high use may be a sign of opportunities for improved clinical management. A14. Had an ER visit in past 12 months and most recent ER visit was related to a serious health problem or an access barrier 8 # Percentage of adults as defined in A5. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, and uninsured n H is 2012 s ee A5. i f physicians are unable to meet demand from the new Medicaid expansion population, e R use related to access problems could increase. A15. Reported 4 or more ER visits Percentage of adults who reported having gone to a hospital e R 4 or more times in the past 12 months. Adults with Medicaid, private insurance, uninsured, Medicaid adults with and without s si n H is 2012 n H is 2009–2011 High use of the e R relative to others may signify complex health needs, poor access to primary care, or a need for patient education. # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued. Index of Access Measures in March 2014 MACStats Tables 23–27 # MAR CH 2014 \| # 141 MAC s t ats APP e ndix \| # MACStats APPENDIX TABLE, Continued Notes: n AMC s - ne HR s is the 2012 n ational Ambulatory Medical Care s urvey- n ational e lectronic Health Records s urvey. ns CH is the n ational s urvey of Children’s Health. n H is is the n ational Health i nterview s urvey. ns -C s HC n is the n ational s urvey of Children with s pecial Health Care n eeds. HP2020 is Healthy People 2020. ssi is s upplemental s ecurity i ncome. e P sd T is the Medicaid early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment benefit. us P s T f is the u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce. C d C is the Centers for d isease Control and Prevention. e R is hospital emergency room or emergency department. C s HC n is children with special health care needs. Recommendations by the us P s T f are based on a rigorous review of existing peer-reviewed evidence; see u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce ( us P s T f ), About the USPSTF ( w ashington, d C: us P s T f ). http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/about.htm. s urveys from which the measures are drawn use different methods to sample individuals, and data are collected from different time periods. i n addition, the surveys have different questions about health insurance and different reference periods. As a result, the population sampled and subsequently classified as Medicaid, privately insured, or uninsured differs based on the data source. s ee additional notes in MAC s tats Tables 23–27 for detailed definitions of populations and insurance coverage. 1 u . s . Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Healthy People 2020: Topics and national data-technical specifications (Atlanta, g A: C d C, 2013). http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/Tech s pecs.aspx?hp2020id=AH s -5.2. 2 C s HC n is children with special health care needs. C s HC n are identified in the ns CH and ns -C s HC n using a 5-item, parent-reported tool that identifies children across the range and diversity of childhood chronic conditions and special needs who currently experience 1 or more of 5 common health consequences due to a physical, mental, behavioral, or other type of health condition lasting or expected to last at least 12 months. f or more on how children are categorized as C s HC n , see Child and Adolescent Health Measurement i nitiative (CAHM i ), Fast facts: Children with special health care needs screener (Portland, o R: CAHM i , 2007). http://childhealthdata.org/docs/cshcn/cshcn-screener-cahmi-quickguide-pdf.pdf. 3 Measures s 7, T4, and A4 are child quality measures developed by the Maternal and Child Health b ureau, Health Resources and s ervices Administration through the Child & Adolescent Health Measurement i nitiative (CAHM i ). f or details on these measure definitions, see d ata Resource Center for Child & Adolescent Health ( d RC), CAHM i , Indicator 4.9d: Medical home component: Effective care coordination. http://www.nschdata.org/browse/survey/results?q=2512&r=1 [for s 7]; d RC, CAMH i , Problems getting referrals, only children who needed referrals. http://www.nschdata.org/browse/survey/results?q=2549&r=1 [for T4]; d RC, CAHM i , Indicator 4.8: Children who receive coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical home. http://www.nschdata.org/browse/survey/results?q=2507&r=1 [for A4]. 4 i ndividuals were defined as having serious mental illness if they reported an activity limitation due to depression, anxiety, or emotional problem; feelings interfered with life a lot in the past 30 days; or received a score of 13 or over (out of 24) on the k essler P sychological d istress s cale ( k 6) in the n H is . s ee R.C. k essler , P.R. b arker, l .J. Colpe, et al., s creening for serious mental illness in the general population, Archives of General Psychiatry 60, no. 2 (2003): 184–189. 5 ns -C s HC n survey questions from which this measure is constructed are whether the child has a personal doctor or nurse, has a usual source of sick and wellchild care, or has no problems obtaining needed referrals; family is satisfied with doctors’ communication, or gets help coordinating the child’s care if needed; doctor spends enough time with the child, listens carefully to the parent, is sensitive to the family’s customs, or provides enough infor mation; and the parent feels like a partner in care. 6 Mater nal and Child Health b ureau, The national survey of children with special health care needs chartbook 2009–2010 (Rockville, M d : Health Resources and s ervices Administration, u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, 2013). http://mchb.hrsa.gov/cshcn0910/. 7 u . s . Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Healthy People 2020: Topics and national data-technical specifications (Atlanta, g A: C d C, 2013). http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/Tech s pecs.aspx?hp2020id=M i CH-30.2. 8 The e R visit is classified as a serious health problem if it resulted in a hospital admissio n, a health provider advised the person to go, the problem was too serious for a doctor’s office, or they arrived by ambulance. The e R visit is classified as an access-related problem if it happened either at night or on the weekend, or when their doctor’s office or clinic was not open, and excludes individuals reporting a serious health problem. 9 M. Helfand, and s . Carson, s creening for lipid disorders in adults: s elective update of 2001 u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce review , Evidence Syntheses 49 (Rockville, M d : Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2008). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/ nbk 33500/. 10 u . s . Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Healthy People 2020: Topics and national data-technical specifications (Atlanta, g A: C d C, 2013). http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/Tech s pecs.aspx?hp2020id=H ds -6. 11 o ver time and geographically, vaccination rates fluctuate based on supply of the vaccine and flu activity, reducing the utility of monitoring changes for the entire population. w hen vaccine supply is limited, health professionals are instructed to focus vaccination efforts on older adults and people with conditions that place them at high risk of developing complications from influenza. s ee l .A. k rosskopf, et al., Prevention and control of influenza with vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on i mmunization Practices– u nited s tates, 2013–2014, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Review 62, no. RR07 (2013): 1–43. http://www.cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6207a1.htm?s_cid=rr6207a1_w#PersonsAtRiskMedicalComplicationsAttributable s evere i nfluenza. 12 u . s . Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Healthy People 2020: Topics and national data-technical specifications (Atlanta, g A: C d C, 2013). http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/Tech s pecs.aspx?hp2020id=C-16. 13 The us P s T f recommends screening adults beginning at age 50 and continuing until age 75 for colorectal cancer using fecal occult blood testing every year, sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years and blood test in the past 3 years, or colonoscopy in the past 10 years. s ee u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce ( us P s T f ), USPSTF A and B Recommendations ( w ashington, d C: us P s T f ). http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsabrecs.htm. 14 The us P s T f recommends against cervical cancer screening for women who have had a hysterectomy with removal of the cervix and who do not have a history of cervical abnormalities or cancer, but the 2012 n H is removed the survey item capturing this history. w omen over age 60 are not included in measure A12 to minimize overcounting of older women not eligible for screening. The us P s T f recommends screening for cervical cancer in women age 21 to 65 with cytology (Pap smear) every 3 years, and provides an alternative recommendation of screening every 5 years for women age 30 to 65 who want to lengthen the screening interval. s ee u . s . Preventive s ervices Task f orce ( us P s T f ), USPSTF A and B Recommendations ( w ashington, d C: us P s T f ). http://www. uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/uspsabrecs.htm. 15 u . s . Centers for d isease Control and Prevention (C d C), u . s . d epartment of Health and Human s ervices, Healthy People 2020: Topics and national data-technical specifications (Atlanta, g A: C d C 2013). http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/Tech s pecs.aspx?hp2020id=C-15. Source: MACPAC analysis.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.arb.696757/gov.uscourts.arb.696757.987.0.pdf.json	-1- 800922.2\0392946 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ### IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA In re: FRONTIER STAR , LLC, Debtors. _ _____________________________ _ This filing applies to: ALL DEBTORS SPECIFIED DEBTOR Chapter 11 Case Nos. 2:15-bk-09383-EPB 2:15-bk-09385-EPB 2:15-bk-14679-EPB 2:15-bk-15682-EPB Jointly Administered Under Case No. 2:15-bk-09383-EPB ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ASSUMPTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF CERTAIN LEASES This matter came before the Court pursuant to the Chapter 11 Trustee’s Third Omnibus Motion for Authority to Assume and Assign Certain Leases of the Debtors [Docket No. 894] (“Lease Motion”) and pursuant to this Court’s Order Authorizing and Approving the Sale of Substantially All of Debtors’ Assets Free and Clear of Liens, Claims, Encumbrances, and Interests and the Assumption and Assignment of Certain Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in Connection Therewith, and Granting Related Relief [Docket No. 888] (“Sale Order”). An Objection to the Lease Motion [Docket No. 931] was filed by HVTC, L.L.C. (“HVTC”) and Gilbert-Chandler Dated: May 31, 2016 SO ORDERED. Eddward P. Ballinger Jr., Bankruptcy Judge _________________________________ Case 2:15-bk-09383-EPB Doc 987 Filed 05/31/16 Entered 06/01/16 08:06:21 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 5-2- 800922.2\0392946 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ### Heights I, L.L.C. (“GCHI”; collectively with HVTC, the “Landlords”), which Objection is resolved by this Order, which has been approved by counsel for the Landlords. This Order has also been approved by counsel for Starcorp, LLC (“Buyer”), which was granted certain lease designation rights pursuant to the Sale Order. The Court has considered the entire record in this matter, and based on the entire record before the Court, the Court hereby finds as follows: A. The findings and conclusions set forth herein (and any findings and conclusions stated by the Court at any hearing regarding the Sale Order) constitute the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 7052 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”), made applicable to this proceeding pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9014. B. To the extent that any of the findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopted as such. C. On November 18, 2015, this Court appointed P. Gregg Curry (“Trustee”) as the Chapter 11 Trustee for these bankruptcy cases and estates. D. Pursuant to the Sale Order and the Lease Motion, the Buyer has designated the following leases inter alia for assumption and assignment: 1) Happy Valley Towne Center Ground Lease dated January 12, 2004, as amended by that First Amendment to Happy Valley Towne Center Ground Lease dated on or about May 24, 2004 (collectively “HVTC Lease”); and 2) Gilbert Gateway Towne Center Phase II Ground Lease dated June 21, 2005, as amended by that First Amendment to Gilbert Gateway Towne Center Phase II Ground Lease dated January 12, 2006, and Case 2:15-bk-09383-EPB Doc 987 Filed 05/31/16 Entered 06/01/16 08:06:21 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 5-3- 800922.2\0392946 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ### that Second Amendment to Gilbert Gateway Towne Center Phase II Ground Lease dated August 30, 2010 (collectively “GCHI Lease”). E. Notice of the relief requested by the Lease Motion was duly served on creditors and interested parties, which the Court finds to be sufficient notice in the particular circumstances. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lease Motion is granted as provided in this Order. 2. The Trustee is hereby authorized to assume the HVTC Lease and the GCHI Lease (collectively “Leases”) and to assign the Leases to Starcorp CJ, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Lease Assignee”), which has been designated by the Buyer to be the assignee of the Leases. 3. Within 15 days of the entry of this Order, the Trustee shall pay directly to the Landlords the following amounts as the required cure amounts and compensation for pecuniary loss pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(b)(1), which represents the accrued and unpaid amounts due under the Landlords under the Leases as of March 31, 2016 (“Cure Amounts”): a. To HVTC, L.L.C. -- $24,885.04; and b. To Gilbert-Chandler Heights I, L.L.C. – $23,049.72. 4. The Debtors, their respective bankruptcy estates, and the Trustee shall be, and hereby are, relieved from liability for any breach of any of the Leases occurring on or after April 1, 2016, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(k). Case 2:15-bk-09383-EPB Doc 987 Filed 05/31/16 Entered 06/01/16 08:06:21 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 5-4- 800922.2\0392946 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ### 5. The Buyer and Lease Assignee have provided adequate assurance of future performance for the Leases within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. §365(b)(1)(C), 365(b)(3), and 365(f)(2)(B). 6. The Lease Assignee shall be deemed to be substituted as the Lessee under the Leases effective as of April 1, 2016. 7. The Lease Assignee shall operate Carl’s Jr. restaurants on the premises that are the subject of the Leases and shall comply with the restrictions on use, radius, location, and/or exclusivity that are contained in the Leases. 8. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Order, with respect to each of the Leases, the Lease Assignee shall have both the benefits and the burdens under the Leases, including those burdens which have accrued as of April 1, 2016, but are not yet due under the terms of the Lease (and thus are not yet payable as part of the Cure Amounts pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(b)(1)(A)), including, but not limited to: (a) any adjustments or reconciliations (including any year-end adjustments or reconciliations) in respect of common area maintenance, insurance, taxes, and other charges and expenses that become due under the Leases; (b) any and all property taxes due and payable under the Leases; and (c) any indemnification obligations that become due under the Leases. 9. Except to the extent otherwise set forth herein, all provisions of the Sale Order regarding the assumption and assignment of Leases shall apply as though fully set forth herein and as though the Leases were Assigned Contracts as that term is used in the Sale Order. 10. Notwithstanding the stay provisions of Bankruptcy Rule 6006(d), this Order shall be effective and enforceable immediately upon its entry and its provisions shall be self-executing. Case 2:15-bk-09383-EPB Doc 987 Filed 05/31/16 Entered 06/01/16 08:06:21 Desc Main Document Page 4 of 5-5- 800922.2\0392946 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ### DATED AND SIGNED ABOVE BY: EDDWARD P. BALLINGER JR. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPROVED: D ICKINSON ### W RIGHT ### PLLC WN/4239 By: ___________________________ William NovotnyAttorneys for HVTC, L.L.C., and GilbertChandler Heights I, L.L.C. M OTSCHENBACHER ### & B LATTNER ### , LLP /s/NJH By: ___________________________ Nicholas J. Henderson Attorneys for the Buyer and Lease Assignee B RYAN ### C AVE ### LLP /s/ALC By: ___________________________ Amanda L. Cartwright Attorneys for the Trustee PHOENIX 53563-49 296632v2 Case 2:15-bk-09383-EPB Doc 987 Filed 05/31/16 Entered 06/01/16 08:06:21 Desc Main Document Page 5 of 5
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/railworthiness-directive-railroad-tank-cars-equipped-certain-mckenzie-valve-machining-llc.json	- Home # Railworthiness Directive for Railroad Tank Cars Equipped With Certain McKenzie Valve & Machining LLC Valves Subject Freight Operations, Hazardous Materials, Motive Power and Equipment image2015-03-13-102143.pdf (415.27 KB) DOT is committed to ensuring that information is available in appropriate alternative formats to meet the requirements of persons who have a disability. If you require an alternative version of files provided on this page, please contact FRADevOps@dot.gov.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h2/20031122/h2.pdf.json	# Federal Reserve Release H.2 # Actions of the Board, Its Staff, and the Federal Reserve Banks; Applications and Reports Received 47 No. Week Ending November 22, 2003 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Board Actions ### Testimony And Statements U.S. Tax Shelter Industry: The Role of Accountants, Lawyers, and Financial Professionals -- statement by Richard Spillenkothen, Director, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation, before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. - Published, November 20, 2003 ### Bank Holding Companies The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and PNC Bancorp, Inc. -- to acquire United National Bancorp, Bridgewater, New Jersey, and thereby acquire its wholly owned subsidiary bank, UnitedTrust Bank. - Approved, November 19, 2003 Shinhan Financial Group Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea -- to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of shares of Chohung Bank and the indirect acquisition of CHB America Bank, New York, New York. - Approved, November 19, 2003 ### Financial Holding Companies Den norske Bank ASA, Oslo, Norway, and DnB Holding ASA -- elections to be treated as financial holding companies. - Effective, November 20, 2003 ### Enforcement Mellon Bank, N.A., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania -- issuance of a final decision and order of prohibition against Garfield C. Brown, Jr., a former employee. - Approved, November 20, 2003 (AC) = Addition or Correction Board - Page 1 of 1 ### November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 BS&R C&CA FOMC RBOPS IF OSDM Banking Supervision and Regulation Consumer and Community Affairs Federal Open Market Committee Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems International Finance Office of Staff Director for Management ### H.2 Actions under delegated authority ### Bank Branches, Domestic Regions Bank, Birmingham, Alabama -- to establish a branch at 877 Military Cutoff Road, Wilmington, North Carolina. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Atlanta Regions Bank, Birmingham, Alabama -- to establish a branch at the west side of Highway 181, 1/5 mile north of Interstate 10, Daphne. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Atlanta Regions Bank, Birmingham, Alabama -- to establish a branch at the southwest corner of Debbie Lane and Highway 287, Mansfield, Texas. - Approved, November 21, 2003 Atlanta SouthTrust Bank, Birmingham, Alabama -- to establish a branch at 7323 Park Boulevard, Pinellas Park, Florida. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Atlanta State Bank of La Crosse, La Crosse, Wisconsin -- to establish a branch at 108 West 82nd Street, Marshfield. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Minneapolis SunTrust Bank, Atlanta, Georgia -- to establish branches at 4166 Buford Highway; 1760 East-West Connector, Smyrna; and 4105 Old Milton Parkway, Alpharetta. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Secretary Tennessee State Bank, Pigeon Forge, Tennessee -- to establish a branch at 939 Dolly Parton Parkway, Sevierville. - Approved, November 20, 2003 Atlanta (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 1 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Bank Branches, Domestic TexasBank, Fort Worth, Texas -- to establish a branch at 2200 West Southlake Boulevard, Southlake. - Approved, November 19, 2003 Dallas ### Bank Holding Companies CB Bancorp, Inc., Conway, Arkansas -- to engage in brokerage services through the acquisition of Community Financial Group, Inc., Cabot, and its subsidiary, Community Financial Solutions. - Approved, November 21, 2003 St. Louis CNLBancshares, Inc., Orlando, Florida -- commitment waiver request. - Withdrawn, November 19, 2003 Atlanta First Community Capital Corporation, Houston, Texas, and First Community Capital Corporation of Delaware, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware -- to acquire Grimes County Capital Corporation, Houston, Texas, and indirectly acquire Community State Bank. - Approved, November 19, 2003 Dallas Floridian Community Holdings, Inc., Davie, Florida -- to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of Floridian Community Bank, Inc. - Withdrawn, November 18, 2003 Atlanta FNBG Bancshares, Inc., Duluth, Georgia -- to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of First National Bank of Gwinnett. - Approved, November 21, 2003 Atlanta Freedom Bancshares of Southern Missouri, Inc., Cassville, Missouri -- to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of Freedom Bank of Southern Missouri. - Approved, November 18, 2003 St. Louis (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 2 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Bank Holding Companies Home Bancshares, Inc., Conway, Arkansas, and TCBancorp, Inc., North Little Rock -- to acquire shares of CB Bancorp, Inc., Conway, and indirectly acquire Community Financial Group, Inc., Cabot, and its subsidiary, Community Bank; and for CB Bancorp, Inc. to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of Community Financial Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Community Bank. - Approved, November 21, 2003 St. Louis Humboldt Bancorp, Roseville, California -- to merge with California Independent Bancorp, Yuba City, and thereby acquire Feather River State Bank. - Approved, November 18, 2003 San Francisco Northern States Financial Corporation, Waukegan, Illinois -- to acquire Round Lake Bankcorp, Inc., Round Lake, and thereby acquire First State Bank of Round Lake, Round Lake Beach. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Chicago Northern Trust Corporation, Chicago, Illinois -- to engage indirectly through Northern Trust Global Advisors, Inc., Stamford, Connecticut, in serving as an investment advisor. - Withdrawn, November 21, 2003 Chicago Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, Tokyo, Japan -- relief from certain commitments. - Granted, November 21, 2003 Director, BS&R ### Bank Mergers The Bank of Commerce, Wetumka, Oklahoma -- to merge with Weleetka State Bank, Weleetka, and operate a branch at the existing location. - Approved, November 18, 2003 Secretary (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 3 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Bank Mergers Sky Bank, Salineville, Ohio -- to merge with Great Lakes Bank, Mentor. - Approved, November 20, 2003 Cleveland ### Banks, Foreign SAS Rue la Boetie, Paris, France, and Credit Agricole S.A. -- commenter's request to extend the comment period on the application to retain certain U.S. subsidiaries of Credit Lyonnais. - Denied, November 18, 2003 Secretary ### Banks, State Member The Missouri Bank, Warrenton, Missouri -- to expand its banking powers by exercising limited trust powers as trustee on a municipal bond issue. - Approved, November 20, 2003 St. Louis ### Change In Bank Control First Medicine Lodge Bancshares, Inc., Overland Park, Kansas -- change in bank control. - Permitted, November 17, 2003 Kansas City Texico Bancshares Corporation, Texico, Illinois. -- change in bank control. - Withdrawn, November 21, 2003 St. Louis ### Competitive Factors Reports Atlantic Bank of New York, New York, New York -- report on competitive factors of the proposed purchase of certain assets and assumption of certain liabilities of a branch of Allied Irish Banks, p.l.c. - Submitted, November 12, 2003 (AC) Secretary (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 4 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Competitive Factors Reports Crews Banking Corporation, Wauchula, Florida -- report on competitive factors of the proposed purchase of assets and assumption of liabilities of Englewood Bank, Englewood. - Submitted, November 12, 2003 (AC) Atlanta First Financial Bank, National Association, Terre Haute, Indiana -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with First Citizens State Bank, Newport; First Parke State Bank, Rockville; First State Bank, Brazil; First Farmers State Bank, Sullivan; First Crawford State Bank, Robinson, Illinois; First Community Bank, National Association, Olney; and First National Bank of Marshall, Marshall. - Submitted, November 20, 2003 Chicago The First National Bank of Berwick, Berwick, Pennsylvania -- report on competitive factors of the proposed purchase of certain assets and assumption of certain liabilities of the Danville branch of First Federal Bank, Hazleton. - Submitted, November 18, 2003 Philadelphia Humboldt Bank, Eureka, California -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with Feather River State Bank, Yuba City. - Submitted, November 18, 2003 San Francisco Mid-Peninsula Bank, Palo Alto, California -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with Bank of Santa Clara, Bay Area Bank, San Jose National Bank, Bay Bank of Commerce, Golden Gate Bank, Bank of Petaluma, Cupertino National Bank, Mt. Diablo National Bank, Peninsula Bank of Commerce, and Coast Commercial Bank, all in California. - Submitted, November 18, 2003 San Francisco PeoplesTrust Bank, Hamilton, Alabama -- report on competitive factors of the proposed purchase of assets and assumption of liabilities of the branch of Community Spirit Bank, Red Bay, at 34888 Highway 43 South, Hackleburg. - Submitted, November 12, 2003 (AC) Atlanta (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 5 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Competitive Factors Reports The Plainville State Bank, Plainville, Kansas -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with Farmers National Bank, Lincoln. - Submitted, November 21, 2003 Kansas City The Plainville State Bank, Plainville, Kansas -- report on competitive factors of the proposed purchase of certain assets and assumption of certain liabilities of Beverly State Bank, Beverly. - Submitted, November 21, 2003 Kansas City State Bank, Worthington, Iowa -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with Worthington Bancorporation. - Submitted, November 20, 2003 Chicago Westport National Bank, Westport, Connecticut -- report on competitive factors of the proposed merger with Westport National Bank. - Submitted, November 19, 2003 New York ### Extensions Of Time Citizens Bancshares, Inc., ESOP, Edmond, Oklahoma -- extension to February 19, 2004, to acquire shares of Citizens Bancshares, Inc., and thereby acquire Citizens Bank of Edmond. - Granted, November 20, 2003 Kansas City Oswego Community Bank Employees Stock Ownership Plan, Oswego, Illinois -- extension to February 22, 2004, to increase its ownership of Oswego Bancshares, Inc., and thereby acquire Oswego Community Bank. - Granted, November 18, 2003 Chicago (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 6 of 7 ### H.2 November 16, 2003 to November 22, 2003 Actions under delegated authority ### Extensions Of Time Rio Financial Services, Inc., McAllen, Texas, and Rio Delaware Corporation, Wilmington, Delaware -- extension to January 30, 2004, to become bank holding companies through the acquisition of Rio Bank, McAllen. - Granted, November 19, 2003 Dallas ### Financial Holding Companies HBOS Treasury Services plc, London, United Kingdom -- election to be treated as a financial holding company effective as of the date it establishes its New York branch. - Effective, November 18, 2003 Director, BS&R The Northern Trust Company, Chicago, Illinois -- election to become a financial holding company. - Effective, November 20, 2003 Secretary ### Membership 1st United Bank, North Palm Beach, Florida -- to become a member of the Federal Reserve System. - Approved, November 21, 2003 Secretary Great Lakes Bank, Mentor, Ohio -- to become a member of the Federal Reserve System on changing its name to Sky Bank and moving its headquarters to Salineville. - Approved, November 20, 2003 Cleveland Marco Community Bank, Marco Island, Florida -- to become a member of the Federal Reserve System. - Approved, November 21, 2003 Atlanta (AC) = Addition or Correction Delegated - Page 7 of 7 # District 1 Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22 , 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period CIC Kenneth R. Lehman and Joan Abercrombie Lehman – to acquire up to 25% of the outstanding shares of the common stock of S ervice Bancorp, Inc., Medway, Massachusetts Newspaper – 12/04/2003 Fed Reg – 12/04/2003 3(a)(3) & 3(a)(5) * Bank of America Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina – application to acquire FleetBoston Financial Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts Newspaper – 12/1 9 /2003 Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 3(a)(3)* FleetBoston Financial Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts – to acquire up to 19.9% of the outstanding shares of Bank of America Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina Newspaper – 12/1 9 /2003 Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 C omments should be directed to: A. Linwood Gill, III, Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, P.O. Box 27622, Richmond, Virginia 23261, Phone # 804 - 697 - 8237. Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Applicat ion Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to enc ourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228 ). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's app lication for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Ou tstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CR A rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 2 Federal Reserve Bank of New York Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period CIC Barry M. Snyder to acquire shares of Great Lake Bancorp, Inc., Buffalo, New York. Newspaper – 11/24/2003 Fed Reg 1 1/28/2003 Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period 4C8 Bayerische Hypo_und Vereinsbank AG, Munich, Germany and Munchener Ruckversicherungs - Gesellschaft AG, Munich, German y, to engage in the following activities through their non - controlling investment (currently 7.258%) in Identrus, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, following the acquisition by Identrus of eFinance Corporation, San Francisco, California. Fe d Reg – 12/09/2003 Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institu tions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was rev ised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit faci lities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactor y NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for First Quarter of 2004 Institution Location Chemung Canal Trust Company One Chemung Canal Plaza, P.O. Box 1522, Elmira, New York 14902 The inclusion on the list of institutions that are scheduled to undergo CRA examinations in the next calendar quarter is not determinative of whether the institution will be examined in that quarter. Reserve Banks may need to defer a planned examination or conduct an unforeseen examination because of scheduling difficulties or other circumstances. # District 3 Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage deposi tory institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regula tion was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for 1 st Quarter of 2004 Institution Location Premier Bank American Bank Doylestown, PA Allentown, PA # District 4 Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch A pplication by Savings Bank & Trust, Wadsworth, Ohio, to establish a branch at 3333 Massillon Road, Green, Ohio. Newspaper - 11/07/2003 Branch Application by Western Reserve Bank, Medina, Ohio, to establish a branch at 8747 Brecksville Road, Brecksville, O hio. Newspaper - 11/17/2003 Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(1) PSB Holdings, Inc., New Matamoras, Ohio, proposes to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of The Peoples Savings Bank, New Matamoras, Ohio. Newspaper - 12/04/2003 Fed Reg - 12/01/2003 Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to im prove SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk 219052 1 ShoreBank, Cleveland 540 East 105 th Street Cleveland, Ohio 44108 08/25/2003 11/18/2003 O X Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 5 Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch Fr ederick County Bank, Frederick, Maryland, to establish a branch at 200 Commerce Drive, Walkersville, Maryland. Newspaper – 12/01/2003 Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act. Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper an d Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(3) Bank of America Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina, to acquire up to 19.9% of the voting shares of FleetBoston Financial Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts. Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspaper – 12/19/2003 3(a)(5) Bank of America Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina, to merge with FleetBoston Financial Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts.* Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspaper – 12/19/2003 Subject to the provisions of the Comm unity Reinvestment Act. Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighb orhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its e ntire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Fede ral bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their C RA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk 2742153 First Capital Bank 4101 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 09/02/2003 11/21/2003 S X 2705121 Potomac Bank of Virginia 9910 Main Street Fairfax, Virginia 22031 09/08/2003 11/21/2003 S X Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 6 Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch AmS outh Bank, Birmingham, Alabama, to establish a branch located at 1522 Cape Coral Parkway West, Cape Coral, Florida, to be known as the Chiquita Branch. Newspaper - 11/28/2003 Subject to provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Appli cations subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(5) Alabama National BanCorporation, Birmingham, Alabama, to merge with Cypress Bankshares, Inc., and thereby acquire its subsidiary, Cypre ss Bank, both of Palm Coast, Florida. Newspaper - 12/08/2003 Fed Reg - 12/05/2003 3(a)(3) Citizens Banking Corporation, Frostproof, Florida, to acquire 12.63 percent of the outstanding shares of American Banking Corporation, Lake Wales, Florida.* Newspaper - N /Avail Fed Reg - N/Avail 3(a)(3) Crews Banking Corporation, Wauchula, Florida, to merge with DeSoto Banking Corp., and thereby acquire its subsidiary, The First State Bank of Arcadia, both of Arcadia, Florida.* Newspaper - 11/17/2003 Fed Reg - 11/17/2003 3 (a)(5) Crews Banking Corporation, Wauchula, Florida, to acquire 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Englewood Acquisition Bank, Englewood, Florida, changing its name to Englewood Bank upon consummation.* Newspaper - 11/17/2003 Fed Reg - 11/17/2003 CIC Ph enix - Girard Bancshares, Inc., Phenix City, Alabama, after the - fact notification filed by the John M. Dudley, Sr. Irrevocable Family Trust, John M. Dudley, Jr., and Leslie Green, as trustees, to retain 99.99 percent of the outstanding shares of Phenix Girar d Bancshares, Inc., and its subsidiary, Phenix - Girard Bank, both of Phenix City, Alabama. Newspaper - N/Avail Fed Reg - 12/10/2003 3(a)(1) Sterling BancGroup, Inc., Lantana, Florida, to acquire Sterling Bank, F.S.B., Lantana, Florida.* Newspaper - 12/04/2003 Fed Reg - N/AvailSection II – Appli cations subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(5) Synovus Financial Corp., Columbus, Georgia, to merge with Peoples Florida Banking Corporation, and thereby acquire Peoples Bank, both of Palm Harbor, Florida.* Newspaper - N/Avail Fed Reg - 11/24/2003 3(a)(3) Synovus Financial Cor p., Columbus, Georgia, to acquire 100 percent of the outstanding shares of Synovus Bank of Jacksonville, Florida (in organization).* Newspaper - N/Avail Fed Reg - N/Avail Subject to provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section III – Applicati ons subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application COM PSB BancGroup, Inc., Lake City, Florida, co mmitment waiver request. COM Vision Bancshares, Inc., Gulf Shores, Alabama, commitment waiver request.Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet t he credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. T he CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of a n institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to impr ove SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk 81 7 833 S outhTrust Bank 420 North 20 th Street Birmingham, Alabama 35203 (334) 254 - 5000 05/05/2003 11/19/2003 S X Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 7 Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch San d Ridge Bank, Highland, Indiana, to establish a branch facility to be located at the northwest corner of County Road 350 South and Concord Road, Lafayette, Indiana. Newspaper – 11/19/2003 * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period CIC Notice by Floyd H. Garrott, Battle Ground, Indiana, individually and as trustee of the John F. Garrott Trust, to retain 34.8 percent of the voting shares of The Farmers State Bank, Brookston, Indiana. Fed Reg – 12/10/2003 Newspaper – 12/07/2003 CIC Notice by the Norman Wirkler, Carbondale, Colorado, to control 33.90 percent and by the Wirkler Family (Norman Wirkler, Carbon dale, CO; Mary Wirkler, Colorado Springs, CO; Helen Wirkler, Dallas, TX; and Loma Mowat, Burr Ridge, IL) to gain control of 39.52 percent of Garnavillo Bank Corporation, Garnavillo, Iowa and thereby indirectly gain control of Garnavillo Savings Bank, Garna villo, Iowa. Fed Reg – N/Avail Newspaper – N/Avail CIC Notice by Randall E. Vail, Lake Mills, Wisconsin, to increase his ownership above 25 percent of The Greenwood's Bancorporation, Inc., Lake Mills, Wisconsin, and thereby indirectly acquire The Greenwoo d's State Bank, Lake Mills, Wisconsin. Fed Reg – 12/04/2003 Newspaper – N/Avail 3(a)(1) Main Street Bancorp, Inc., Northville, Michigan, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Main Street Bank (in organization), Northville, Michigan.* Fed Reg – 12/19/2003 Newspaper – 12/15/2003Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice CIC Notice by Raymond Abel, Mediapolis, Iowa, to retain control of 25.62% of Mediapolis Bancorporat ion, Mediapolis, Iowa, and thereby indirectly acquire Mediapolis Savings Bank; notice by the Aspelmeier Family (Kenneth and Shirley Aspelmeier of Mediapolis, Iowa, and their children Lynne McBride of Waterloo, Iowa, and David Aspelmeier and his children Ca de and Samuel all of West Branch, Iowa) to retain control of 29.28% Mediapolis Bancorporation, Mediapolis, Iowa, and thereby indirectly acquire Mediapolis Savings Bank. In addition, notice by Kenneth Aspelmeier to individually control 25.62% of Mediapolis Bancorporation with his wife, Shirley, and notice by the Schmidgall Family (Donald and Carol Schmidgall, Hartzell and Marian Schmidgall, Jon and Julie Schmidgall, Ronald and Jane Schmidgall all of Mediapolis, Iowa) to retain control of 27.96% of Mediapoli s Bancorporation, Mediapolis, Iowa, and thereby indirectly acquire Mediapolis Savings Bank. Fed Reg – 12/04/2003 Newspaper – 12/03/2003 3(a)(1) Valley Financial Group, Ltd., Saginaw, Michigan, to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of 10 0 percent of the voting shares of 1st State Bank (in organization), Saginaw, Michigan. * Fed Reg – N/Avail Newspaper – N/Avail CIC Notice by J P Family Limited Partnership, to acquire 34.79 percent of the voting shares of Will Bancorp, Inc., Williamsville , Illinois, and thereby indirectly acquire Williamsville State Bank and Trust, Williamsville, Illinois. Fed Reg – N/Avail Newspaper – N/Avail * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application NoneSection V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) a nd is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken in to account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate a n institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institutio n/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk 667832 State Bank of Arthur 411 S. Vine Street Arthur, Illinois 61911 (217) 543 - 2111 06/23/2003 11/18/2003 S X 2687133 Premier Bank 1975 John F. Kennedy Drive Dubuque, Io wa 52004 (563) 588 - 1000 07/21/2003 11/17/2003 S X Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 8 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch A rvest Bank, Fayetteville, Arkansas, to establish a branch facility to be located at 1900 South Douglas Boulevard, Midwest City, Oklahoma. * Newspaper – 11/28/2003 * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Applications s ubject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period CIC Notice by Wafik William Malek, Manchester, Missouri, to retain control of Gateway Bancshares, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri. (Previously submitted durin g the week ending September 13, 2003.) Newspaper – 09/30/2003 Fed Reg – 12/09/2003 Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not su bject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application Other Simmons First Bank of Russellville, Russellville, Arkansas, to reduce its permanent capital.Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulat ion BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 9 Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch First American Bank & Trust, Madison, South Dakota, proposes to establish a branch at 832 St. Joseph Street, Rapid City, South Dakota. Newspaper – N/Avail * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Applications subjec t to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period CIC Michael Dennis Watters, Lakeville, Minnesota, to gain control of Provincial Corp., Lakeville, Minnesota, and thereby indirectly gain control of Provincia l Bank, Lakeville, Minnesota. Fed Reg – 11/17/2003 Newspaper – 11/23/2003 CIC Change in control notice by Kent Evans Nyberg as trustee Grand Rapids, Minnesota to acquire control of First National, Agency Company of Deer River, Deer River, Minnesota, and t hereby indirectly acquire control of First National Bank of Deer River, Deer River, Minnesota. Fed Reg – 12/10/2003 Newspaper – N/Avail 3(a)(1) Gateway Bancorporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of G ateway Bank, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, a de novo bank. Fed Reg – 12/19/2003 Newspaper – N/Avail Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period NoneSection IV – Appl ications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application None Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit need s of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA require s that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution' s CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Subst antial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Sectio n VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 10 Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branc h Pinnacle Bank, Papillion, Nebraska, to establish a branch at 20304 Veterans Drive, Elkhorn, Nebraska. Newspaper - 11/22/2003 Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment p eriod 3(a)(1) Thunder Bancorp, Inc., Sylvan Grove, Kansas, to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of 100 percent of the voting shares of Beverly State Bank, Beverly, Kansas (to be renamed Thunder Bank, Sylvan Grove, Kansas). Newspaper - 12/06/2003 Fed Reg - 12/19/2003 4(c)(8) Thunder Bancorp, Inc., Sylvan Grove, Kansas, to engage in insurance activities through the acquisition of Sylvan Agency, Inc., Sylvan Grove, Kansas. Newspaper - 12/06/2003 Fed Reg - 12/19/2003 Section III – App lications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application Membership Beverly State Bank, Beverly, Kansa s (to be renamed Thunder Bank, Sylvan Grove, Kansas), to become a member of the Federal Reserve System.Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improv e SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 11 Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period Branch Cit izens Bank, Slaton, TX, to establish a branch at 6602 Quaker Ave nue , Lubbock, TX 79414* Newspaper – 12/05/2003 * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register noti ce Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(1) DCB Financial Corporation, Dallas, TX, and DCB Delaware Financial Corporation, Wilmington, DE, to acquire Dallas City Bank, Dallas, TX (de novo)* (previously reported the week ending November 15 , 2003) Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspaper – 12/07/2003 3(a)(1) DCB Delaware Financial Corporation, Wilmington, DE, to acquire Dallas City Bank, Dallas, TX (de novo)* (previously reported the week ending November 15, 2003) Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspaper – 12/ 07/2003 3(a)(1) Professional Capital, Inc., Dallas, TX, and Professional Capital of Delaware, Inc., Wilmington, DE, to acquire Professional Bank, NA, Dallas, TX (de novo)* (previously reported the week ending November 15, 2003) Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspa per – 12/14/2003 3(a)(1) Professional Capital of Delaware, Inc., Wilmington, DE, to acquire Professional Bank, NA, Dallas, TX (de novo)* (previously reported the week ending November 15, 2003) Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 Newspaper – 12/14/2003 * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period NoneSection IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application None Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low - and m oderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained directly from the institution o r Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following state member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None # District 12 Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Applications and notifications filed during the week ending Saturday, November 22, 2003 Section I – Applications subject to newspaper notice only Type Application Ending date of comment period 18C & Branch North Valley Bank, Redding, California, to merge with Six Rivers Bank, Eureka, California, and to acquire eight Northern California branch offices of Six Rivers Bank.* Newspaper – N/Avail * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section II – Applications subject to both newspaper and Federal Register notice Type Application Ending date of comment period 3(a)(3) Five Star Bancorp, Rocklin, California, to acquire 100 percent of Five Star Bank Natomas, Sacramento, Califo rnia, a state nonmember bank in organization.* Newspaper – N/Avail Fed Reg – 12/15/2003 * Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act Section III – Applications subject to Federal Register notice only Type Application Ending date o f comment period None Section IV – Applications not subject to Federal Register or newspaper notice Type Application MIRA Castle Creek Capital LLC, Rancho Santa Fe, California, for John M. Eggemeyer to form a director/management interlock wi th TCF Financial Corporation, Wayzata, Minnesota.Section V – Availability of CRA public evaluations The Community Reinvestment Act is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they ope rate, including low - and moderate - income neighborhoods. It was enacted by the Congress in 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2901) and is implemented by Regulation BB (12 CFR 228). The regulation was revised in May 1995. The CRA requires that each depository institution's r ecord in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically. That record is taken into account in considering an institution's application for deposit facilities. A copy of an institution's CRA evaluation may be obtained direc tly from the institution or Reserve Bank. Federal bank regulators use the following performance levels to rate an institution's performance under CRA: O = Outstanding S = Satisfactory NI = Needs to improve SN = Substantial noncompliance The following st ate member banks have been examined and their CRA public evaluations are now available. Exam type RSSD number Institution/Location Examination date CRA public date CRA rating LrgBk SmBk None Section VI – CRA examinations scheduled for Quarter of Institution Location None
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.mmc.gov/wp-content/uploads/6_HealthMAP-Gulland-Feb-8.pdf.json	### An independent agency of the U.S. Government # Health Monitoring and Analysis Platform # ( HealthMAP): A vision for marine mammal stranding response, health surveillance, science, and management # Frances M.D. Gulland ## • Timely information sharing is of value for enhancing animal care and rehabilitation, conservation, public health ## and scientific research • Title IV of the MMPA states 1. Facilitate the collection and dissemination of reference data on the health of marine mammals and health trends of marine mammals in the wild; 2. Correlate the health of marine mammals and marine mammal populations, in the wild, with available data on physical, chemical, and biological environmental parameters; # The Value of Marine Mammal Health Data ### • “ Marine mammals as sentinels” implies that the marine mammals are early warnings of ecosystem change, thus need to have an ### early warning system to convey information from these animals • Increases in the reporting of diseases in marine organisms suggest ocean health is deteriorating yet this could be skewed by ### publication effort ( Harvell et al. 2004, Simeone et al 2015) • Climate change predicted to change the incidence of diseases, detecting such changes requires integrating health data with climate sensitive environmental parameters ( Burek et al. 2008) # The Value of Marine Mammal Health Data• National Stranding Database exists, contains little health data, no standardized cause of death/stranding • Multiple internal organizational and regional health data sharing systems exist or are under development, – GulfMAP – Eastern Pacific Marine One Health Coalition – MARCO (Mid -Atlantic Regional Council on the Ocean) Mid -Atlantic Ocean Data Portal: – Wildlife Rehabilitation Medical Database – National Wildlife Health Center https://whispers.usgs.gov/home • Currently there is often dependency on informal communication amongst individuals that results in after- hours communications • National “Integrated Ocean Observing System” currently measures multiple environmental variables, especially physical parameters, that are shared real -time with users and the public, little marine mammal data, no health data # Marine Mammal Health Observing Systems ### • National marine mammal health tracking program that is web - based & readily accessible to scientists, managers & public (to different degrees) – Integrate health data from strandings, live capture - release programs, bycatch & subsistence sources ### • Add a marine mammal health component to the existing “Integrated ### Ocean Observing Systems” (IOOOS) with regional hubs – Integrate ecosystem - based analyses of marine mammal health data with physical, chemical, and biological environmental data (Title IV) ### • Allow detection of spatiotemporal changes in marine mammal health that ### will enable – early warning of health issues and trends, – identify disease hotspots facilitating detection of cause, – share potential public and animal health risks outside the stranding network # HealthMAP : Vision• Scale of US coastline, no. animals involved • Sharing data that results in publications by others outside stranding network without acknowledgement, or out - ofcontext use • Will require consistent definitions of health parameters, diseases • Duplication of data entry effort # Pros & Cons Concerns • “One Health” approach by integrating with terrestrial animal databases, thus early warning of changes in disease incidence • Preservation of decades of data/samples that may disappear (retirements, lab closures) • Reduced need for one -on -one emails out of hours to inform managers, public health agencies • Ability to correlate health data with oceanographic and environmental data in IOOOS • Develop understanding of disease epidemiology, causes • Meet MMPA Title IV mandates ## Gains ### • Pilot project with 5 California volunteer groups (federal, ### private, 2 NGO, academia) • 5 years of data from dead stranded animals 2005 -2010 • 3110 records from paper records (71%) or electronic data ### • Each organization binned their cases into broad health categories:Trauma (Human caused/Not human caused), Biotoxin, Infectious disease (known pathogen/non ### specific), Malnutrition, Neoplasia, Other, Unknown # Pilot Project Proof of Concept for a Workshop in 2014 ### An independent agency of the U.S. Government www.mmc.gov \| Follow us on Twitter: @MarineMammalCom https://axiomdatascience.com/maps/marine - mammal - health - map/# ### • Marine mammal health data are of value to people beyond those who collect data from these wild animals ### • IOOS is ever more effective, marine mammal health data needed • Pilot program in California effective • Challenge is scaling up to include multiple types of data from ### different sources nation wide • Currently no allocation of federal funds specifically for development ### of a HealthMap • It will take a village! # HealthMAP to Date ### An independent agency of the U.S. Government www.mmc.gov \| Follow us on Twitter: @MarineMammalCom # Thank you!
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/transmission/commercial-business-process-improvement/2022-04-20-pcm-update-cbpi.pdf.json	# Short-term Preemption and ROFR Project Update April 20, 2022 Mike SteigerwaldBONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ## • Status and Schedule • Q&A from PCM Training • OASIS Enhancements # Agenda 2BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION # Status and Phased Implementation Schedule 3 #  OATI software changes have been completed. #  Ready to handle billing of Redirect ROFRs. #  3/01: 3 weeks notice given for the Preemption BP v4. #  3/9,15,17: Customer training sessions on PCM. #  3/22: Enabled PCM for Monthly firm/non -firm. #  4/12: Enabled PCM for Weekly firm/non -firm. #  No PCM activity has occurred yet for Monthly or Weekly. #  5/03: EIM go- live #  5/17* at 11am: Enable PCM for Daily firm/non -firm. *Schedule for Daily may change if issues arise with the prior phase.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION Q: Were the PCM training sessions recorded? A: Yes, but we are still seeking permission from OATI to post them. Q: If I am a Defender, will the TSR show the time I need to respond by? A: No, not on the TSR. But the Competing Request Flag on the TSR links to the Preemption Detail screen, which does show the ROFR Deadline. Q: Can you speak to ROFR Flag Y vs N? A: The ROFR Flag is key. o If set to Y, you have until the ROFR Deadline to exercise ROFR or your reservation will be preempted to the specified Remaining Profile. You have several choices when exercising ROFR as spelled out in the Preemption and ROFR User Guide . o If the ROFR Flag is N, then you do not have ROFR rights. Your reservation will simply be preempted by the Challenger immediately through a RECALL, leaving you with the specified Remaining Profile. # Q&A from PCM Training 4BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION Q : What happens if the Firm parent of a 1 - NS is preempted? A: This is not possible. A Secondary Redirect (1 - NS) is only permitted once a parent reservation is already unconditional (per A.7 in the Redirects BP). Once your Firm parent is unconditional, your 1 - NS cannot be orphaned. Q: Can 6 - NN be preempted? A: Nope. 6 - NN cannot be a Challenger or a Defender because of the way BPA ATC is structured. Firm ATC is different than Non-firm ATC, so 6 - NN cannot be challenged by Firm. Per NAESB, 6 - NN cannot challenge other 6 - NN. Finally, 6 - NN already has priority in ATC over all Non-firm ATC, so there is no need for 6 - NN to challenge 5- NM or lower. Q: Why is the unconditional time for Hourly Firm set to 1AM? I thought it was 2PM. A: This is temporary. Since version 4 of the Preemption BP does not include Hourly service, there is little reason to subject Hourly Firm to the restrictions tied to the Unconditional Time (i.e., Redirects and Consolidations). Once v5 of the Preemption BP is effective for Hourly service, the Unconditional Time will be changed to 2PM of the WECC preschedule day. # Q&A from PCM Training (continued) 5BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ## • Row highlighting for Preemption on Reservation Summary when Competing Request Flag = Y • OASIS - > My Settings - > Display Settings • Cell only • Entire row # PCM Enhancement: Row Coloring 6BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ## • Based on the Competing Request Flag on OASIS. • Now triggers when the Preemption process starts (flag set) and when it ends (flag cleared). • Provides more details: Preemption Ref and Role. # PCM Enhancement: Competing Request Alarm 7BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION # • Is there anything that we have not yet covered? • If you have any other questions or feedback after this call, contact: techforum@bpa.gov Questions / Concerns / Feedback 8BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION # Background Reference 9BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ## • This is an OASIS “how-to” document for common functions related to PCM that is linked from the Preemption v4 BP. • A “final” version is posted here . • Since this is not a Business Practice, BPA did not go through a formal comment process. o However, BPA is interested in any comments, suggestions, or questions. Please send to : techforum@bpa.gov • Everything demonstrated in the PCM training sessions is covered in this document. # Preemption and ROFR User Guide 10BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ## • Subscribe to PCM emails and alarm notifications. – Follow instructions in the Preemption and ROFR User Guide. ## • Pay attention to the Unconditional Time of your reservations. • Be prepared to exercise ROFR within 24 hours of OASIS notification (Competing Request Flag being set). – If you successfully exercise ROFR, your reservation will be extended on OASIS. You will be billed for this “new” capacity. ## • Respond if your capacity has been preempted. – Subscribe to RECALL and RELINQUISH alarms for notification. – Adjust tags if the underlying reservation has been preempted. – Reconcile any Resales if you are the Reseller of a parent reservation that has been preempted. # Customer Readiness Recap 11BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION ### • Preemption and ROFR: The overall process that carries out Section 13.2 of the tariff in which a higher priority request may challenge lower priority requests and reservations for constrained capacity. • Right of First Refusal (ROFR): The ability for PTP customers to defend their existing reservation by agreeing to match the terms of a challenging PTP request. • Defender: Request or reservation holding conditional capacity that is at risk from higher priority requests. • Challenger: The higher priority request that can challenge. • Preemption without ROFR: Scenario in which the Defender really has no defense. Their capacity can simply be taken by the Challenger. Most commonly involves an NT Challenger against any PTP Defender. • Preemption with ROFR: Scenario in which the Defender may choose to exercise ROFR to keep their existing reservation. Only occurs between a PTP Challenger and a PTP Defender holding a reservation. • PCM: The OATI software that carries out Preemption/ROFR. # Terminology Recap 12BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION # PCM Email Notification Examples 13BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 14 # PCM has started for a Challenger 14 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • Information can be queried using the template preemption with PREEMPTION_REF. • The email and OASIS template query both return: the Challenger, all Defenders, all Dependents of the Defenders. • The PREEMPTION_COMPONENT_STATE is the status of each AREF within the PCM process. “ACTIVE” means in progress.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION • ROFR_FLAG = Y means the Defender has ROFR. • When the ROFR_FLAG = Y, the ROFR_DEADLINE tells you when ROFR must be submitted to be valid. • The ROFR_REF is used to look up the ROFR Notification on OASIS. ROFR can be submitted or declined from the ROFR Notification. 15 # PCM has started for a Defender 15 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 16 # PCM has started for a Dependent 16 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • A Dependent is either a Resale or a pending Redirect from a Defender. • The Assignee will be notified via email when the parent capacity is being challenged. • The email and template results shows the Defender AREF and whether the Defender has ROFR.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 17 # Defender has successfully exercised ROFR 17 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • The Defender has reached a final state of MATCHED. This means ROFR was granted. • The Dependent has also been COMPLETED at the same time as the Defender. • Note that the Challenger is still in progress (ACTIVE). • The overall PCM process is also still in progress: PREEMPTION_PROCESS_STATE = ACTIVE.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 18 # Challenger has received a Counteroffer 18 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • The Challenger has now reached a final state. • PREEMPTION_COMPONENT_STATE = PARTIAL means the Challenger got a counteroffer. • The overall PCM process is done. PREEMPTION_PROCESS_STATE = COMPLETED. All AREFs must be in a final status before the overall process can be completed.BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 19 # Challenger has received a Full Offer 19 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • This is a different Preemption and ROFR process: PREEMPTION_REF = 1035. • The Challenger received a full offer (PREEMPTION_COMPONENT_STATE = FULL) and the overall process is done (PREEMPTION_PROCESS_STATE = COMPLETED).BONNEVILLE POW ER ADMINISTRATION 20 # Defender has been Preempted 20 Predecisional . For discussion purposes only. • This is the same Preemption and ROFR process (PREEMPTION_REF = 1035). • The Defender was preempted (PREEMPTION_COMPONENT_STATE = PREEMPTED). • Note that the Defender did not have ROFR (ROFR_FLAG = N).
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.nist.gov/node/1535896.json	Skip to main content An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( LockA locked padlock) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. https://www.nist.gov/nist-awards/2018-bronze-medal-award-dustin-hite-dietrich-leibfried-david-pappas-andrew-wilson - Topics - All Topics - Advanced communications - Artificial intelligence - Bioscience - Buildings and construction - Chemistry - Climate - Cybersecurity - Electronics - Energy - Environment - Fire - Forensic science - Health - Information technology - Infrastructure - Manufacturing - Materials - Mathematics and statistics - Metrology - Nanotechnology - Neutron research - Performance excellence - Physics - Public safety - Resilience - Standards - Transportation - Publications - Labs & Major Programs - Laboratories - Communications Technology Laboratory - Engineering Laboratory - Information Technology Laboratory - Material Measurement Laboratory - Physical Measurement Laboratory - User Facilities - NIST Center for Neutron Research - CNST NanoFab - Research Test Beds - Research Projects - Tools & Instruments - Major Programs - Baldrige Performance Excellence Program - CHIPS for America Initiative - Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) - Office of Advanced Manufacturing - Special Programs Office - Technology Partnerships Office - Services & Resources - Standards and Measurements - Calibration Services - Laboratory Accreditation (NVLAP) - Quality System - Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) - Standards.gov - Time Services - Office of Weights and Measures - Software - Data - Chemistry WebBook - National Vulnerability Database - Physical Reference Data - Standard Reference Data (SRD) - Storefront - License & Patents - Computer Security Resource Center (CSRC) - NIST Research Library - News & Events - News - Events - Blogs - Feature Stories - Awards - Video Gallery - Image Gallery - Media Contacts - About NIST - About Us - Leadership - Organization Structure - Budget & Planning - Contact Us - Visit - Careers - Student programs - Work with NIST - History - NIST Digital Archives - NIST Museum - NIST and the Nobel - Educational Resources 2018 NIST Awards # 2018 Bronze Medal Award Wilson, Hite, Leibfried, Pappas ## AWARD CITATION The team is recognized for reducing, by a factor of 100, the heating in ion traps used in quantum computing. This enables greater control of the ion quantum states, thus breaking down a large impediment to quantum computation with the traps. To do this, they innovated and applied a cleaning technique that greatly reduced noise due to surface contamination. They also pioneered an approach to integrate the technique along with multiple material diagnostic tools into an ion-trap test bed. Due to these breakthroughs, ion traps are now being developed as a feasible technology for a scalable, universal quantum computer. They also have propelled development of a stylus ion trap as an extremely sensitive surface-measurement tool. ## GROUP AWARD ### Dustin Hite ### Dietrich Leibfried ### David Pappas ### Andrew Wilson ## Share FacebookLinkedinTwitterEmail ### HEADQUARTERS 301-975-2000 Webmaster \| Contact Us \| Our Other Offices TwitterFacebookLinkedInInstagramYouTubeGiphyRSS FeedMailing List Feedback - Site Privacy - Accessibility - Privacy Program - Copyrights - Vulnerability Disclosure - No Fear Act Policy - FOIA - Environmental Policy - Scientific Integrity - Information Quality Standards - Commerce.gov - Science.gov - USA.gov - Vote.gov
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.caed.239108.4.0.pdf.json	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HECTOR GARZA, Petitioner, No. CIV S-12-1305 CKD P vs. R. GROUNDS, Respondent. ORDER / Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. In his application, petitioner challenges a conviction issued by the Fresno County Superior Court. Fresno County is part of the Fresno Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See Local Rule 120(d). Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper division of a court may, on the court’s own motion, be transferred to the proper division of the court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Fresno Division of the court. This court will not rule on petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. ///// ///// Case 2:12-cv-01305-CKD Document 4 Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California sitting in Fresno. 2. All future filings shall reference the new Fresno case number assigned and shall be filed at: United States District Court Eastern District of California 2500 Tulare Street Fresno, CA 93721 Dated: May 21, 2012 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 3 garz1305.109 Case 2:12-cv-01305-CKD Document 4 Filed 05/21/12 Page 2 of 2
text/markdown	0.015735	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/usc/118/66/10_-Subtitle_A-ptII-ch83-scI.json	### SUBCHAPTER I—DEFENSE-WIDE INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL POLICY Sec. 1601. Civilian intelligence personnel: general authority to establish excepted positions, appoint personnel, and fix rates of pay. 1602. Basic pay. 1603. Additional compensation, incentives, and allowances. [1604. Repealed.] 1605. Benefits for certain employees assigned outside the United States. 1606. Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service. 1607. Intelligence Senior Level positions. 1608. Time-limited appointments. 1609. Termination of defense intelligence employees. 1610. Reductions and other adjustments in force. 1611. Postemployment assistance: certain terminated intelligence employees. 1612. Merit system principles and civil service protections: applicability. 1613. Miscellaneous provisions. 1614. Definitions. #### Editorial Notes #### Amendments 1996—Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XVI, §1632(a)(3), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2745, added table of sections for subchapter and struck out former table of sections consisting of items 1601 "Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service", 1602 "Defense Intelligence Agency merit pay system", 1603 "Limit on pay", 1604 "Civilian personnel management", 1605 "Benefits for certain employees of the Defense Intelligence Agency", 1606 "Uniform allowance: civilian employees", and 1608 "Financial assistance to certain employees in acquisition of critical skills". 1994—Pub. L. 103–359, title V, §501(b)(1)(A), Oct. 14, 1994, 108 Stat. 3428, amended chapter heading generally, inserting "AND CENTRAL IMAGERY OFFICE". 1989—Pub. L. 101–193, title V, §507(a)(2), Nov. 30, 1989, 103 Stat. 1710, added item 1608. 1987—Pub. L. 100–178, title VI, §601(b), Dec. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 1015, added item 1606. 1985—Pub. L. 99–145, title XIII, §1302(a)(2), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 737, redesignated item 192 of chapter 8 of this title as item 1605 and transferred it to this chapter. 1984—Pub. L. 98–618, title V, §501(b), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3302, added item 1604.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.ssa.gov/atlanta/index.htm.json	Skip to main content # Social Security Search Menu Español Sign in ## Atlanta Region ### Links Social Security Region 4 Visit the Atlanta RegionArea Web sites Search for your office's location 8 Southern States Wage Reporting Region 4 Employment Opportunities Area Work Incentive Coordinators Public Information/Education Search All of SSA For Information ### Social Security Region 4 By knowing your zip code we can: - Tell you your local office's address. - Supply you with directions to the office. - Tell you hours your local office is open. ---- 800 Number Details - (800) 772-1213 between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM - TDD call (800) 325-0778) ---- If you wish to write to us, please use the following address: Regional Public Affairs OfficeSocial Security Administration61 Forsyth St. SW Suite 23T29Atlanta, GA  30303-8907 ---- Please send your comments or suggestions about this internet site to: Region 4 Webbers ****Please do not include any personal information(especially social security numbers)when sending any comments orsuggestions about our site. ### Related Information - Meet our Regional Commissioner Rose Mary Buehler - - - - - - - Footer menu
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/nij.ojp.gov/funding/awards/list?awardee=&city=&combine_awards=&field_award_status_value=All&field_funding_type_value=All&field_served_nationally_value=All&fiscal_year=&form_topic=&page=3&state=All&subtopic=337641&order=field_awardee&sort=desc.json	Subtopic:Recidivism Number of Awards: 157Total Amount Awarded: $74,828,457 ## Use Search Filters ### Select Filters ### Enter search criteria #### Pagination - First page« First - Previous page‹ Previous - … - Page 3 - Current page 4 - Page 5 - … - Next pageNext › - Last pageLast » #### Pagination - First page« First - Previous page‹ Previous - … - Page 3 - Current page 4 - Page 5 - … - Next pageNext › - Last pageLast »
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.af.mil/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Print.aspx?PortalId=1&ModuleId=858&Article=107286.json	<!--/* //NOSONAR /--><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <!--/ //NOSONAR /--><html lang="en-US"> <head id="Head"><meta id="MetaDescription" name="DESCRIPTION" /><meta id="MetaKeywords" name="KEYWORDS" /><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1" /><title> MAJOR GENERAL THOMAS G. DARLING </title><link id="css3605" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/module.css" /><link id="css5184" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/desktopmodules/ArticleCS/styles/AirForce3/style.css" /></head> <body> <main> <div> <link href="/portals/_default/skins/AirForce3/Assets/css/theme.css?cdv=108" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet"> <table class="print-layout article-content" style="width:100%;"> <tbody> <tr colspan="2" style="width:100vw;"> <td bgcolor="#1c2347" colspan="2"> <div class="header-inner"> <h1 class="print-title"> <img class="print-logo" src="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/images/emblems/af/seal.png" alt="Department of the United States Air Force Logo" /> <span>Biography</span> </h1> <h2 class="print-title"> <svg class="svg-logo" width="80" height="70" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 80 70"> <g> <title>U.S. Air Force Logo</title> <g transform="matrix(0.30864200474303516,0,0,0.30864200474303516,96.66049876374962,86.23049787780087) "> <polygon points="-216.59274005889893,-115.45912504196167 -239.41073322296143,-98.88313627243042 -211.62673664093018,-78.69417142868042 -202.91378498077393,-105.51613187789917 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-207.52175617218018,-75.70814847946167 -184.70473957061768,-59.13417387008667 -161.90072345733643,-75.70814847946167 -184.70473957061768,-92.29115629196167 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-195.99575519561768,-126.93117094039917 -279.6467409133911,-187.7141375541687 -260.1197633743286,-147.0781512260437 -232.37673664093018,-126.93117094039917 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-187.24075031280518,-153.7301287651062 -304.11372089385986,-238.64913511276245 -284.5887575149536,-198.0051531791687 -194.19973468780518,-132.33217191696167 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-287.54475116729736,-271.9891619682312 -301.3247194290161,-243.31515073776245 -258.9787721633911,-212.55013608932495 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-166.50472736358643,-105.51613187789917 -157.78475666046143,-78.69417142868042 -130.01070880889893,-98.88313627243042 -152.83077716827393,-115.45912504196167 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-137.04073810577393,-126.93117094039917 -109.2976884841919,-147.0781512260437 -89.7787675857544,-187.7141375541687 -173.42074298858643,-126.93117094039917 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-182.17178058624268,-153.7301287651062 -175.22274494171143,-132.33217191696167 -84.8327226638794,-198.0051531791687 -65.3028154373169,-238.64913511276245 " class="fill" /> <polygon points="-81.8727617263794,-271.9891619682312 -110.4467363357544,-212.55013608932495 -68.0937089920044,-243.31515073776245 " class="fill" /> <path d="m-197.38074,-111.46014c0,-6.997 5.676,-12.677 12.682,-12.677c6.99,0 12.677,5.68 12.677,12.677c0,7.005 -5.687,12.68 -12.677,12.68c-7.006,-0.001 -12.682,-5.675 -12.682,-12.68z" class="fill" /> </g> </g> </svg> <span>United States Air Force</span> </h2> </div> </td> </tr> <tr colspan="2" style="width:100vw;"> <td style="height: 30px;"></td> </tr> <tr colspan="2" style="break-inside: auto; page-break-inside: auto; width: 100vw;"> <td colspan="2"> <article class="article-detail article-detail-bio" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/NewsArticle"> <div class="column-right"> <aside class="article-bio-aside article-detail-headshot"> <img src="https://media.defense.gov/2018/Nov/20/2002064915/300/300/0/181120-F-ZZ966-1025.JPG" alt="Maj. Gen Thomas G. Darling" /> </aside> </div> <header> <h1> MAJOR GENERAL THOMAS G. DARLING</h1> </header> <section class="article-detail-content"> <div class="print-layout-content"> Major General Thomas G. Darling is deputy commander in chief and chief of staff U.S. Atlantic Command, U.S. Naval Station, Norfolk, Va. <br /> <br /> General Darling was born in 1932, in Abilene, Texas, where he graduated from high school in 1950. He received a bachelor of science degree in 1954 from Texas Agricultural and Mechanical University at College Station, and a master's degree in public administration from The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., in 1964. He completed Air Command and Staff College in 1964, the Naval War College in 1971 and the University of Pittsburgh's Management Program for Executives in 1977. <br /> <br /> He graduated as a distinguished military graduate of the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps program, was commissioned a second lieutenant and entered the U.S. Air Force in July 1954. He completed pilot training at Marana Air Base, Ariz., and Goodfellow Air Force Base, Texas. He was assigned to the 7th Bombardment Wing, Carswell Air Force Base, Texas, from August 1955 to July 1963. While there he was a B-36 pilot with the 492nd Bombardment Squadron. After completing B-52 combat crew training in June 1958, General Darling served as a B-52 pilot, aircraft commander and standardization evaluator with the 9th Bombardment Squadron, also at Carswell. <br /> <br /> In August 1963 he entered the Air Command and Staff College and upon graduation was assigned to the 824th Bombardment Squadron, Turner Air Force Base, Ga. While at Turner, General Darling served on temporary duty with the squadron at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, flying 46 combat missions in B-52s over Southeast Asia from March to October 1966. <br /> <br /> General Darling was assigned to Headquarters Strategic Air Command, Offutt Air Force Base, Neb., in January 1967 as chief of the Tanker Manning Section in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel. He was named bomber manning chief in July 1967 and in October 1968 become chief of the Aircrew-Operations Assignments Branch. The general entered the Naval War College in July 1970. After graduation in July 1971, he was assigned to Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C., as chief of the Force Structure Branch in the Directorate of Personnel Plans. In May 1972 he become executive to the assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower and reserve affairs. <br /> <br /> In July 1974 General Darling was assigned to the 97th Bombardment Wing at Blytheville Air Force Base, Ark., as vice commander and in July 1975 assumed command of the wing. He returned to SAC headquarters in February 1977 as director of training in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations, and in July 1978 became deputy chief of staff for personnel. <br /> <br /> In August 1981 General Darling was assigned to the Armed Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Va., as commandant. In August 1984 he was named vice commander, 15th Air Force, at March Air Force Base, Calif. He assumed duties as chief of staff for Atlantic Command in June 1986 and was assigned concurrent responsibilities as deputy commander in chief in September 1986. <br /> <br /> A command pilot, General Darling has more than 7,000 flying hours, including more than 500 combat hours in B-52s. His military decorations and awards include the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster, Meritorious Service Medal, Air Medal with oak leaf cluster and Air Force Commendation Medal. In addition, General Darling was awarded the MacArthur Medallion for his leadership initiatives while serving as commandant of the Armed Forces Staff College. <br /> <br /> He was promoted to major general Jan. 1, 1982, with date of rank Aug. 1, 1978. <br /> <br /> (Current as of November 1986)<br /> <br /> </div> </section> </article> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"> <div class="print-footer-space"> <img class="print-logo" src="" alt="Department of the Air Force Logo" /> </div> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <style> body{margin:0;padding:0;} table.print-layout{ width: 100%; font-size: 12px; max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; } table.print-layout, table.print-layout tr, table.print-layout > thead > tr > td, table.print-layout > tbody > tr > td, table.print-layout > tfoot > tr > td{ border: none; padding: 0; border-collapse: collapse; vertical-align: top; } table.print-layout article.article-detail-bio{ display:block; padding: 0 20px; } table.print-layout .column-right{ float:right; width: 30%; padding: 0 0 0 30px; } .header-inner{ display:flex; align-items: center; height: 70px; } h1.print-title{ text-align:left; padding: 0 20px; font-family: Oswald,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color:#fff; text-transform: uppercase; margin: 0; font-size: 20px; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: left; } h1.print-title .print-logo{ display: inline-block; width: 60px; height: 60px; margin: 0 10px 0 0; } h2.print-title{ flex: 1; text-align:right; padding: 0 20px; font-family: Ethnocentric,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color:#fff; text-transform: uppercase; margin: 0; font-size: 12px; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: flex-end; } h2.ussf-print-title{ flex: 1; text-align:right; padding: 0 20px; font-family: Oswald,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color:#fff; text-transform: uppercase; margin: 0; font-size: 20px; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: flex-end; } h2.print-title svg.svg-logo{ display: inline-block; height: 30px; width: 30px; margin: 0 10px; } table.print-layout article.article-detail-bio h1{ font-size: 20px; } .article-detail-headshot{ display:block; } figure.feature figcaption, figure.feature .actions, .media-inline-slideshow{ display:none!important; } .article-content.print-layout .article-detail-rank-history{font-size: 10px;} .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li > span{vertical-align: top;} /.article-content.print-layout .article-detail-rank-history ul li{display:flex;flex-direction: row-reverse;}/ .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li img{max-width:15px;position: relative; top: 4px;} .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-1 img, .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-2 img{max-width:10px;} .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-6 img{max-width:30px;min-width:0;} .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-7 img, .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-8 img, .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-9 img, .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-10 img{max-height:16px;} .article-content .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image-O-11 img{max-height: 40px;} /.article-content.print-layout .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-image{text-align: left;padding-left:0;padding-right:1rem;}/ /.article-content.print-layout .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-name{text-align: right; flex:1;}/ .article-content.print-layout .article-detail-rank-history ul li .rank-date{display:block;font-size:9px;} .article-content.print-layout .article-bio-aside h2{font-size: 18px;} @media (max-width: 767px) { .ast-split{flex-direction:row;} } .print-footer-space { height: 60px; position: relative; } .print-footer-space:before{ content: ''; display: block; position:absolute; height: 10px; background: #1c2347; left: 0; right:0; top: 15px; } .print-footer-space img.print-logo{ position: relative; height: 40px; width: 40px; left: 50%; margin-left: -20px; top:0px; } .print-footer-space img.ussf-print-logo{ background-color: white; padding: 0 5px; width: auto; } @media print { body {margin: 0;} body {-webkit-print-color-adjust: exact;} thead { display: table-header-group; } tfoot { display: table-row-group; } tr { page-break-inside: avoid; } img { page-break-inside: avoid; } } @page { size: auto; /* margin: 5mm 5mm 10mm; */ margin: 12.7mm; } </style> <script> window.addEventListener('load', (event) => { window.print(); }); </script> </div> </main> </body> </html>
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.copyright.gov/licensing/111/2020.2/62958.2020.2.pdf.json	This form is effective beginning with the January 1 to June 30, 2017 accounting period (2017/1) SA3E If you are filing for a prior accounting period, contact the Licensing Division for the correct form. Long Form for Secondary Transmissions by DATE RECEIVED Cable Systems (Long Form) A ACCOUNTING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS STATEMENT: Accounting 2020/2 Period Instructions: Give the full legal name of the owner of the cable system. If the owner is a subsidiary of another corporation, give the full corpoOwner rate title of the subsidiary, not that of the parent corporation. List any other name or names under which the owner conducts the business of the cable system. If there were different owners during the accounting period, only the owner on the last day of the accounting period should submit a single statement of account and royalty fee payment covering the entire accounting period. Check here if this is the system’s first filing. If not, enter the system’s ID number assigned by the Licensing Division. 62958 LEGAL NAME OF OWNER/MAILING ADDRESS OF CABLE SYSTEM Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 2020/2 INSTRUCTIONS: In line 1, give any business or trade names used to identify the business and operation of the system unless these names already appear in space B. In line 2, give the mailing address of the system, if different from the address given in space B. System IDENTIFICATION OF CABLE SYSTEM: MAILING ADDRESS OF CABLE SYSTEM: (Number, street, rural route, apartment, or suite number) (City, town, state, zip code) D Instructions: For complete space D instructions, see page 1b. Identify only the frst community served below and relist on page 1b Area with all communities. Served CITY OR TOWN STATE First Saint Louis MO Below is a sample for reporting communities if you report multiple channel line-ups in Space G. CITY OR TOWN (SAMPLE) STATE Alda MD Alliance MD Gering MD Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Offce to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Offce's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal suffciency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. FOR COPYRIGHT OFFICE USE ONLY El Segundo, CA 90245 coplicsoa@loc.gov STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT ALLOCATION NUMBER B 6295820202 Return completed workbook by email to: General instructions are located in the first tab of this workbook. Community 1 CH LINE UP 2 SUB GRP# AMOUNT $ For additional information, contact the U.S. Copyright Office Licensing Division at: Tel: (202) 707-8150 C Sample 62958 2260 E Imperial Hwy Room 839 1 2 A B B 3 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) 2/24/21 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 1b. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 Instructions: List each separate community served by the cable system. A “community” is the same as a “community unit” as defined in FCC rules: “a separate and distinct community or municipal entity (including unincorporated communities within unincorporated areas and including single, discrete unincorporated areas.” 47 C.F.R. §76.5(dd). The frst community that you list will serve as a form Area of system identifcation hereafter known as the “first community.” Please use it as the first community on all future filings. Served Note: Entities and properties such as hotels, apartments, condominiums, or mobile home parks should be reported in parentheses below the identified city or town. If all communities receive the same complement of television broadcast stations (i.e., one channel line-up for all), then either associate all communities with the channel line-up “A” in the appropriate column below or leave the column blank. If you report any stations on a partially distant or partially permitted basis in the DSE Schedule, associate each relevant community with a subscriber group, designated by a number (based on your reporting from Part 9). When reporting the carriage of television broadcast stations on a community-by-community basis, associate each community with a channel line-up designated by an alpha-letter(s) (based on your Space G reporting) and a subscriber group designated by a number (based on your reporting from Part 9 of the DSE Schedule) in the appropriate columns below. CITY OR TOWN STATE CH LINE UP Saint Louis MO First Arnold MO Community Ballwin MO Barnhart MO Bella Villa MO Bellefontaine Neighbors MO Bellerive MO Bel-Nor MO Bel-Ridge MO Berkeley MO Beverly Hills MO Black Jack MO Breckenridge Hills MO Brentwood MO Bridgeton MO Byrnes Mill MO Calverton Park MO Charlack MO Chesterfield MO Clarkson Valley MO Clayton MO Concord MO Cool Valley MO Cottleville MO Country Club Hills MO Country Life Acres MO Crestwood MO Creve Coeur MO Crystal City MO Crystal Lake Park MO Dardenne Prairie MO Dellwood MO Des Peres MO Doe Run (Outside of All T-V Markets) MO Edmundson MO Ellisville MO Eureka MO Farmington MO D SUB GRP# See instructions for additional information on alphabetization. U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) Fenton MO Ferguson MO Festus MO Flordell Hills MO Florissant MO Franklin Unincorporated County MO Frontenac MO Glendale MO Grantwood Village MO Green Park MO Greendale MO Hanley Hills MO Hazelwood MO Herculaneum MO Hillsboro MO Hillsdale MO Huntleigh MO Jefferson Unincorporated County MO Jennings MO Kimmswick MO Kinloch MO Kirkwood MO Ladue MO Lakeshire MO Mackenzie MO Manchester MO Maplewood MO Marlborough MO Maryland Heights MO Moline Acres MO Normandy MO Northwoods MO Norwood Court MO Oakland MO Oakville MO O'Fallon MO Olivette MO Overland MO Pacific MO Pagedale MO Parkdale MO Pasadena Hills MO Pasadena Park MO Pevely MO Pine Lawn MO Richmond Heights MO Riverview MO Rock Hill MO Saint Ann MO Saint Charles MO Saint Charles Unincorporated County MO Saint Francois Unincorporated County (Outside all Markets) MO Saint Genevieve Unincorporated County MO Saint John MO Saint Louis Unincorporated County MO Saint Peters MO Shrewsbury MO Add rows as necessary. U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) Sunset Hills MO Sycamore Hills MO Town And Country MO Twin Oaks MO Union MO University City MO Valley Park MO Velda Village MO Velda Village Hills MO Vinita Park MO Warson Woods MO Washington MO Webster Groves MO Weldon Spring MO Wellston MO Westwood MO Wilbur Park MO Wildwood MO Winchester MO Woodson Terrace MO Alton IL Belleville IL Benld IL BROOKLYN IL Caseyville IL Collinsville IL East Saint Louis IL Edwardsville IL Fairview Heights IL Freeburg IL Glen Carbon IL Godfrey IL Granite City IL Jersey Unincorporated County IL Madison Unincorporated County IL Maryville IL O'Fallon IL Pontoon Beach IL Roxana IL Saint Clair Unincorporated County IL Shiloh IL Smithton IL Swansea IL Troy IL Wood River IL U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company SECONDARY TRANSMISSION SERVICE: SUBSCRIBERS AND RATES In General: The information in space E should cover all categories of secondary transmission service of the cable system, that is, the retransmission of television and radio broadcasts by your system to subscribers. Give information Secondary about other services (including pay cable) in space F, not here. All the facts you state must be those existing on the Transmission last day of the accounting period (June 30 or December 31, as the case may be). Service: Sub- Number of Subscribers: Both blocks in space E call for the number of subscribers to the cable system, broken scribers and down by categories of secondary transmission service. In general, you can compute the number of subscribers in Rates each category by counting the number of billings in that category (the number of persons or organizations charged separately for the particular service at the rate indicated—not the number of sets receiving service). Rate: Give the standard rate charged for each category of service. Include both the amount of the charge and the unit in which it is generally billed. (Example: “$20/mth”). Summarize any standard rate variations within a particular rate category, but do not include discounts allowed for advance payment. Block 1: In the left-hand block in space E, the form lists the categories of secondary transmission service that cable systems most commonly provide to their subscribers. Give the number of subscribers and rate for each listed category that applies to your system. Note: Where an individual or organization is receiving service that falls under different categories, that person or entity should be counted as a subscriber in each applicable category. Example: a residential subscriber who pays extra for cable service to additional sets would be included in the count under “Service to the first set” and would be counted once again under “Service to additional set(s).” Block 2: If your cable system has rate categories for secondary transmission service that are different from those printed in block 1 (for example, tiers of services that include one or more secondary transmissions), list them, together with the number of subscribers and rates, in the right-hand block. A two- or three-word description of the service is sufficient. NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS Residential: • Service to first set $ 19.00 51,330 $ 10.00 • Service to additional set(s) 69,901 $0-$15 • FM radio (if separate rate) 69,578 $8.99-$9.99 Motel, hotel Commercial 20.00 $ Converter • Residential • Non-residential SERVICES OTHER THAN SECONDARY TRANSMISSIONS: RATES In General: Space F calls for rate (not subscriber) information with respect to all your cable system’s services that were not covered in space E, that is, those services that are not offered in combination with any secondary transmission service for a single fee. There are two exceptions: you do not need to give rate information concerning (1) services Services furnished at cost or (2) services or facilities furnished to nonsubscribers. Rate information should include both the Other Than amount of the charge and the unit in which it is usually billed. If any rates are charged on a variable per-program basis, Secondary enter only the letters “PP” in the rate column. Transmissions: Block 1: Give the standard rate charged by the cable system for each of the applicable services listed. Rates Block 2: List any services that your cable system furnished or offered during the accounting period that were not listed in block 1 and for which a separate charge was made or established. List these other services in the form of a brief (two- or three-word) description and include the rate for each. CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE RATE Continuing Services: Installation: Non-residential • Pay cable • Motel, hotel $0-$100 • Pay cable—add’l channel $5-$199 • Commercial $0-$35 • Fire protection • Pay cable $0-$449 •Burglar protection • Pay cable-add’l channel $99 Installation: Residential • Fire protection $0 - $49 • First set $0-$199 • Burglar protection $10 • Additional set(s) Other services: $105 • FM radio (if separate rate) • Reconnect $0-$35 $7 • Converter • Disconnect 5.00 $ • Outlet relocation $0-$55 $0-$150 • Move to new address Vacation Hold HD Premium Tier Program Downgrade Fee Non-Return Eqpt Fee DVR Upgrade Fee Wireless Receiver Service Activation Fee HD Tech Fee Set-Top Box Broadcast TV Surcharge Video on Demand BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 2. Credit Management Fee Dispatch on Demand 62958 CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE CATEGORY OF SERVICE Name E CATEGORY OF SERVICE RATE NO. OF SUBSCRIBERS BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 F 69,578 323 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 3. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 PRIMARY TRANSMITTERS: TELEVISION In General: In space G, identify every television station (including translator stations and low power television stations) carried by your cable system during the accounting period, except (1) stations carried only on a part-time basis under FCC rules and regulations in effect on June 24, 1981, permitting the carriage of certain network programs [sections 76.59(d)(2) and (4), 76.61(e)(2) and (4), or 76.63 (referring to 76.61(e)(2) and (4))]; and (2) certain stations carried on a Primary substitute program basis, as explained in the next paragraph. Transmitters: Substitute Basis Stations: With respect to any distant stations carried by your cable system on a substitute program Television basis under specifc FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations: • Do not list the station here in space G—but do list it in space I (the Special Statement and Program Log)—if the station was carried only on a substitute basis. • List the station here, and also in space I, if the station was carried both on a substitute basis and also on some other basis. For further information concerning substitute basis stations, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 1: List each station’s call sign. Do not report origination program services such as HBO, ESPN, etc. Identify each multicast stream associated with a station according to its over-the-air designation. For example, report multicast stream as “WETA-2”. Simulcast streams must be reported in column 1 (list each stream separately; for example WETA-simulcast). Column 2: Give the channel number the FCC has assigned to the television station for broadcasting over-the-air in its community of license. For example, WRC is Channel 4 in Washington, D.C. This may be different from the channel on which your cable system carried the station. Column 3: Indicate in each case whether the station is a network station, an independent station, or a noncommercial educational station, by entering the letter “N” (for network), “N-M” (for network multicast), “I” (for independent), “I-M” (for independent multicast), “E” (for noncommercial educational), or “E-M” (for noncommercial educational multicast). For the meaning of these terms, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 4: If the station is outside the local service area, (i.e. “distant”), enter “Yes”. If not, enter “No”. For an explanation of local service area, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 5: If you have entered “Yes” in column 4, you must complete column 5, stating the basis on which your cable system carried the distant station during the accounting period. Indicate by entering “LAC” if your cable system carried the distant station on a part-time basis because of lack of activated channel capacity. For the retransmission of a distant multicast stream that is not subject to a royalty payment because it is the subject of a written agreement entered into on or before June 30, 2009, between a cable system or an association representing the cable system and a primary transmitter or an association representing the primary transmitter, enter the designation “E” (exempt). For simulcasts, also enter “E”. If you carried the channel on any other basis, enter “O.” For a further explanation of these three categories, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 6: Give the location of each station. For U.S. stations, list the community to which the station is licensed by the FCC. For Mexican or Canadian stations, if any, give the name of the community with which the station is identifed. Note: If you are utilizing multiple channel line-ups, use a separate space G for each channel line-up. CHANNEL LINE-UP AA 1. CALL 2. B’CAST 3. TYPE 4. DISTANT? 5. BASIS OF 6. LOCATION OF STATION SIGN CHANNEL OF (Yes or No) CARRIAGE NUMBER STATION (If Distant) 30/1030 N 9/1009 E 4/1004 N 24/1024 I 11/1011 I 5/1005 N 2/1002 I 46 I WRBU St. Louis, MO St. Louis, MO KPLR/KPLRHD St. Louis, MO KSDK/KSDKHD KTVI/KTVIHD KNLC/KNLCHD St. Louis, MO Name G See instructions for additional information on alphabetization. East St. Louis, IL St. Louis, MO St. Louis, MO St. Louis, MO KMOV/KMOVHD KETC/KETCHD KDNL/KDNLHD U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 3. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 PRIMARY TRANSMITTERS: TELEVISION In General: In space G, identify every television station (including translator stations and low power television stations) carried by your cable system during the accounting period, except (1) stations carried only on a part-time basis under FCC rules and regulations in effect on June 24, 1981, permitting the carriage of certain network programs [sections 76.59(d)(2) and (4), 76.61(e)(2) and (4), or 76.63 (referring to 76.61(e)(2) and (4))]; and (2) certain stations carried on a Primary substitute program basis, as explained in the next paragraph. Transmitters: Substitute Basis Stations: With respect to any distant stations carried by your cable system on a substitute program Television basis under specifc FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations: • Do not list the station here in space G—but do list it in space I (the Special Statement and Program Log)—if the station was carried only on a substitute basis. • List the station here, and also in space I, if the station was carried both on a substitute basis and also on some other basis. For further information concerning substitute basis stations, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 1: List each station’s call sign. Do not report origination program services such as HBO, ESPN, etc. Identify each multicast stream associated with a station according to its over-the-air designation. For example, report multicast stream as “WETA-2”. Simulcast streams must be reported in column 1 (list each stream separately; for example WETA-simulcast). Column 2: Give the channel number the FCC has assigned to the television station for broadcasting over-the-air in its community of license. For example, WRC is Channel 4 in Washington, D.C. This may be different from the channel on which your cable system carried the station. Column 3: Indicate in each case whether the station is a network station, an independent station, or a noncommercial educational station, by entering the letter “N” (for network), “N-M” (for network multicast), “I” (for independent), “I-M” (for independent multicast), “E” (for noncommercial educational), or “E-M” (for noncommercial educational multicast). For the meaning of these terms, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 4: If the station is outside the local service area, (i.e. “distant”), enter “Yes”. If not, enter “No”. For an explanation of local service area, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 5: If you have entered “Yes” in column 4, you must complete column 5, stating the basis on which your cable system carried the distant station during the accounting period. Indicate by entering “LAC” if your cable system carried the distant station on a part-time basis because of lack of activated channel capacity. For the retransmission of a distant multicast stream that is not subject to a royalty payment because it is the subject of a written agreement entered into on or before June 30, 2009, between a cable system or an association representing the cable system and a primary transmitter or an association representing the primary transmitter, enter the designation “E” (exempt). For simulcasts, also enter “E”. If you carried the channel on any other basis, enter “O.” For a further explanation of these three categories, see page (v) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form. Column 6: Give the location of each station. For U.S. stations, list the community to which the station is licensed by the FCC. For Mexican or Canadian stations, if any, give the name of the community with which the station is identifed. Note: If you are utilizing multiple channel line-ups, use a separate space G for each channel line-up. CHANNEL LINE-UP AB 1. CALL 2. B’CAST 3. TYPE 4. DISTANT? 5. BASIS OF 6. LOCATION OF STATION SIGN CHANNEL OF (Yes or No) CARRIAGE NUMBER STATION (If Distant) Name G U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 7. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company GROSS RECEIPTS Instructions: The figure you give in this space determines the form you fle and the amount you pay. Enter the total of all amounts (gross receipts) paid to your cable system by subscribers for the system’s secondary transmission service (as identifed in space E) during the accounting period. For a further explanation of how to compute this amount, see Gross Receipts page (vii) of the general instructions. Gross receipts from subscribers for secondary transmission service(s) during the accounting period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 27,319,677.68 IMPORTANT: You must complete a statement in space P concerning gross receipts. (Amount of gross receipts) COPYRIGHT ROYALTY FEE Instructions: Use the blocks in this space L to determine the royalty fee you owe: • Complete block 1, showing your minimum fee. Copyright • Complete block 2, showing whether your system carried any distant television stations. Royalty Fee • If your system did not carry any distant television stations, leave block 3 blank. Enter the amount of the minimum fee from block 1 on line 1 of block 4, and calculate the total royalty fee. • If your system did carry any distant television stations, you must complete the applicable parts of the DSE Schedule accompanying this form and attach the schedule to your statement of account. If part 8 or part 9, block A, of the DSE schedule was completed, the base rate fee should be entered on line 1 of block 3 below. If part 6 of the DSE schedule was completed, the amount from line 7 of block C should be entered on line 2 in block 3 below. If part 7 or part 9, block B, of the DSE schedule was completed, the surcharge amount should be entered on line 2 in block 4 below. MINIMUM FEE: All cable systems with semiannual gross receipts of $527,600 or more are required to pay at least the minimum fee, regardless of whether they carried any distant stations. This fee is 1.064 percent of the system’s gross receipts for the accounting period. Line 1. Enter the amount of gross receipts from space K $ 27,319,677.68 Line 2. Multiply the amount in line 1 by 0.01064 Enter the result here. This is your minimum fee. DISTANT TELEVISION STATIONS CARRIED: Your answer here must agree with the information you gave in space G. If, in space G, you identifed any stations as “distant” by stating “Yes” in column 4, you must check “Yes” in this block. • Did your cable system carry any distant television stations during the accounting period? Yes—Complete the DSE schedule. x No—Leave block 3 below blank and complete line 1, block 4. Line 1. BASE RATE FEE: Enter the base rate fee from either part 8, section 3 or 4, or part 9, block A of the DSE schedule. If none, enter zero Line 2. 3.75 Fee: Enter the total fee from line 7, block C, part 6 of the DSE schedule. If none, enter zero Line 3. Add lines 1 and 2 and enter here Line 1. BASE RATE FEE/3.75 FEE or MINIMUM FEE: Enter either the minimum fee from block 1 or the sum of the base rate fee / 3.75 fee from block 3, line 3, whichever is larger Cable systems Line 2. SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE: Enter the fee from either part 7 submitting (block D, section 3 or 4) or part 9 (block B) of the DSE schedule. If none, enter additional zero. deposits under Line 3. Line 3. INTEREST CHARGE: Enter the amount from line 4, space Q, page 9 Section 111(d)(7) (Interest Worksheet) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . should contact the Licensing Line 4. FILING FEE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 725.00 additional fees. Division for the appropriate TOTAL ROYALTY AND FILING FEES DUE FOR ACCOUNTING PERIOD. form for Add Lines 1, 2 and 3 of block 4 and enter total here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . submitting the additional fees. Remit this amount via electronic payment payable to Register of Copyrights. (See page (i) of the general instructions located in the paper SA3 form for more information.) 2 $ 290,681.37 Block 3 $ - 0.00 Name K $ 290,681.37 62958 $ - Block 1 Block L Block 4 $ 291,406.37 0.00 0.00 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 8. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company CHANNELS M Instructions: You must give (1) the number of channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations to its subscribers and (2) the cable system’s total number of activated channels, during the accounting period. Channels 1. Enter the total number of channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Enter the total number of activated channels on which the cable system carried television broadcast stations and nonbroadcast services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INDIVIDUAL TO BE CONTACTED IF FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED: (Identify an individual we can contact about this statement of account.) Individual to Be Contacted for Further Name Telephone 310-964-1930 Address (Number, street, rural route, apartment, or suite number) (City, town, state, zip) Email mn112s@att.com Fax (optional) CERTIFICATION (This statement of account must be certifed and signed in accordance with Copyright Office regulations.) O Certifcation • I, the undersigned, hereby certify that (Check one, but only one , of the boxes.) (Owner other than corporation or partnership) I am the owner of the cable system as identifed in line 1 of space B; or (Agent of owner other than corporation or partnership) I am the duly authorized agent of the owner of the cable system as identified in line 1 of space B and that the owner is not a corporation or partnership; or X (Officer or partner) I am an officer (if a corporation) or a partner (if a partnership) of the legal entity identifed as owner of the cable system in line 1 of space B. • I have examined the statement of account and hereby declare under penalty of law that all statements of fact contained herein are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and are made in good faith. [18 U.S.C., Section 1001(1986)] X Typed or printed name: Title: (Title of official position held in corporation or partnership) Date: Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Offce to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Offce's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal suffciency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. Myriam Nassif Name 62958 15 607 N Enter an electronic signature on the line above using an "/s/" signature to certify this statement. (e.g., /s/ John Smith). Before entering the first forward slash of the /s/ signature, place your cursor in the box and press the "F2" button, then type /s/ and your name. Pressing the "F" button will avoid enabling Excel's Lotus compatibility settings. Michael Santogrossi Vice President – Finance February 24, 2021 Information 2260 E Imperial Hwy Room 839 El Segundo, CA 90245 ☛ /s/ Michael Santogrossi U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE9. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 SPECIAL STATEMENT CONCERNING GROSS RECEIPTS EXCLUSIONS The Satellite Home Viewer Act of 1988 amended Title 17, section 111(d)(1)(A), of the Copyright Act by adding the following sentence: “In determining the total number of subscribers and the gross amounts paid to the cable system for the basic service of providing secondary transmissions of primary broadcast transmitters, the system shall not include subscribers and amounts collected from subscribers receiving secondary transmissions pursuant to section 119.” For more information on when to exclude these amounts, see the note on page (vii) of the general instructions in the paper SA3 form. During the accounting period did the cable system exclude any amounts of gross receipts for secondary transmissions made by satellite carriers to satellite dish owners? X NO YES. Enter the total here and list the satellite carrier(s) below. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Name Name Mailing Address Mailing Address INTEREST ASSESSMENTS You must complete this worksheet for those royalty payments submitted as a result of a late payment or underpayment. For an explanation of interest assessment, see page (viii) of the general instructions in the paper SA3 form. Line 1 Enter the amount of late payment or underpayment . . . . . . . . . . . x Line 2 Multiply line 1 by the interest rate* and enter the sum here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x days Line 3 Multiply line 2 by the number of days late and enter the sum here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Line 4 Multiply line 3 by 0.00274** enter here and on line 3, block 4, space L, (page 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * To view the interest rate chart click on www.copyright.gov/licensing/interest-rate.pdf. For further assistance please contact the Licensing Division at (202) 707-8150 or licensing@loc.gov. ** This is the decimal equivalent of 1/365, which is the interest assessment for one day late. NOTE: If you are filing this worksheet covering a statement of account already submitted to the Copyright Offce, please list below the owner, address, first community served, accounting period, and ID number as given in the original filing. Owner Address First community served Accounting period ID number Privacy Act Notice: Section 111 of title 17 of the United States Code authorizes the Copyright Offce to collect the personally identifying information (PII) requested on this form in order to process your statement of account. PII is any personal information that can be used to identify or trace an individual, such as name, address and telephone numbers. By providing PII, you are agreeing to the routine use of it to establish and maintain a public record, which includes appearing in the Offce's public indexes and in search reports prepared for the public. The effect of not providing the PII requested is that it may delay processing of your statement of account and its placement in the completed record of statements of account, and it may affect the legal suffciency of the fling, a determination that would be made by a court of law. Interest Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ - x 0.00274 (interest charge) - - Name P Special Statement Concerning Gross Receipts Exclusion Q U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 10. The Minimum Fee»Base Rate Fee » 3.75 Percent Fee. All cable sysINSTRUCTIONS FOR DSE SCHEDULE tems fling SA3E (Long Form) must pay at least the minimum fee, which is WHAT IS A “DSE” 1.064 percent of gross receipts. The cable system pays either the minimum The term “distant signal equivalent” (DSE) generally refers to the numerical fee or the sum of the base rate fee and the 3.75 percent fee, whichever is value given by the Copyright Act to each distant television station carried larger, and a Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge, as applicable. of DSEs determines the royalty you owe. For the full definition, see page What is a “Permitted” Station? A permitted station refers to a distant (v) of the General Instructions in the paper SA3 form. station whose carriage is not subject to the 3.75 percent rate but is subject to the base rate and, where applicable, the Syndicated Exclusivity FORMULAS FOR COMPUTING A STATION’S DSE Surcharge. A permitted station would include the following: There are two different formulas for computing DSEs: (1) a basic formula 1) A station actually carried within any portion of a cable system prior for all distant stations listed in space G (page 3), and (2) a special for- to June 25, 1981, pursuant to the former FCC rules. mula for those stations carried on a substitute basis and listed in space 2) A station first carried after June 24, 1981, which could have been I (page 5). (Note that if a particular station is listed in both space G and carried under FCC rules in effect on June 24, 1981, if such carriage space I, a DSE must be computed twice for that station: once under the would not have exceeded the market quota imposed for the importabasic formula and again under the special formula. However, a station’s tion of distant stations under those rules. total DSE is not to exceed its full type-value. If this happens, contact the 3) A station of the same type substituted for a carried network, nonLicensing Division.) commercial educational, or regular independent station for which a quota was or would have been imposed under FCC rules (47 CFR 76.59 (b),(c), 76.61 (b),(c),(d), and 767.63 (a) [referring to 76.61 (b),(d)]) BASIC FORMULA: FOR ALL DISTANT STATIONS LISTED in effect on June 24, 1981. IN SPACE G OF SA3E (LONG FORM) 4) A station carried pursuant to an individual waiver granted between Step 1: Determine the station’s type-value. For purposes of computing April 16, 1976, and June 25, 1981, under the FCC rules and regulations DSEs, the Copyright Act gives different values to distant stations depend- in effect on April 15, 1976. ing upon their type. If, as shown in space G of your statement of account 5) In the case of a station carried prior to June 25, 1981, on a part-time (page 3), a distant station is: and/or substitute basis only, that fraction of the current DSE repre- • Independent: its type-value is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.00 sented by prior carriage. • Network: its type-value is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.25 NOTE: If your cable system carried a station that you believe qualifies • Noncommercial educational: its type-value is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.25 as a permitted station but does not fall into one of the above categoNote that local stations are not counted at all in computing DSEs. ries, please attach written documentation to the statement of account detailing the basis for its classifcation. a station also depends on its basis of carriage. If, as shown in space G of your Form SA3E, the station was carried part time because of lack of activated channel capacity, its basis of carriage value is determined by (1) Substitution of Grandfathered Stations. Under section 76.65 of the calculating the number of hours the cable system carried the station during former FCC rules, a cable system was not required to delete any station the accounting period, and (2) dividing that number by the total number of that it was authorized to carry or was lawfully carrying prior to March 31, hours the station broadcast over the air during the accounting period. The 1972, even if the total number of distant stations carried exceeded the basis of carriage value for all other stations listed in space G is 1.0. market quota imposed for the importation of distant stations. Carriage Step 3: Multiply the result of step 1 by the result of step 2. This gives of these grandfathered stations is not subject to the 3.75 percent rate, you the particular station’s DSE for the accounting period. (Note that for but is subject to the Base Rate, and where applicable, the Syndicated stations other than those carried on a part-time basis due to lack of ac- Exclusivity Surcharge. The Copyright Royalty Tribunal has stated its tivated channel capacity, actual multiplication is not necessary since the view that, since section 76.65 of the former FCC rules would not have DSE will always be the same as the type value.) permitted substitution of a grandfathered station, the 3.75 percent Rate applies to a station substituted for a grandfathered station if carriage SPECIAL FORMULA FOR STATIONS LISTED IN of the station exceeds the market quota imposed for the importation SPACE I OF SA3E (LONG FORM) of distant stations. Step 1: For each station, calculate the number of programs that, during the accounting period, were broadcast live by the station and were substituted COMPUTING THE 3.75 PERCENT RATE—PART 6 OF THE DSE for programs deleted at the option of the cable system. SCHEDULE (These are programs for which you have entered “Yes” in column 2 and • Determine which distant stations were carried by the system pursuant “P” in column 7 of space I.) to former FCC rules in effect on June 24, 1981. Step 2: Divide the result of step 1 by the total number of days in the • Identify any station carried prior to June 25, 198l, on a substitute and/or calendar year (365—or 366 in a leap year). This gives you the particular part-time basis only and complete the log to determine the portion of station’s DSE for the accounting period. the DSE exempt from the 3.75 percent rate. • Subtract the number of DSEs resulting from this carriage from the numTOTAL OF DSEs ber of DSEs reported in part 5 of the DSE Schedule. This is the total In part 5 of this schedule you are asked to add up the DSEs for all of the number of DSEs subject to the 3.75 percent rate. Multiply these DSEs distant television stations your cable system carried during the accounting by gross receipts by .0375. This is the 3.75 fee. period. This is the total sum of all DSEs computed by the basic formula and by the special formula. COMPUTING THE SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE— PART 7 OF THE DSE SCHEDULE THE ROYALTY FEE • Determine if any portion of the cable system is located within a top 100 The total royalty fee is determined by calculating the minimum fee and major television market as defined by the FCC rules and regulations in the base rate fee. In addition, cable systems located within certain televi- effect on June 24, 1981. If no portion of the cable system is located in sion market areas may be required to calculate the 3.75 fee and/or the a major television market, part 7 does not have to be completed. Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. Note: Distant multicast streams are not • Determine which station(s) reported in block B, part 6 are commercial subject to the 3.75 fee or the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. Distant VHF stations and place a grade B contour, in whole, or in part, over the simulcast streams are not subject to any royalty payment. cable system. If none of these stations are carried, part 7 does not have The 3.75 Fee. If a cable system located in whole or in part within a to be completed. television market added stations after June 24, 1981, that would not have • Determine which of those stations reported in block b, part 7 of the been permitted under FCC rules, regulations, and authorizations (hereaf- DSE Schedule were carried before March 31,1972. These stations are ter referred to as “the former FCC rules”) in effect on June 24, 1981, the exempt from the FCC’s syndicated exclusivity rules in effect on June 24, system must compute the 3.75 fee using a formula based on the number 1981. If you qualify to calculate the royalty fee based upon the carriage of DSEs added. These DSEs used in computing the 3.75 fee will not be of partially-distant stations, and you elect to do so, you must compute used in computing the base rate fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. the surcharge in part 9 of this schedule. The Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. Cable systems located in • Subtract the exempt DSEs from the number of DSEs determined in block whole or in part within a major television market, as defined by FCC rules B of part 7. This is the total number of DSEs subject to the Syndicated and regulations, must calculate a Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for the Exclusivity Surcharge. carriage of any commercial VHF station that places a grade B contour, in • Compute the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge based upon these DSEs whole or in part, over the cable system that would have been subject to and the appropriate formula for the system’s market position. the FCC’s syndicated exclusivity rules in effect on June 24, 1981. by a cable system during an accounting period. Your system’s total number Step 2: Calculate the station’s basis of carriage value: The DSE of U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 11. COMPUTING THE BASE RATE FEE—PART 8 OF THE DSE 5. Calculate a separate base rate fee for each subscriber group, using SCHEDULE (1) the rates given above; (2) the total number of DSEs for that group’s Determine whether any of the stations you carried were partially distant— complement of stations; and (3) the amount of gross receipts attributable that is, whether you retransmitted the signal of one or more stations to to that group. subscribers located within the station’s local service area and, at the same 6. Add together the base rate fees for each subscriber group to detertime, to other subscribers located outside that area. mine the system’s total base rate fee. • If none of the stations were partially distant, calculate your base rate 7. If any portion of the cable system is located in whole or in part within fee according to the following rates—for the system’s permitted DSEs a major television market, you may also need to complete part 9, block B as reported in block B, part 6 or from part 5, whichever is applicable. of the Schedule to determine the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. First DSE 1.064% of gross receipts What to Do If You Need More Space on the DSE Schedule. There Each of the second, third, and fourth DSEs 0.701% of gross receipts are no printed continuation sheets for the schedule. In most cases, the The fifth and each additional DSE 0.330% of gross receipts blanks provided should be large enough for the necessary information. If PARTIALLY DISTANT STATIONS—PART 9 OF THE DSE SCHEDULE you need more space in a particular part, make a photocopy of the page • If any of the stations were partially distant: in question (identifying it as a continuation sheet), enter the additional 1. Divide all of your subscribers into subscriber groups depending on information on that copy, and attach it to the DSE schedule. their location. A particular subscriber group consists of all subscribers who Rounding Off DSEs. In computing DSEs on the DSE schedule, you may are distant with respect to exactly the same complement of stations. round off to no less than the third decimal point. If you round off a DSE in 2. Identify the communities/areas represented by each subscriber group. any case, you must round off DSEs throughout the schedule as follows: 3. For each subscriber group, calculate the total number of DSEs of • When the fourth decimal point is 1, 2, 3, or 4, the third decimal remains that group’s complement of stations. unchanged (example: .34647 is rounded to .346). If your system is located wholly outside all major and smaller television • When the fourth decimal point is 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9, the third decimal is markets, give each station’s DSEs as you gave them in parts 2, 3, and 4 rounded up (example: .34651 is rounded to .347). of the schedule; or If any portion of your system is located in a major or smaller television The example below is intended to supplement the instructions for calculatmarket, give each station’s DSE as you gave it in block B, part 6 of this ing only the base rate fee for partially distant stations. The cable system schedule. would also be subject to the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for partially 4. Determine the portion of the total gross receipts you reported in space distant stations, if any portion is located within a major television market. K (page 7) that is attributable to each subscriber group. Distant Stations Carried Identification of Subscriber Groups In most cases under current FCC STATION DSE CITY OUTSIDE LOCAL GROSS RECEIPTS rules, all of Fairvale would be within A (independent) 1.0 SERVICE AREA OF FROM SUBSCRIBERS the local service area of both stations B (independent) 1.0 Santa Rosa Stations A, B, C, D ,E $310,000.00 A and C and all of Rapid City and Bo- C (part-time) 0.083 Rapid City Stations A and C 100,000.00 dega Bay would be within the local D (part-time) 0.139 Bodega Bay Stations A and C 70,000.00 service areas of stations B, D, and E. E (network) 0.25 Fairvale Stations B, D, and E 120,000.00 TOTAL DSEs 2.472 TOTAL GROSS RECEIPTS $600,000.00 Minimum Fee Total Gross Receipts x .01064 First Subscriber Group Second Subscriber Group Third Subscriber Group (Santa Rosa) (Rapid City and Bodega Bay) (Fairvale) Gross receipts $310,000.00 Gross receipts $170,000.00 Gross receipts $120,000.00 DSEs 2.472 DSEs 1.083 DSEs 1.389 Base rate fee $6,497.20 Base rate fee $1,907.71 Base rate fee $1,604.03 $310,000 x .01064 x 1.0 = 3,298.40 $170,000 x .01064 x 1.0 = 1,808.80 $120,000 x .01064 x 1.0 = 1,276.80 $310,000 x .00701 x 1.472 = 3,198.80 $170,000 x .00701 x .083 = 98.91 $120,000 x .00701 x .389 = 327.23 Base rate fee $6,497.20 Base rate fee $1,907.71 Base rate fee $1,604.03 Total Base Rate Fee: $6,497.20 + $1,907.71 + $1,604.03 = $10,008.94 In this example, the cable system would enter $10,008.94 in space L, block 3, line 1 (page 7) EXAMPLE: $6,384.00 COMPUTATION OF COPYRIGHT ROYALTY FEE FOR CABLE SYSTEM CARRYING PARTIALLY DISTANT STATIONS $600,000.00 Santa Rosa Fairvale Rapid City Bodega Bay Stations A and C 35 mile zone Stations B, D, and E 35 mile zone U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 11. (CONTINUED) LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company SUM OF DSEs OF CATEGORY “O” STATIONS: • Add the DSEs of each station. Enter the sum here and in line 1 of part 5 of this schedule. Instructions: In the column headed “Call Sign”: list the call signs of all distant stations identified by the letter “O” in column 5 of space G (page 3). In the column headed “DSE”: for each independent station, give the DSE as “1.0”; for each network or noncommercial educational station, give the DSE as “.25.” CATEGORY “O” STATIONS: DSEs DSE DSE 62958 CALL SIGN 0.00 CALL SIGN Add rows as necessary. Remember to copy all formula into new rows. 2 Computation 1 CALL SIGN of DSEs for Category “O” Stations DSE U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 12. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company Instructions: CAPACITY Column 1: List the call sign of all distant stations identified by “LAC” in column 5 of space G (page 3). Column 2: For each station, give the number of hours your cable system carried the station during the accounting period. This figure should correspond with the information given in space J. Calculate only one DSE for each station. Computation Column 3: For each station, give the total number of hours that the station broadcast over the air during the accounting period. of DSEs for Column 4: Divide the figure in column 2 by the figure in column 3, and give the result in decimals in column 4. This figure must Stations be carried out at least to the third decimal point. This is the “basis of carriage value” for the station. Carried Part Column 5: For each independent station, give the “type-value” as “1.0.” For each network or noncommercial educational station, Time Due to give the type-value as “.25.” Lack of Column 6: Multiply the figure in column 4 by the figure in column 5, and give the result in column 6. Round to no less than the Activated third decimal point. This is the station’s DSE. (For more information on rounding, see page (viii) of the general instructions in the paper Channel SA3 form. Capacity ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = ÷ = x = SUM OF DSEs OF CATEGORY LAC STATIONS: Add the DSEs of each station. Enter the sum here and in line 2 of part 5 of this schedule, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u Instructions: Column 1: Give the call sign of each station listed in space I (page 5, the Log of Substitute Programs) if that station: • Was carried by your system in substitution for a program that your system was permitted to delete under FCC rules and regular- tions in effect on October 19, 1976 (as shown by the letter “P” in column 7 of space I); and Computation • Broadcast one or more live, nonnetwork programs during that optional carriage (as shown by the word “Yes” in column 2 of of DSEs for space I). Substitute- Column 2: For each station give the number of live, nonnetwork programs carried in substitution for programs that were deleted Basis Stations at your option. This figure should correspond with the information in space I. Column 3: Enter the number of days in the calendar year: 365, except in a leap year. Column 4: Divide the figure in column 2 by the figure in column 3, and give the result in column 4. Round to no less than the third decimal point. This is the station’s DSE (For more information on rounding, see page (viii) of the general instructions in the paper SA3 form). 4. DSE 1. CALL 4. DSE SIGN ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = ÷ = SUM OF DSEs OF SUBSTITUTE-BASIS STATIONS: Add the DSEs of each station. Enter the sum here and in line 3 of part 5 of this schedule, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u TOTAL NUMBER OF DSEs: Give the amounts from the boxes in parts 2, 3, and 4 of this schedule and add them to provide the total number of DSEs applicable to your system. Total Number 1. Number of DSEs from part 2= u of DSEs 2. Number of DSEs from part 3= uu 3. Number of DSEs from part 4= u TOTAL NUMBER OF DSEs u 5. TYPE 6. DSE Name 3 CATEGORY LAC STATIONS: COMPUTATION OF DSEs 1. CALL 2. NUMBER 3. NUMBER 62958 4. BASIS OF VALUE CARRIED BY STATION VALUE SYSTEM SIGN OF HOURS OF HOURS CARRIAGE ON AIR OF DAYS IN YEAR 0.00 4 3. NUMBER 2. NUMBER SUBSTITUTE-BASIS STATIONS: COMPUTATION OF DSEs 1. CALL 2. NUMBER 3. NUMBER SIGN PROGRAMS IN YEAR PROGRAMS OF OF DAYS OF 5 ____________________________________ 0.00 0.00 0.00 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ 0.00 0.00 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 13. ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 6 Yes—Complete part 8 of the schedule—DO NOT COMPLETE THE REMAINDER OF PART 6 AND 7. X Column 2: Enter the appropriate letter indicating the basis on which you carried a permitted station. BASIS OF (Note the FCC rules and regulations cited below pertain to those in effect on June 24, 1981.) PERMITTED A Stations carried pursuant to the FCC market quota rules [76.57, 76.59(b), 76.61(b)(c), 76.63(a) referring to CARRIAGE 76.61(b)(c)] B Specialty station as defined in 76.5(kk) (76.59(d)(1), 76.61(e)(1), 76.63(a) referring to 76.61(e)(1) C Noncommerical educational station [76.59(c), 76.61(d), 76.63(a) referring to 76.61(d)] D Grandfathered station (76.65) (see paragraph regarding substitution of grandfathered stations in the instructions for DSE schedule). E Carried pursuant to individual waiver of FCC rules (76.7) F A station previously carried on a part-time or substitute basis prior to June 25, 1981 G Commercial UHF station within grade-B contour, [76.59(d)(5), 76.61(e)(5), 76.63(a) referring to 76.61(e)(5)] M Retransmission of a distant multicast stream. Column 3: 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE 1. CALL 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE 1. CALL 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE BASIS SIGN BASIS SIGN BASIS Line 1: Enter the total number of DSEs from part 5 of this schedule Line 2: Enter the sum of permitted DSEs from block B above Line 4: Enter gross receipts from space K (page 7) Line 5: Multiply line 4 by 0.0375 and enter sum here Line 7: Multiply line 6 by line 5 and enter here and on line 2, block 3, space L (page 7) List the DSE for each distant station listed in parts 2, 3, and 4 of the schedule. (Note: For those stations identified by the letter “F” in column 2, you must complete the worksheet on page 14 of this schedule to determine the DSE.) 1. CALL Instructions: Block A must be completed. In block A: • If your answer if “Yes,” leave the remainder of part 6 and part 7 of the DSE schedule blank and complete part 8, (page 16) of the schedule. • If your answer if “No,” complete blocks B and C below. Column 1: CALL SIGN List the call signs of distant stations listed in part 2, 3, and 4 of this schedule that your system was permitted to carry under FCC rules and regulations prior to June 25, 1981. For further explanation of permitted stations, see the instructions for the DSE Schedule. (Note: The letter M below refers to an exempt multicast stream as set forth in the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010.) Do any of the DSEs represent partially permited/ partially nonpermitted carriage? If yes, see part 9 instructions. x 0.0375 SIGN - 0.00 BLOCK C: COMPUTATION OF 3.75 FEE (If zero, leave lines 4–7 blank and proceed to part 7 of this schedule) 0.00 x Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1. This is the total number of DSEs subject to the 3.75 rate. - Name LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: Computation of 3.75 Fee BLOCK B: CARRIAGE OF PERMITTED DSEs Is the cable system located wholly outside of all major and smaller markets as defined under section 76.5 of FCC rules and regulations in effect on June 24, 1981? No—Complete blocks B and C below. 62958 BLOCK A: TELEVISION MARKETS 0.00 Line 6: Enter total number of DSEs from line 3 - U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 13. (CONTINUED) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE 1. CALL 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE 1. CALL 2. PERMITTED 3. DSE BASIS SIGN BASIS SIGN BASIS Name BLOCK A: TELEVISION MARKETS (CONTINUED) Computation of 3.75 Fee 6 62958 LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: 1. CALL SIGN U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 14. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company Worksheet for Computating the DSE Schedule for Permitted Part-Time and Substitute Carriage Computation of the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge X Yes—Complete blocks B and C . No—Proceed to part 8 Yes—List each station below with its appropriate permitted DSE Yes—List each station below with its appropriate permitted DSE X No—Enter zero and proceed to part 8. X No—Enter zero and proceed to part 8. DSE DSE DSE DSE 0.00 0.00 or in part, over the cable system? TOTAL DSEs TOTAL DSEs CALL SIGN CALL SIGN to former FCC rule 76.159) In block A: commercial VHF station that places a grade B contour, in whole • Is any portion of the cable system within a top 100 major television market as defned by section 76.5 of FCC rules in effect June 24, 1981? CALL SIGN CALL SIGN BLOCK B: Carriage of VHF/Grade B Contour Stations BLOCK C: Computation of Exempt DSEs Was any station listed in block B of part 7 carried in any commuInstructions: Block A must be completed. If your answer is “No,” leave blocks B and C blank and complete part 8 of the DSE schedule. 1. CALL 5. PRESENT DSE DSE 2. PRIOR SIGN CARRIAGE PERIOD 7 If your answer is “Yes,” complete blocks B and C, below. BLOCK A: MAJOR TELEVISION MARKET Is any station listed in block B of part 6 the primary stream of a nity served by the cable system prior to March 31, 1972? (refer Column 5: Indicate the station’s DSE for the current accounting period as computed in parts 2, 3, and 4 of this schedule. Column 6: Compare the DSE figures listed in columns 2 and 5 and list the smaller of the two figures here. This figure should be entered 4. BASIS OF 6. PERMITTED PERMITTED DSE FOR STATIONS CARRIED ON A PART-TIME AND SUBSTITUTE BASIS B—Late-night programming: Carriage under FCC rules, sections 76.59(d)(3), 76.61(e)(3), or 76.63 (referring to DSE general instructions in the paper SA3 form. statement of account on fle in the Licensing Division. in block B, column 3 of part 6 for this station. 3. ACCOUNTING 76.61(e)(3)). IMPORTANT: The information you give in columns 2, 3, and 4 must be accurate and is subject to verifcation from the designated S—Substitute carriage under certain FCC rules, regulations, or authorizations. For further explanation, see page (vi) of the (Note that the FCC rules and regulations cited below pertain to those in effect on June 24, 1981.) A—Part-time specialty programming: Carriage, on a part-time basis, of specialty programming under FCC rules, sections 76.59(d)(1),76.61(e)(1), or 76.63 (referring to 76.61(e)(1)). Instructions: You must complete this worksheet for those stations identifed by the letter “F” in column 2 of block B, part 6 (i.e., those stations carried prior to June 25, 1981, under former FCC rules governing part-time and substitute carriage.) Column 1: List the call sign for each distant station identifed by the letter “F” in column 2 of part 6 of the DSE schedule. Column 2: Indicate the DSE for this station for a single accounting period, occurring between January 1, 1978 and June 30, 1981. Column 3: Indicate the accounting period and year in which the carriage and DSE occurred (e.g., 1981/1). Name 62958 Column 4: Indicate the basis of carriage on which the station was carried by listing one of the following letters: U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE15. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company Enter the amount of gross receipts from space K (page 7) . . . . $ 7 A. Enter the total DSEs from block B of part 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Enter the total number of exempt DSEs from block C of part 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Subtract line B from line A and enter here. This is the total number of DSEs subject to the surcharge computation. If zero, proceed to part 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ • Is any portion of the cable system within a top 50 television market as defned by the FCC? X Yes—Complete section 3 below. No—Complete section 4 below. • Did your cable system retransmit the signals of any partially distant television stations during the accounting period? Yes—Complete part 9 of this schedule. X No—Complete the applicable section below. If the figure in section 2, line C is 4.000 or less, compute your surcharge here and leave section 3b blank. NOTE: If the DSE is 1.0 or less, multiply the gross receipts by .00599 by the DSE. Enter the result on line A below. A. Enter 0.00599 of gross receipts (the amount in section1) . . . . . $ B. Enter 0.00377 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ C. Subtract 1.000 from total permitted DSEs (the figure on line C in section 2) and enter here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Multiply line B by line C and enter here . . . . . . . . E. Add lines A and D. This is your surcharge. Enter here and on line 2 of block 4 in space L (page 7) Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge . . . . . . . . . . $ If the figure in section 2, line C is more than 4.000, compute your surcharge here and leave section 3a blank. A. Enter 0.00599 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . . . . $ B. Enter 0.00377 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ C. Multiply line B by 3.000 and enter here . . . . . $ D. Enter 0.00178 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ E. Subtract 4.000 from total DSEs (the fgure on line C in section 2) and enter here F. Multiply line D by line E and enter here . . . . . . . $ G. Add lines A, C, and F. This is your surcharge. Enter here and on line 2 of block 4 in space L (page 7) Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge . . . . . . . . . . . $ Did your cable system retransmit the signals of any partially distant television stations during the accounting period? Yes—Complete part 9 of this schedule. X No—Complete the applicable section below. If the figure in section 2, line C is 4.000 or less, compute your surcharge here and leave section 4b blank. NOTE: If the DSE is 1.0 or less, multiply the gross receipts by 0.003 by the DSE. Enter the result on line A below. A. Enter 0.00300 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . . $ B. Enter 0.00189 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ C.Subtract 1.000 from total permitted DSEs (the fgure on line C in section 2) and enter here . . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Multiply line B by line C and enter here . . . . . . . $ E. Add lines A and D. This is your surcharge. Enter here and on line 2 of block 4 in space L (page 7) Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SECTION 4: SECOND 50 TELEVISION MARKET Section 4a Section 3b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section 3a Computation of the Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.00 0.00 SECTION 3: TOP 50 TELEVISION MARKET Name BLOCK D: COMPUTATION OF THE SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE Section 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,319,677.68 62958 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company If the figure in section 2, line C is more than 4.000, compute your surcharge here and leave section 4a blank. Computation A. Enter 0.00300 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ of the Syndicated B. Enter 0.00189 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u $ Exclusivity Surcharge C. Multiply line B by 3.000 and enter here. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ D. Enter 0.00089 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u $ E. Subtract 4.000 from the total DSEs (the figure on line C in section 2) and enter here. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u F. Multiply line D by line E and enter here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ G. Add lines A, C, and F. This is your surcharge. Enter here and on line 2, block 4, space L (page 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instructions: You must complete this part of the DSE schedule for the SUM OF PERMITTED DSEs in part 6, block B; however, if block A of part 6 was checked “Yes,” use the total number of DSEs from part 5. • In block A, indicate, by checking “Yes” or “No,” whether your system carried any partially distant stations. Computation • If your answer is “No,” compute your system’s base rate fee in block B. Leave part 9 blank. of • If your answer is “Yes” (that is, if you carried one or more partially distant stations), you must complete part 9. Leave block B below Base Rate Fee blank. What is a partially distant station? A station is “partially distant” if, at the time your system carried it, some of your subscribers were located within that station’s local service area and others were located outside that area. For the definition of a station’s “local service area,” see page (v) of the general instructions. • Did your cable system retransmit the signals of any partially distant television stations during the accounting period? Yes—Complete part 9 of this schedule. X No—Complete the following sections. Enter the amount of gross receipts from space K (page 7). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ Enter the total number of permitted DSEs from block B, part 6 of this schedule. (If block A of part 6 was checked “Yes,” use the total number of DSEs from part 5.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u If the figure in section 2 is 4.000 or less, compute your base rate fee here and leave section 4 blank. NOTE: If the DSE is 1.0 or less, multiply the gross receipts by 0.01064 by the DSE. Enter the result on line A below. A. Enter 0.01064 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ B. Enter 0.00701 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u C. Subtract 1.000 from total DSEs (the figure in section 2) and enter here. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u D. Multiply line B by line C and enter here. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u $ E. Add lines A, and D. This is your base rate fee. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Name 7 Section 4b 8 BLOCK B: NO PARTIALLY DISTANT STATIONS—COMPUTATION OF BASE RATE FEE u $. $ 191,510.94 - 3 Section 27,319,677.68 Section 2 1 Section 0.00 - Base Rate Fee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u .$. - - DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 16. 62958 BLOCK A: CARRIAGE OF PARTIALLY DISTANT STATIONS Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 17. ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company If the figure in section 2 is more than 4.000, compute your base rate fee here and leave section 3 blank. A. Enter 0.01064 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) u $ B. Enter 0.00701 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) u $ C. Multiply line B by 3.000 and enter here u $ D. Enter 0.00330 of gross receipts (the amount in section 1) u $ E. Subtract 4.000 from total DSEs (the figure in section 2) and enter here u F. Multiply line D by line E and enter here u $ G. Add lines A, C, and F. This is your base rate fee. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) Base Rate Fee u $ • Add the DSEs for each station. This gives you the total DSEs for the particular subscriber group. • Calculate gross receipts for the subscriber group. For further explanation of gross receipts see page (vii) of the general instructions in the paper SA3 form. • Compute a base rate fee for each subscriber group using the formula outline in block B of part 8 of this schedule on the preceding page. In making this computation, use the DSE and gross receipts figure applicable to the particular subscriber group (that is, the total DSEs for that group's complement of stations and total gross receipts from the subscribers in that group). You do not need to show your actual calculations on the form. Computing the base rate fee for each subscriber group: Block A contains separate sections, one for each of your system’s subscriber groups. In each section: • Identify the communities/areas represented by each subscriber group. • Give the call sign for each of the stations in the subscriber group’s complement—that is, each station that is distant to all of the subscribers in the group. • If: 1) your system is located wholly outside all major and smaller television markets, give each station’s DSE as you gave it in parts 2, 3, and 4 of this schedule; or, 2) any portion of your system is located in a major or smaller televison market, give each station’s DSE as you gave it in block B, part 6 of this schedule. Step 2: For each wholly distant and each partially distant station you carried, determine which of your subscribers were located outside the station’s local service area. A subscriber located outside the local service area of a station is distant to that station (and, by the same token, the station is distant to the subscriber.) Step 3: Divide your subscribers into subscriber groups according to the complement of stations to which they are distant. Each subscriber group must consist entirely of subscribers who are distant to exactly the same complement of stations. Note that a cable system will have only one subscriber group when the distant stations it carried have local service areas that coincide. Section 4 9 Computation of Base Rate Fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for Partially Distant Stations, and for Partially Permitted Stations IMPORTANT: It is no longer necessary to report television signals on a system-wide basis. Carriage of television broadcast signals shall instead be reported on a community-by-community basis (subscriber groups) if the cable system reported multiple channel line-ups in Space G. In General: If any of the stations you carried were partially distant, the statute allows you, in computing your base rate fee, to exclude receipts from subscribers located within the station’s local service area, from your system’s total gross receipts. To take advantage of this exclusion, you must: How to Identify a Subscriber Group for Partially Distant Stations First: Divide all of your subscribers into subscriber groups, each group consisting entirely of subscribers that are distant to the same station or the same group of stations. Next: Treat each subscriber group as if it were a separate cable system. Determine the number of DSEs and the portion of your system’s gross receipts attributable to that group, and calculate a separate base rate fee for each group. Finally: Add up the separate base rate fees for each subscriber group. That total is the base rate fee for your system. NOTE: If any portion of your cable system is located within the top 100 television market and the station is not exempt in part 7, you must also compute a Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for each subscriber group. In this case, complete both block A and B below. However, if your cable system is wholly located outside all major television markets, complete block A only. Step 1: For each community served, determine the local service area of each wholly distant and each partially distant station you carried to that community. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: Computation of Base Rate Fee 8 Name 62958 0.00 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 DSE SCHEDULE. PAGE 18. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 Guidance for Computing the Royalty Fee for Partially Permitted/Partially NonPermitted Signals Step 1: Use part 9, block A, of the DSE Schedule to establish subscriber groups to compute the base rate fee for wholly and partially permitted distant signals. Write “Permitted Signals” at the top of the page. Note: One or more permitted signals in these subscriber groups may be partially distant. Step 2: Use a separate part 9, block A, to compute the 3.75 percent fee for wholly nonpermitted and partially nonpermitted distant signals. Write “Nonpermitted 3.75 stations” at the top of this page. Multiply the subscriber group gross receipts by total DSEs by .0375 and enter the grand total 3.75 percent fees on line 2, block 3, of space L. Important: The sum of the gross receipts reported for each part 9 used in steps 1 and 2 must equal the amount reported in space K. Step 3: Use part 9, block B, to compute a syndicated exclusivity surcharge for any wholly or partially permitted distant signals from step 1 that is subject to this surcharge. Guidance for Computing the Royalty Fee for Carriage of Distant and Partially Distant Multicast Streams Step 1: Use part 9, Block A, of the DSE Schedule to report each distant multicast stream of programming that is transmitted from a primary television broadcast signal. Only the base rate fee should be computed for each multicast stream. The 3.75 Percent Rate and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge are not applicable to the secondary transmission of a multicast stream. You must report but not assign a DSE value for the retransmission of a multicast stream that is the subject of a written agreement entered into on or before June 30, 2009 between a cable system or an association representing the cable system and a primary transmitter or an association representing the primary transmitter. Name U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 19. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company FIRST SUBSCRIBER GROUP SECOND SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA Computation CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE of Base Rate Fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for Partially Distant Stations Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts First Group $ Gross Receipts Second Group $ Base Rate Fee First Group $ Base Rate Fee Second Group $ THIRD SUBSCRIBER GROUP FOURTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts Third Group $ Gross Receipts Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee Third Group $ Base Rate Fee Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee: Add the base rate fees for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) $ 0 0.00 0.00 CALL SIGN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27,319,677.68 DSE CALL SIGN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DSE Name BLOCK A: COMPUTATION OF BASE RATE FEES FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP CALL SIGN 0 DSE 9 62958 CALL SIGN DSE 0 0.00 0 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 19. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 FIFTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP SIXTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA Computation CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE of Base Rate Fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for Partially Distant Stations Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts First Group $ Gross Receipts Second Group $ Base Rate Fee First Group $ Base Rate Fee Second Group $ SEVENTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP EIGHTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts Third Group $ Gross Receipts Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee Third Group $ Base Rate Fee Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee: Add the base rate fees for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) $ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CALL SIGN DSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 CALL SIGN DSE 0.00 0.00 CALL SIGN 0.00 Name BLOCK A: COMPUTATION OF BASE RATE FEES FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP 0 0 9 DSE CALL SIGN DSE U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 19. Nonpermitted 3.75 Stations LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 FIRST SUBSCRIBER GROUP SECOND SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA Computation CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE of Base Rate Fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for Partially Distant Stations Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts First Group $ Gross Receipts Second Group $ Base Rate Fee First Group $ Base Rate Fee Second Group $ THIRD SUBSCRIBER GROUP FOURTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts Third Group $ Gross Receipts Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee Third Group $ Base Rate Fee Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee: Add the base rate fees for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) $ 0.00 0.00 Name BLOCK A: COMPUTATION OF BASE RATE FEES FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP 0 0 9 CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE 27,319,677.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 DSE CALL SIGN 0 0 CALL SIGN DSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 19. Nonpermitted 3.75 Stations LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 FIFTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP SIXTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA Computation CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE of Base Rate Fee and Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge for Partially Distant Stations Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts First Group $ Gross Receipts Second Group $ Base Rate Fee First Group $ Base Rate Fee Second Group $ SEVENTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP EIGHTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP COMMUNITY/ AREA COMMUNITY/ AREA CALL SIGN DSE CALL SIGN DSE Total DSEs Total DSEs Gross Receipts Third Group $ Gross Receipts Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee Third Group $ Base Rate Fee Fourth Group $ Base Rate Fee: Add the base rate fees for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 3, line 1, space L (page 7) $ CALL SIGN Name BLOCK A: COMPUTATION OF BASE RATE FEES FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP 0 0 9 DSE CALL SIGN DSE 0.00 0.00 CALL SIGN DSE 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CALL SIGN DSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 20. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 If your cable system is located within a top 100 television market and the station is not exempt in Part 7, you must also compute a Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. Indicate which major television market any portion of your cable system is located in as defined by section 76.5 of FCC rules in effect on June 24, 1981: Computation c of First 50 major television market c Second 50 major television market Base Rate Fee INSTRUCTIONS: and Step 1: In line 1, give the total DSEs by subscriber group for commercial VHF Grade B contour stations listed in block A, part 9 of Syndicated this schedule. Exclusivity Step 2: In line 2, give the total number of DSEs by subscriber group for the VHF Grade B contour stations that were classified as Surcharge Exempt DSEs in block C, part 7 of this schedule. If none enter zero. for Step 3: In line 3, subtract line 2 from line 1. This is the total number of DSEs used to compute the surcharge. Partially Step 4: Compute the surcharge for each subscriber group using the formula outlined in block D, section 3 or 4 of part 7 of this Distant schedule. In making this computation, use gross receipts figures applicable to the particular group. You do not need to show Stations your actual calculations on this form. Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . . . . Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs . . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs . . . . . Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 and enter here. This is the and enter here. This is the total number of DSEs for total number of DSEs for this subscriber group this subscriber group subject to the surcharge subject to the surcharge computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE SURCHARGE First Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Second Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs. . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs. . Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 and enter here. This is the and enter here. This is the total number of DSEs for total number of DSEs for this subscriber group this subscriber group subject to the surcharge subject to the surcharge computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE SURCHARGE Third Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ Fourth Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE: Add the surcharge for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 4, line 2 of space L (page 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Name BLOCK B: COMPUTATION OF SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP 9 FIRST SUBSCRIBER GROUP SECOND SUBSCRIBER GROUP THIRD SUBSCRIBER GROUP FOURTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17) ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 2020/2 FORM SA3E. PAGE 20. LEGAL NAME OF OWNER OF CABLE SYSTEM: SYSTEM ID# Southwestern Bell Telephone Company 62958 If your cable system is located within a top 100 television market and the station is not exempt in Part 7, you must also compute a Syndicated Exclusivity Surcharge. Indicate which major television market any portion of your cable system is located in as defined by section 76.5 of FCC rules in effect on June 24, 1981: Computation c of First 50 major television market c Second 50 major television market Base Rate Fee INSTRUCTIONS: and Step 1: In line 1, give the total DSEs by subscriber group for commercial VHF Grade B contour stations listed in block A, part 9 of Syndicated this schedule. Exclusivity Step 2: In line 2, give the total number of DSEs by subscriber group for the VHF Grade B contour stations that were classified as Surcharge Exempt DSEs in block C, part 7 of this schedule. If none enter zero. for Step 3: In line 3, subtract line 2 from line 1. This is the total number of DSEs used to compute the surcharge. Partially Step 4: Compute the surcharge for each subscriber group using the formula outlined in block D, section 3 or 4 of part 7 of this Distant schedule. In making this computation, use gross receipts figures applicable to the particular group. You do not need to show Stations your actual calculations on this form. Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . . . . Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs . . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs . . . . . Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 and enter here. This is the and enter here. This is the total number of DSEs for total number of DSEs for this subscriber group this subscriber group subject to the surcharge subject to the surcharge computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE SURCHARGE First Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Second Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . Line 1: Enter the VHF DSEs . . . . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs. . Line 2: Enter the Exempt DSEs. . Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 Line 3: Subtract line 2 from line 1 and enter here. This is the and enter here. This is the total number of DSEs for total number of DSEs for this subscriber group this subscriber group subject to the surcharge subject to the surcharge computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE SURCHARGE Third Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ Fourth Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE: Add the surcharge for each subscriber group as shown in the boxes above. Enter here and in block 4, line 2 of space L (page 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Name BLOCK B: COMPUTATION OF SYNDICATED EXCLUSIVITY SURCHARGE FOR EACH SUBSCRIBER GROUP 9 FIFTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP SIXTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP SEVENTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP EIGHTH SUBSCRIBER GROUP U.S. Copyright Office Form SA3E Long Form (Rev. 05-17)
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/Headquarters/Legal/CGHO/Civil Penalty Articles/Boating Under the Influence/I DRANK.pdf?ver=2017-07-24-151443-870.json	I DRANK, BUT I DIDN’T DRIVE Written by: CDR Evan Hudspeth Particularly during the holiday season, many have heard the warnings about not drinking alcohol and driving a vehicle . Hopefully it makes sense that this warning is also applicable to drinking alcohol and operating a vessel . In order to e stablish that a boating under the influence (BUI) violation has occurred, evidence should indicate that not only was the subject under the influence, but also that the subject was operating a vessel. Sometimes a recreational boater will respond to the BUI allegation admitting the first element (being under the influence), but disputing the second (operating a vessel). These arguments often fail to focus on the significant issues because the boater does not have a good understanding of Title 33, Code of Fede ral Regulations, Part 95 (33 CFR § 95.001 and following), which sets forth the regulatory framework by which a person is determined to be operating a vessel under the influence. First, a few definitions are necessary in order to fully understand the terms the Hearing Officer will consider when deciding if a violation has occurred. According to 33 CFR § 95.010, a “ Vessel includes every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on w ater.” So it is quite likely that, besides a motorboat, a sailboat, a rowboat, or a raft could also be considered a vessel. Additionally, “ Underway means that a vessel is not at anchor, or made fast to the shore, or aground.” So even if a vessel is driftin g, it is still considered underway. If the boater was on a vessel, and the vessel was underway, as those terms are defined by the regulations, the Hearing Officer will next determine whether or not the boater was operating the vessel. According to 33 CFR § 95.015, “... an individual is considered to be operating a vessel when... The individual has an essential role in theoperation of a recreational vessel underway, including but not limited to navigation of the vessel or control of the vessel’s propulsion sys tem.” Although some examples are given, the term “an essential role” is not defined. Therefore evidence that describes the specific circumstances must be considered to determine operation of the vessel. Simply having a “designated driver” at the controls does not exclude another from also operating the vessel. If physical actions (handling the oars, sails, throttle, rudder, tiller, or helm) or verbal directions (where to go, or how to operate) are involved, then the charged boater can be considered to have had “an essential role” in the operation of the vessel. Other considerations (when provided) include the purported operator’s (and/or charged boater’s) age, experience level, and familiarity with the area. So, before alleging a violation, or disputing a BUI charge, consider the applicable regulations discussed above, and ensure your evidence or arguments are focused on the matters that will really tend to prove or dispute the alleged violation.
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ohrp-international-compilation-2021-north-america.pdf.json	# International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Compiled By: ## Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) # International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition # North America Compiled By: Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition ## NORTH AMERICA Last Updated: November 2021 2 C ompiled By: Off i ce for Human Research Protections (OHRP) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) PU RPOSE The International Compilation of Human Research Standards enumerates over 1,000 laws, regulations, and guidelines (collectively referred to as “standards”) that govern human subject protections in 131 countries, as well as standards from various internatio nal and regional organizations. First published in 2005, the Compilation is intended for use by researchers, IRBs/Research Ethics Committees, sponsors, and others who are involved in human subjects research protections around the world. Collaborators from around the world, some who are acknowledged at the end of the Compilation, provided updates (or confirmations of prior listings), which are reflected in the hundreds of changes entered into this Edition. However, not all countries provided corroboration, so some of the information contain in this document may be outdated or incomplete (please see disclaimer below). ORGANIZATION This document only includes North America . To access the complete International Compilation, please visit: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/international/compilation- human - research -standards/index.html . You may jump to a specific country by clicking its name in the Table of Contents. This document is organized by world region in alphabetical order: Africa, Asia/Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East/North Africa, and North America. Under each region, you will find the countries organized also in alphabetical order. F or each country, the information is then categorized as it relates to: 1. General, i.e. , applicable to most or all types of human subjects research 2. Drugs, Biologics, and Devices 3. Clinical Trial Registries 4. Research Injury 5. Social - Behavioral Research 6. Privacy/Da ta Protection 7. Human Biological Materials 8. Genetic 9. Embryos, Stem Cells, and Cloning These nine categories often overlap, so it may be necessary to review other categories for a more complete understanding of a country’s standards. The information under these nine categories is divided into Key Organizations and Relevant Standards. Key Organizations may include governmental and non-governmental organizations. Relevant Standards may include, laws, legislations, regulations, guidance, official opinions or positions, etc . Since the meaning of these terms often vary significantly by county, the y all have been grouped together under Relevant Standards, regardless to whether they include mandatory requirements or voluntary guidelines. Where possible, a link has been provided to specific Key Organizations and Relevant Standards. In many cases, the documents and webpages are available in English. When the URL links to a non-English website or document, an online language translator usually can render an English version. Many operating systems may also be able to translate a document or webpage. For example, in Chrome, you may be able to right click a document or page and select “translate to [your native language] .”International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition 3 TOPICS NOT COVERED I n orde r to focus its scope to human research protections, the International Compilation of Human Research Stand ards attempts to not include: 1. Standards from the state, provincial, or local levels 2. Enabling legislation, i.e., laws that authorize an agency to promulgate human subjects standards, but do not direct the content of those regulations 3. Laws, regulations, or guidelines that are disease -specific or focus on research integrity, clinical bioethics, product liability, clinical trial inspection procedures, intellectual property, good manufacturing practice, bioequivalence testing, or informed consent in clinical p ractice 4. Ethics codes of academic, medical, or other professional organizations – see the Ethics Codes Collection: http://ethics.iit.edu/ecodes/about 5. Working papers, drafts, commentaries, or discussion papers NEW STANDARDS, UPDATES, AND BROKEN LINKS To request inclusion of a new standard in the Compilation, or to provide updated information or report broken links, please contact OHRP - Edu@hhs.gov . If you would like to provide information for a country not currently included in the Compilation, we would love to hear from you. Please contact us at OHRP -Edu@hhs.gov . DISCLAIMER Although this Compilation contains information of a legal nature, it has been developed for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinions as to the current operative laws, regulations, or guidelines of any jurisdiction. In addition, because new standards are issued on a continuing basis, this Compilation is not an exhaustive source of all current applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines relating to human subject protections. The information contain in this Compilation may incomplete or outdated. While in-country persons have been requested to review listings to assure their accuracy and completeness, researchers and other individuals should check with local authorities and/or research ethics committees before commencing research activities. Last Updated: November 2021International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 4 ### TABLE OF CONTENTS NORTH AMERICA ................................................................................................ ................................ ......... 5 C anada ................................................................................................ ................................ ........................... 5 U nited States ................................................................................................ ................................ ................. 7 ACK NOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 15International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 5 ### NORTH AMERICA – Canada N OTE : Several Canadian provinces and territories also have human subject research standards. For an overview of clinical research r egulations in Canada, see the ClinRegs report: https://clinregs.niaid.nih.gov/country/canada ### General Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html  National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces: https://www.canada.ca/en/department- national defence.html  Correctional Service of Canada: http://www.csc - scc.gc.ca/index -eng.shtml ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2-2018- en - interactive -final.pdf  National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, Research Involving Human Subjects (1998): http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about- policies - standards - defence - admin - orders - directives -5000/5061- 0.page  Correctional Service of Canada: Commissioner’s Directive - Research: DCOO9 (2017): http://www.csc - scc.gc.ca/acts - and -regulations/009- cd -en.shtml ### D rugs , Biologics, and Devices Drugs Key Organizations  Health Canada, Therapeutic Products Directorate: http://www.hc -sc.gc.ca/ahc- asc/branch dirgen/hpfb-dgpsa/tpd-dpt/index-eng.php  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations (1024 – Clinical Trials) (2001): http://www.hc -sc.gc.ca/dhp- mps/alt_formats/hpfb -dgpsa/pdf/compli-conform/1024-eng.pdf  Health Canada, Good Clinical Practice, Various: https://www.canada.ca/en/health canada/services/drugs - health -products/compliance-enforcement/good- clinical - practices.html  PRE, Tri -Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition, Chapter 11: Clinical Trials (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2-2018- en interactive -final.pdf ### D evices Key Organizations  Health Canada, Medical Devices: http://www.hc -sc.gc.ca/dhp- mps/md - im/index -eng.php ### R elevant Standards  Medical Devices Regulations (SOR/98 -282) (1998): http://laws lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-98-282/FullText.htmlInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 202 1 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 6 ### C linical Trial Registries Key Organizations  Health Canada Clinical Trial Database: http://www.hc - sc.gc.ca/dhp mps/prodpharma/databasdonclin/index - eng.php  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, Chapter 11.D. (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - in teractive - final.pdf ### R esearch Injury Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical C onduct for Research Involving Humans, Chapter 3, Article 3.2. (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - interactive - final.pdf ### S ocial - Behavio ral Research Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Inv olving Humans, Chapter 10. (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - interactive - final.pdf ### P rivacy/Data Protection N OTE : Each of the Canadian provinces and territories also has enacted privacy legislation. ### Key Organizations  Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC): https://www.priv.gc.ca/en  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethic s (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html  Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR): http://www.cihr - irsc.gc.ca/e/193.html ### R elevant Standards  Pri vacy Act, Sections 7 - 8 (1983): http://laws - lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/P - 21.pdf  Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, Articles 5 and 7 (2001): http://laws lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/P - 8.6.pdf  OPC: SOR/2001 - 6, SOR/2001 - 7, and SOR/2001 - 8 (September 29, 2014)  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition, Chapter 5: Privacy an d Confidentiality (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - interactive - final.pdf  CIHR Best Practices for Protecting Privacy in Health Resea rch (2005): http://www.cihr irsc.gc.ca/e/documents/et_pbp_nov05_sept2005_e.pdfInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 202 1 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 7 ### H uman Biological Materials Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition, Chapter 12: Human Biological Materials Including Materials Related to Human Reproduction (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - interactive - final.pdf ### G enetic Research Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html  Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee (CBAC): http://www.hc - sc.gc.ca/sr sr/biotech/role/strateg - eng.php  Health Canada, Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate: http://www.hc - sc.gc.ca/ahc asc/branch - dirgen/hpfb - dgpsa/bgtd - dpbtg/index - eng.php ### R elevant Standards  PRE, Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition, Chapter 13: Human Genetic Research ( 2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en - interactive - final.pdf ### E mbryos, Stem Cells, and Cloning Key Organizations  Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE): https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/home.html ### R elevant Standards  Assisted Human Reproduction Act (2004): http://laws - lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A - 13.4/  Assisted Human Reproduction (Section 8 Consent) Regulations (2007): http://laws lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR - 2007 - 137/index.html  PRE: Tri - Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2 nd Edition, Chapter 12, Sections E and F (2018): http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2 - 2018 - en interactive - final.pdf ### N ORTH AMERICA – United States For an overview of clinical research regulations in the United States, see the ClinRegs report: https://clinregs.niaid.nih.gov/country/united - states ### General Key Organization and Relevant Standards  Public Health Service Act (1993): http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/PL103 - 43.pdf  HHS, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (FDA is not a Common Rule agency): https://www.fda.gov/International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 8  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP): www.hhs.gov/ohrp/ a. 45 CFR 46, Subparts A (the Common Rule), B, C, D, and E (2018): https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations- and -policy/regulations/45- cfr -46/index.html b. OHRP, Human Research Protections Guidance, v arious: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations- and -policy/guidance/index.html  Subpart A of the HHS regulations for the protection of research participants at 45 CFR 46 is often referred to as the Common Rule be cause various Federal departments and agencies have adopted the same regulations . For a list of U.S. Federal departments and agencies that have adopted the Common Rule and citations to their relevant regulations see: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/compliance- and reporting/common- rule - agencies -contacts/index.html  Other relevant standards by U.S. Federal departments and agencies include: 1. Agency for Internati onal Development: https://www.usaid.gov/ a. Protection of Human Subjects in Research Supported by USAID: A Mandatory Reference for ADS Chapter 200 (2015): https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1864/200mbe.pdf 2. Central Intelligence Agency: https://www.cia.gov/index.html : a. Executive Order 12333, adopting 45 CFR 46 Subparts A, B, C, and D 3. Department of Defense, Directorate of Human Research Protections (DOHRP): https://rt.cto.mil/ddre - rt/dd -rtl/hsd/hrp/ a. United States Code Title 10, Section 980: Limitation on Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects b. DoDI 3216.02 (2011): https://rcb.tamu.edu/humans/resources/DOD%20Directive%20321602p.pdf 4. Department of Education: https:// www.ed.gov/ a. Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (1974) b. Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (1974) c. 34 CFR 98 (1984) d. 34 CFR 99 (2000) e. 34 CFR 350.4(c) (1991) f. 34 CFR 356.3(c) (1991) 5. Department of Energy: http://science.energy.gov/ber/human- subjects/ a. DOE Order 443.1B b. DOE Order 481.1 6. Department of Homeland Security: https:// www.dhs.gov/ a. Public Law 108-458, Section 8306 b. DHS Directive 026 -04, Human Subjects Research (2007): https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/foia/mgmt - directive -026-04-protection-of-humansubject s.pdfInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 9 7. Bureau of Prisons: https:// www.bop.gov a. 28 CFR 22 Privacy Regulation (1976): http://www. ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title28/28cfr22_main_02.tpl b. 42 U.S.C. § 3789g Confidentiality of Information (1984): http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010- title42/html/USCODE -2010- title42 -chap46- subchapVIII-sec3789g.htm c. 28 CFR 46 (1991), Subpart A: http://www.e cfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title28/28cfr46_main_02.tpl 8. Department of Veterans Affairs: a. Office of Research Oversight (ORO): http://www.va.gov/oro/ b. Office of Research and Development: http:// www.research.va.gov c. 38 CFR 17.85 (1998) d. VA, Policies, Human Research , various: https://www.research.va.gov/resources/policies/human_research.cfm 9. Environmental Protection Agency, Program in Human Research Ethics: https://www.epa.gov/osa/basic- information -about-human- subjects - research -0 a. Subpart A: Basic EPA Policy for Protection of Subjects in Human Research Conducted or Supported by EPA (Common Rule) b. Subpart B: Prohibition of Research Conducted or Supported by EPA Involving Intentional Exposure of Human Subjects who are Children or Pregnant or Nursing Women (2006) c. Subpart C: Observational Research: Additional Protections for Pregnant Women and Fetuses Involved as Subjects in Observational Research Conducted or Supported by EPA (2006) d. Subpart D: Observational Research: Additional Protections for Children Involved as Subjects in Observational Research Conducted or Supported by EPA (2006) e. Subpart K: Basic Ethical Requi rements for Third - Party Human Research for Pesticides Involving Intentional Exposure of Non-pregnant, Non-nursing Adults (2013) f. Subpart L: Prohibition of Third-Party Research Involving Intentional Exposure to a Pesticide of Human Subjects who are Children or Pregnant or Nursing Women (2013) g. Subpart M: Requirements for Submission of Information on the Ethical Conduct of Completed Human Research (2013) h. Subpart O: Administrative Actions for Noncompliance (2013) i. Subpart P: Review of Proposed and Completed Human Research (2013) j. Subpart Q: Standards for Assessing Whether to Rely on the Results of Human Research in EPA Actions (2013) k. Scientific and Ethical Approaches for Observational Exposure Studies (2008): https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P10012LY.PDF?Dockey=P10012LY.PDF l. EPA Order 1000.17A: Policy and Procedures on Protection of Human Subjects in EPA Conducted or Supported Research (2016): https://www.epa.gov/osa/epa- order -100017- policy- and - procedures -protection-human- research - subjects - epa - conducted -orInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 10 ### Drugs, Biologics, and Devices Drugs and Biologics Key Organizations  Food and Drug Administration: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs and https://www.fda.gov/vaccinesblood-biologics ### R elevant Standards  Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 USC Sections 355 and 371 (2012): https://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title21&edition=prelim  Public Health Service Act, 42 USC Section 262 (199 8): https://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title42&edition=prelim  21 st Century Cures Act, Section 3024 (2016): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW114publ255/pdf/PLAW-114publ255.pdf  FDA, Regulations, Good Clinical Practice and Clinical Trials , various : https://www.fda.gov/scienceresearch/clinical - trials - and -human- subject -protection/regulations-good- clinic al - practice - and - clinical trials  FDA, Good Clinical Practice and Human Subject Protection in FDA- Regulated Clinical Trials: https://www.fda.gov/science- research/science - and - research - special - topics/clinical - trials - and -humansubject -protection  FDA, Drugs, Guidance, v arious: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance- compliance -regulatoryinformation/guidances-drugs  FDA, Biologics, Guidance, various: https://www.fda.gov/vacci nes -blood-biologics/guidancecompliance -regulatory- information -biologics ### D evices Key Organizations  Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health : https://www.fda.gov/Medical- Devices ### R elevant Standards  Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 USC Sections 355 and 371 (2012): https://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title21&edition=prelim  21 st Century Cures Act, Section 3024 (2016): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW114publ255/pdf/PLAW-114publ255.pdf  FDA, Regulations, Good Clinical Practice and Clinical Trials , various : https://www.fda.gov/scienceresearch /clinical - trials - and -human- subject -protection/regulations-good- clinical - practice - and - clinical trials  FDA, Good Clinical Practice and Human Subject Protection in FDA- Regulated Clinical Trials: https://www.fda.gov/science- research/science - and - research - special - topics/clinical - trials - and -humansubject -protection  FDA, Devices, Guidance, Various: https://www.fda.gov/medical- devices/device -advicecomprehensive-regulatory- assistance/guidance -documents- medical - devices - and - radiation - emitting productsInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 202 1 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 11 ### C linical Trial Registries Key Organizations  Food and Drug Administration: https://www .fda.gov/science - research/clinical - trials - and - human subject - protection/fdas - role - clinicaltrialsgov - information  National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home  Office of Research Oversight (ORO): http://www1.va.gov/oro/ ### R elevant Standards  Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, Section 113 (1997): https://www.fda.gov/regulatory - information/selected - amendments - fdc - act/food - and - drug administration - modernization - act - fdama - 1997  Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act, Section 801 (2007): https://www.fda.gov/regulatory - i nformation/selected - amendments - fdc - act/food - and - drug administration - amendments - act - fdaaa - 2007  Clinical Trials Regulation and Results Information Submission, 42 CFR 11 (2016): https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/09/21/2016 - 22129/clinical - trials - registration - and results - information - submission  NIH Policy on the Dissemination of NIH - Funded Clinical Trial In formation (2016): https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/09/21/2016 - 22379/dissemination - of - nih - funded clinical - trial - information  FAQ s on ClinicalTrials.gov: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/manage - recs/faq  Department of Veterans Affairs, FAQ: http://www.research.va.gov/resources/ORD_Admin/clinical_trials/registration - faq.pdf  OHRP, Clinical Trial Informed Consent Form Posting (45 CFR 46.116(h)) : https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations - and - policy/informed - consent - posting/index.html ### R esearch Injury Key Organizations  Various ### R elevant Standards  Department of Health and Human Services, Sections 116(a)(6) and (7) of the Common Rule: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files/revised - common - rule - reg - text - unofficial - 2018 - requirements.pdf  Department of Veterans Af fairs, 38 CFR 17.85: Treatment of Research - Related Injuries to Human Subjects: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR - 2013 - title38 - vol1/pdf/CFR - 2013 - title 38 - vol1 - sec17 - 85.pdf  Department of Veterans Affairs, Handbook 1200.5, Appendix F, Paragraph 2a(11) ### S ocial - Behavioral Research Key Organizations  VariousInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 202 1 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 12  All Common Rule agencies, 45 CFR 46 and applicable subparts: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files/revised - common - rule - reg - tex t - unofficial - 2018 - requirements.pdf  National Science Foundation, FAQs and Vignettes: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/hsfaqs.jsp ### P rivacy/Data Protection Key Organizations  Various ### R elevant Standards  All Common Rule agencies, Common Rule at 45 CFR 46.111(a)(7) (2018): https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files /revised - common - rule - reg - text - unofficial - 2018 - requirements.pdf  Department of Justice, Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (1974): http://www.justice.gov/opcl/privacyact1974.htm  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)(1996): https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW 104publ191/cont ent - detail.html  HIPAA Privacy Rule, 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, Subparts A and C (2002): http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/h ipaa/administrative/privacyrule/index.html  HIPAA Security Rule, 45 CFR parts 160, 162, and 164 (2009): http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/securityrule/index.html  HIPAA Breach Notificati on Rule, 45 CFR §164.400 - 414: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/breachnotificationrule/index.html  HHS, OCR, 21st Century Cures Act Res earch Guidance on Activities Preparatory to Research (2017): https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/remote - access - research - 12 - 15 - 17.pdf  HHS, OCR, 21st Century Cur es Act Research Guidance o n Streamlining Authorization (2018): https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hipaa - future - research - authorization - guidance 06122018%20v2.pdf  HHS, OCR, Various: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for - professionals/special - topics/research/index.html and https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for - professionals/faq/research - uses - and - disclosures  Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act (CIPSEA) (2002): http://www.eia.gov/cipsea/cipsea.pdf  He alth Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act (2009): https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW - 111publ5/pdf/PLAW - 111publ5.pdf  NIH Policy on Certificates of Confidentiality (2017): https://humansubjects.nih.gov/coc/index  NIH, HIPAA Resources, v arious: http://privacyruleandresearch.nih.gov/  Agenc y for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Confidentiality in AHRQ - Supported Research (2018): https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice - files/NOT - HS - 18 - 012.html  E - Gove rnment Act of 2002, Public Law 107 - 347: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW 107publ347/pdf/PLAW - 107publ347.pdfInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 202 1 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 13 ### H uman Biological Materials Key Organizations  Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP): http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/ ### R elevant Standards  Guidance, various: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations - and - policy/guidance/biological - materials and - data/index.html ### G enetic Research Key Organizations  FDA, Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Device Evaluation and Safety: https://www.fda.gov/medical devices/products - and - medical - procedures/vitro - diagnostics  FDA, Center for Biologics Research and Evaluation (CBER): https://www.fda.gov/about - fda/fda organization/center - biologics - evaluation - and - research - c ber  HHS, Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP): http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/  HHS, NIH, Office of Science Policy, Biosafety, Biosecurity, and Emerging Biotechnology Policy Division: https://osp.od.nih.gov/biosafety - biosecurity - and - emerging - biotechnology/  HHS, Office for Civil Rights (OCR): https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for - professionals/special topics/genetic - information/index.html ### R elevant Standards  Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) (2008): https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW 110publ233/content - detail.html  All Common Rule agencies: Common Rule at 45 CFR 46: h ttps://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sites/default/files/revised - common - rule - reg - text - unofficial - 2018 - requirements.pdf  FDA, Guidance on Informed Consent for In Vitro Diagnostic Device Studies Using Leftover Human Specimens That are Not Individually Identifiable (2006) : https://www.fda.gov/regulatory information/search - fda - guidance - docum ents/guidance - informed - consent - vitro - diagnostic - device studies - using - leftover - human - specimens - are - not  FDA, In Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) Device Studies, FAQs (2010): https://www.fda.gov/regulatory information/search - fda - guidance - documents/vitro - diagnostic - ivd - device - studies - frequently - asked questions  FDA, Application of Current Statutory Authorities to Human Somatic Cell Therapy Products and Gene Therapy Products. October 14, 1993. 58 FR 53248: https://www.fda.gov/media/76647/download  FDA, CBER - Specific, Various: https://www.fda.gov/vaccines - blood - biologics/other recommendations - biologics - manufa cturers/references - regulatory - process - office - tissues - and - advanced therapies  OHRP, Research on Transplantation of Fetal Tissue, Public Law 103 - 43 (1993): h ttp://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations - and - policy/guidance/public - law - 103 - 43/index.htmlInternational Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 14  OHRP, Guidance on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act: Implications for Investigators and Institutional Review Boards (2009): http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations- an d policy/guidance/guidance-on- g enetic -information-nondiscrimination-act/index.html  NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules (2019): https://osp.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/NIH_Guidelines.pdf  OCR, HIPAA Privacy Rule Provisions Implementing GINA Requirements at 45 CFR 160.103; 45 CFR 164.502(a)(5)(i); 45 CFR 164.514(g); and 45 CFR 164.520(b)(1)(iii)(C) ### Embryos, Stem Cells, and Cloning Key Organizations  National Academy of Sciences (NAS): http://www.nasonlin e.org/  National Institutes of Health: http://stemcells.nih.gov/ ### R elevant Standards  Executive Order 13505, Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells, Executive Order 13505 (2009 ): https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/DCPD200900136/pdf/DCPD-200900136.pdf  Research on Transplantation of Fetal Tissue. Public Law 103- 43 (1993): https://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/PL103-43.pdf  NAS, Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research (2005): http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11278  NAS, 2008 Amendments to the National Academies’ Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12260  NAS, 2010 Final Report of the National Academies Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Advisory Committee and 2010 Amendments to the National Academies Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12923  NIH, Guidelines on Human Stem Cell Research (2009): https://stemcells.nih.gov/research policy/guidelines- for - human - stem - cell - research  NIH, Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry (2016): https://grants.nih.gov/stem_cells/registry /current.htm  NIH, Various : http://stemcells.nih.gov/International Compilation of Human Research Standards 2021 Edition Last Updated: November 2021 15 ### ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The HHS Office for Human Research Protections thanks the following individuals for providing updates or confirmations of accuracy for the 2021 edition of the International Compilation of Human Research Standards. We are particularly grateful for the assist ance provided by Dr. Carla Saenz of the Pan American Health Organization, Dr. Barbara Sina of the Fogarty Division of International Training and Research, and Dr. Jonathan Kagan of the U.S. National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases. M ultinational Organizations: Comac Medical Ltd. Pan American Health Organization The European Council Africa: South Africa: Prof. Douglas R Wassenaar Zambia: Maureen Mupeta Kombe Asia/Pacific: Australia: Jeremy Kenner India: Dr. Nandini K. K umar Japan: Dr. Shimon Tashiro, Takashi Tsuchiya Malaysia: Dr. Nishakanthi Gopalan , Kuenyei Chin South Korea: Byung-in (B.I.) Choe, Kyoungtae Park , Yoon-Joung Chang , Sang - Min Park , Jinyoung Jeong , Seoyun Hong Europe: Global Regulatory Affairs team at Coma c Medical Ltd. Finland: Marko Ahteensuu Germany: Claudia Leuker Macedonia: Marija Todorovska Serbia: Slobodan Zabunovic Switzerland: The International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) , Daniel Simeon - Dubach , Celeste Sandoval Latin America and the Caribbean: Brazil: Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) - Brazil Chile: Dr. Juan Pablo Beca Grenada: Cheryl Cox Macpherson Mexico: M en C Ma. de los Dolores Delgado Ochoa Panama: Dr. Claude Vergès Peru: Dr. Carlos Zamudio Fuertes Middle East/North Africa: Jordan: Dr. Amal Al Omari and the King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman Turkey: Dr. Hamdi Akan O HRP would also like to thank other anonymous colleagues around the world for their invaluable contribution.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.state.gov/wp-json/oembed/1.0/embed?url=https:%2F%2Fwww.state.gov%2Ftimor-leste-national-day-2%2F.json	{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"United States Department of State","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov","author_name":"Michael Wingard","author_url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/author\/mwingard\/","title":"Timor-Leste National Day - United States Department of State","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"OmtBvQkoJ1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/timor-leste-national-day-2\/\">Timor-Leste National Day<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/timor-leste-national-day-2\/embed\/#?secret=OmtBvQkoJ1\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Timor-Leste National Day” — United States Department of State\" data-secret=\"OmtBvQkoJ1\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ \/\n\/! This file is auto-generated \/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp\|\|{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage\|\|(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t\|\|t.secret\|\|t.message\|\|t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))\|\|(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","description":"On behalf of the Government of the United States of America, I would like to congratulate the people of Timor-Leste as you celebrate the anniversary of your Restoration of Independence on May 20. In the 21 years since Timor-Leste restored its independence, the United States and Timor-Leste have enjoyed a strong friendship and partnership based […]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.state.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/S_statement_medium_edited.png","thumbnail_width":1200,"thumbnail_height":630}
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-632-bk-sp.pdf.json	Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Discontinue Prior Editions Social Security Administration ## Solicitud para una exención de recuperación de sobrepago Página 1 of 10 OMB No. 0960-0037 ### Cuándo llenar este formulario Llene este formulario si se aplica alguno de los siguientes: Piensa que no tiene la culpa del sobrepago y no puede pagar el dinero. ## • Piensa que no tiene la culpa y cree que el sobrepago es injusto por alguna otra razón. ## • Usaremos sus respuestas para decidir si tiene que devolver el dinero. Si decidimos que no tiene que devolver el dinero, lo llamamos una exención. ### Cuándo no completar este formulario Piensa que cometimos un error cuando decidimos que le pagaron en exceso, o si no está de acuerdo con la cantidad de su sobrepago. En su lugar, complete el formulario SSA-561 , Request for Reconsideration (Solicitud de reconsideración, solo disponible en inglés). ## • Está solicitando una audiencia ante un juez de derecho administrativo. En su lugar, complete el formulario HA-501-U5 , Request for Hearing by Administrative Law Judge (Solicitud de audiencia ante el juez de derecho administrativo, solo disponible en inglés). ## • Solo desea cambiar la cantidad de dinero que debe pagarnos cada mes. En su lugar, complete el formulario SSA-634-SP , Solicitud de cambio en la tasa de recuperación de sobrepago. 1. A. ¿Cuál es el nombre, el número de Seguro Social y el número de reclamo (si corresponde) de la persona con el sobrepago? Nombre: Número de Seguro Social: Número de reclamación: ## • Ha sido condenado por fraude relacionado con este sobrepago. ## • SECCIÓN 1 - PREGUNTAS SOBRE SU IDENTIDAD B. Si está llenando la solicitud de exención para la persona a la que se le sobrepagó, provea su nombre y parentesco con la persona. Nombre: Parentesco: IMPORTANTE: Por favor, conteste las siguientes preguntas de la manera más completa posible y presente cualquier documento de respaldo con su solicitud de exención. Si está ayudando a la persona que está solicitando la exención, conteste las preguntas como si esa persona estuviera llenando la solicitud. Si necesita más espacio para las respuestas, use la sección «Comentarios» en la página 7. Piensa que no tiene la culpa y su sobrepago es de $1,000 o menos. En su lugar, solicite una exención llamando al 1-800-772-1213 (oprima el 7 para español) o a su oficina local. Es posible que podamos procesar su solicitud rápidamente por teléfono. ## •¿Actualmente recibe pagos de Seguridad de Ingreso Suplementario (SSI, por sus siglas en inglés)? Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 2 of 10 ### SECCIÓN 2 - PETICIÓN PARA UNA EXENCIÓN Por favor, provea la fecha del aviso del sobrepago por el cual está solicitando la exención: (mes, día, año) C. B. 2. A. El sobrepago no fue mi culpa. No tengo los medios para devolver el dinero. El sobrepago es injusto por alguna otra razón. Por favor, explique: 3. ¿Está solicitando la exención del sobrepago completo, incluido el dinero que ya nos ha devuelto? 4. No Sí Díganos lo que sabe acerca de por qué el sobrepago ocurrió. Si hubo algún motivo por el cual no entendió o no pudo informarnos del cambio, explique el motivo. Por lo general, los sobrepagos ocurren cuando ocurre un cambio en su vida del que creemos que no nos enteramos a tiempo. Esto sucede por muchas razones y comprender su opinión nos ayuda a decidir su solicitud de exención. 5. ### SECCIÓN 3 - INGRESOS BASADOS POR NECESIDAD No Sí 6. Si es Sí , vaya a la página 9, firme, feche y proporcione su dirección y número de teléfono. Si es No , continúe llenando el resto de este formulario. 7. Un dependiente es una persona que depende de usted para su sustento y a quien puede reclamar en su declaración de impuestos. Si tiene un sobrepago del Título II, ¿usted o algún miembro dependiente de su hogar recibe actualmente alguno de los siguientes? • Pagos de Seguridad de Ingreso Suplementario (SSI, por sus siglas en inglés) • Asistencia Temporal para Familias Necesitadas (TANF, por sus siglas en inglés) • Pensión basada en la necesidad del Departamento de Asuntos de Veteranos (VA, por sus siglas en inglés) No Sí Si es Sí , vaya a la página 9, firme, feche y provea su dirección y número de teléfono. Por favor, provea prueba de la pensión TANF o VA. Si es No , continúe llenando el resto de este formulario. No Sí ¿Cuál es su motivo para solicitar una exención? (Marque todo lo que corresponda) ¿La cantidad total del sobrepago indicado en su carta es $1,000 o menos? No Sí Si es Sí , no es necesario que llene el resto de este formulario. Llame al 1-800-772-1213 (oprima el 7 para español) o a su oficina local y es posible que podamos procesar su solicitud de exención rápidamente por teléfono. Si es No , continúe llenando el resto de este formulario. Si es No , ¿está solicitando que la exención sea por la cantidad restante del dinero que nos debe?Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 3 of 10 ### SECCIÓN 4 - MIEMBROS DEL HOGAR 8. A. Si es un adulto y solicita una exención, enumere a su cónyuge y dependientes en esta sección. Un dependiente es una persona que depende de usted para su sustento y a quien puede reclamar en su declaración de impuestos. Llene las secciones 5, 6 y 7 con su información, la de su cónyuge y sus dependientes. Nombre Parentesco con usted Edad B. ¿Vive con usted algún adulto o menor que no pueda reclamar como dependiente en su declaración de impuestos? No Sí ¿Paga esta persona algún alquiler, facturas del hogar o cualquier otro gasto del hogar? No Sí, cantidad total mensual que recibe $ ### SECCIÓN 5 - BIENES - COSAS QUE USTED TIENE Y POSEE 9. A. ¿Cuánto dinero en efectivo tienen en su poder usted, su cónyuge y sus dependientes? $ Tipo de cuenta Nombre y dirección de la institución Nombre que aparece en la cuenta Saldo (balance) o valor Ingresos por mes (intereses o dividendos) Número de cuenta $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ TOTALES $ $ Documentos para respaldar su declaración: Para llenar las secciones 5, 6 y 7 de este formulario, debe consultar ciertos documentos que respalden sus declaraciones. Conteste todas las preguntas y envíe los documentos de respaldo para usted, su cónyuge y sus dependientes. Sus documentos de respaldo deben tener una fecha no mayor a 3 meses a partir de la fecha en que solicita una exención. Ejemplos de documentos de respaldo son: • Información actual sobre alquiler o hipoteca • Estado de cuentas bancarias recientes • 2 o 3 facturas recientes de servicios públicos, • Talonarios de su nómina de sueldos actuales médicos, tarjetas de crédito y seguros • Su declaración de impuestos más reciente • Cheques cancelados Si está llenando la solicitud de exención para un menor de edad, ¿los ingresos y bienes del menor ayudan con los alimentos y artículos del hogar? • Si es Sí , enumere a los padres del menor de edad y a otros dependientes de los padres en esta sección. Llene las secciones 5, 6 y 7 con la información de todos los miembros del hogar. • Si es No , solo proporcione la información del menor en las secciones 5, 6 y 7. B. Enumere todas las cuentas financieras de usted, su cónyuge y sus dependientes. Ejemplos de cuentas que debe enumerar incluyen: cheques, por internet (por ejemplo, PayPal), ahorros, certificados de depósito (CD), cuentas de jubilación individuales (IRA, por sus siglas en inglés), dinero o fondos mutuos, acciones, bonos, fondos de fideicomiso, tarjetas de débito prepagas o cualquier otra cuenta.C. ¿Usted, su cónyuge o sus dependientes son propietarios o tienen interés en algún negocio, propiedad u objeto de valor? 10. Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 4 of 10 A. ¿Usted, su cónyuge o sus dependientes poseen más de un vehículo familiar, incluido un automóvil, un vehículo utilitario deportivo (SUV, por sus siglas en inglés), un camión, una camioneta, una caravana, una motocicleta, un bote o cualquier otro vehículo? No (vaya a la 10.B) Sí (enumere todos los vehículos a continuación) Propietario Propósito principal del uso Valor actual Saldo (balance) del préstamo (si corresponde) Año, marca/modelo $ $ $ $ $ $ B. ¿Es usted copropietario de algún bien inmueble con alguien que no sea su cónyuge o un familiar dependiente? No (vaya a la 10.C) Sí (enumere a continuación) $ Propietario Cantidad de ingresos Valor actual en el mercado Saldo (balance) del préstamo (si corresponde) Descripción $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ TOTALES $ TOTALES $ No (vaya a la 11) Sí (enumere a continuación) $ Propietario Cantidad de ingresos Valor actual en el mercado Saldo (balance) del préstamo (si corresponde) Descripción $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ TOTALES $ D. ¿Puede vender o liquidar alguno de los bienes enumerados anteriormente? No Sí, expliqueProporcione el salario neto mensual total para los dependientes: Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 5 of 10 Nombre, dirección y teléfono del empleador(es): (Escriba «propio» si trabaja por cuenta propia) B. ¿Está empleado su cónyuge? Salario neto mensual o ingresos si trabaja por cuenta propia: ### SECCIÓN 6 - INGRESOS MENSUALES DEL HOGAR Ingrese su salario neto mensual, el de su cónyuge y sus dependientes. Anote la cantidad en la línea 12.A. Si necesita más espacio para las respuestas, utilice la sección «COMENTARIOS» en la página 7. 11. A. ¿Está usted empleado? No (vaya a la 11.B) Sí (proporcione información a continuación) Nombre, dirección y teléfono del empleador(es): (Escriba «propio» si trabaja por cuenta propia) Salario neto mensual o ingresos si trabaja por cuenta propia: $ $ No (vaya a la 11.C) Sí (proporcione información a continuación) C. ¿Alguno de sus dependientes está empleado, incluido el trabajo por cuenta propia? No (vaya a la 12) Sí (proporcione información a continuación) Nombres de los dependientes: $Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 6 of 10 Ingreso de los dependientes de la persona con el sobrepago (Total) Ingreso (Asegúrese de mostrar las cantidades mensuales a continuación) A. Salario neto mensual (de las preguntas 11.A, 11.B y 11.C) Ingreso de la persona con el sobrepago Ingreso del cónyuge de la persona con el sobrepago B. Beneficios del Seguro Social (jubilación, incapacidad, cónyuge sobreviviente, estudiantes, etc.) C. Pagos de Seguridad de Ingreso Suplementario (SSI, por sus siglas en inglés) D . C a n t i d a d d e p e n s i ó n ( p o r v e t e r a n o ( V A ) , m i l i t a r , s e r v i c i o c i v i l , f e r r o v i a r i a , e t c . ) $ $ $ $ $ TIPO TIPO $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 12. $ E. Beneficios del Programa de Asistencia Nutricional Suplementaria (SNAP, por sus siglas en inglés) F. Ingresos de bienes raíces, negocios, etc. (de las preguntas 10.B and 10.C) G. Pagos por habitación y/o pensión de una persona que no es un dependiente (de la pregunta 8.B). Escriba la cantidad en la columna de la persona con el sobrepago. H. Manutención de niños/ Pensión alimenticia I. Apoyo o contribuciones de cualquier persona, agencia u organización. J. Ingreso de otros bienes (de la pregunta 9.B) K. Otros ingresos (de cualquier fuente, explique en «COMENTARIOS» en la página 7) TOTALES: Gran Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 7 of 10 Si no está pagando sus facturas, explique qué facturas tienen saldos (balances) sin pagar en la sección «COMENTARIOS» a continuación. ### SECCIÓN 7 - GASTOS MENSUALES DEL HOGAR No incluya un gasto que se retenga de su cheque de pago (como seguro médico, manutención de niños, pensión alimenticia, embargos de salarios, etc.) Tipo de gasto A. Alquiler o Hipoteca (si el pago de la hipoteca incluye impuestos de propiedad u otros impuestos locales, seguros, etc., NO los incluya por segunda vez abajo) $ $ Cantidad mensual E. Alimentos (comestibles, incluidos alimentos comprados con beneficios SNAP y alimentos en restaurantes, trabajo, etc.) D. Seguros (de vida, salud, contra incendios, para la casa, de inquilino, de vehículo y cualquier otra póliza contra accidentes o de responsabilidad) I. Médico/Dental (recetas y equipo médico, si no lo paga el seguro) J. Matrícula y gastos escolares K. Pagos por orden judicial pagados directamente al tribunal TOTAL $ $ $ $ $ $ $ L. Pagos con tarjeta de crédito (indique pago mensual mínimo). NO incluya ningún gasto ya mencionado anteriormente B. Impuesto sobre la propiedad (estatal y municipal) (si está incluido en el pago de la hipoteca, no lo incluya nuevamente) $ 13. ### SECCIÓN DE COMENTARIOS Si sus cometarios son la continuación a una respuesta, primero escriba el número (y la letra, si corresponde) de la pregunta. IMPORTANTE: Revise, llene y firme las declaraciones en las páginas 8 y 9. $ C. Servicios públicos (gas, electricidad, teléfono (celular o de línea fija), internet, recolección de basura, agua, alcantarillado, aceite combustible, propano, carbón, madera, etc.) $ F. Artículos para el hogar y el cuidado personal (ropa, artículos de limpieza, artículos de aseo personal, visitas al salón de belleza, artículos para mascotas, etc.) G. Gastos de vehículo familiar (préstamo, arrendamiento, gasolina y reparaciones) $ $ H. Otros tipos de transportación (autobús, taxi, etc.)Por favor, revise lo siguiente, haga su selección y firme abajo: Entiendo que: Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 8 of 10 AUTORIZACIÓN DE LA ADMINISTRACIÓN DEL SEGURO SOCIAL PARA OBTENER LOS REGISTROS DE CUENTAS DE UNA INSTITUCIÓN FINANCIERA Y LA SOLICITUD DE REGISTROS Autorizo a cualquier custodio de registros en cualquier institución financiera a divulgar a la Administración del Seguro Social cualquier registro sobre mis transacciones financieras o el de la persona mencionada anteriormente a quien represento legalmente o cuyos beneficios administro. No autorizo a ningún custodio de registros en ninguna institución financiera a divulgar a la Administración del Seguro Social ningún registro sobre mis transacciones financieras o el de la persona mencionada arriba a quien represento legalmente o cuyos beneficios administro. Entiendo que, si no doy permiso para obtener registros financieros o si cancelo mi permiso, es posible que el Seguro Social no apruebe mi solicitud de exención. Firma / Autorización del cliente Dirección postal Fecha Fecha Dirección postal del representante Firma / Autorización del representante legal • Tengo derecho a revocar esta autorización en cualquier momento antes de que se divulgue cualquier registro; • La Administración del Seguro Social puede solicitar todos mis registros de cualquier institución financiera; • Cualquier información obtenida se mantendrá confidencial; • Tengo derecho a obtener una copia del registro que mantiene la institución financiera en relación con los casos en que ha divulgado registros a una autoridad gubernamental, a menos que los registros hayan sido divulgados debido a una orden judicial; • Esta autorización no es necesaria como condición para hacer trámites con ninguna institución financiera. • La Administración del Seguro Social solicitará registros para determinar la capacidad de pagar un sobrepago junto con una determinación de exención; • No proporcionar o revocar mi autorización puede resultar en que la Administración del Seguro Social determine, sobre esa base, que el ajuste o la recuperación del sobrepago no me privará de fondos para pagar mis facturas de comida, ropa, vivienda, atención médica u otros gastos necesarios; • Esta autorización está vigente hasta lo que ocurra primero entre: 1) una decisión final sobre si el ajuste o la recuperación de mi sobrepago me privaría de fondos para pagar mis facturas de comida, ropa, vivienda, atención médica u otros gastos necesarios; o 2) mi revocación de esta autorización mediante notificación escrita a la Administración del Seguro Social. A continuación, se muestra una autorización para que la Administración del Seguro Social obtenga la información de su cuenta financiera. Es posible que necesitemos acceder a sus registros financieros para determinar si podemos tomar en cuenta la exención a su sobrepago. IMPORTANTE: Si la persona que recibe el sobrepago es un menor de edad, un padre o tutor legal debe llenar y firmar el formulario en nombre del menor. Si un tribunal ha asignado a un tutor legal a un adulto, el tutor legal debe llenar y firmar el formulario. Los adultos que no tengan un tutor legal designado por el tribunal deben llenar y firmar el formulario, incluso si tienen un representante de beneficiario.Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 9 of 10 ### CLÁUSULA DE PENALIDAD, CERTIFICACIÓN Y LEY DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD Yo declaro bajo pena de perjurio que he examinado toda la información en este formulario, y en cualquier declaración o formulario adjunto, y que es cierta y correcta según mi entender. Yo comprendo que cualquier persona que a sabiendas provea una declaración falsa o engañosa sobre un hecho material en esta información, o cause que otra persona lo haga, comete un delito y puede enfrentar penalidades o encarcelamiento. FIRMA DE LA PERSONA CON EL SOBREPAGO O EL REPRESENTANTE DE BENEFICIARIO, TUTOR LEGAL O PADRE CON CUSTODIA Firma (nombre, inicial, apellido) Fecha (mes, día, año) Número de teléfono de su casa (incluya el código de área) Número de teléfono móvil Dirección postal (número y nombre de la calle, número de apartamento, número de apartado postal o ruta rural) Ciudad Estado Código postal SOLO se requieren testigos de la firma si esta declaración ha sido firmada con una marca (X). Si la firma es una marca (X), entonces dos testigos de la firma que conozcan a la persona que firma deben firmar abajo y escribir sus direcciones postales completas. 1. Firma del testigo 2. Firma del testigo Dirección (número y calle, ciudad, estado y código postal) Dirección (número y calle, ciudad, estado y código postal)- Esta recopilación de información cumple con los requisitos de 44 U.S.C. § 3507, según enmendada por la sección 2 de la Ley de Reducción de Trámites de 1995 . No tiene que contestar estas preguntas a menos que le mostremos un número de control de la Oficina de Administración y Presupuesto. Calculamos que le tomará alrededor de 60 minutos leer las instrucciones, reunir los datos y contestar las preguntas. ENVÍE O LLEVE CON USTED EL FORMULARIO LLENO A SU OFICINA LOCAL DEL SEGURO SOCIAL. Puede encontrar su oficina local del Seguro Social en el sitio de internet del Seguro Social en www.segurosocial.gov . Las oficinas también se encuentran en el directorio telefónico bajo Agencias del gobierno de los EE. UU., o puede llamar al Seguro Social al 1-800-772-1213 y oprima el 7 para español (TTY 1-800-325-0778). Puede enviar comentarios sobre nuestra estimación de tiempo antes mencionada o cualquier otro aspecto de esta recopilación, incluidos sugerencias para reducir el tiempo a: SSA, 6401 Security Blvd. Baltimore, MD 21235-6401. Solo envíe comentarios relacionados con nuestra estimación de tiempo u otros aspectos de esta recopilación a esta dirección, no el formulario lleno. Form SSA-632-BK-SP (09-2023) Página 10 of 10 Las Secciones 204 y 1631 de la Ley del Seguro Social, según enmendada, nos permiten recopilar su información o la información que usted envía en nombre de otra persona, que usaremos para tomar una determinación de exención sobre un sobrepago y para autorización para obtener información de la cuenta financiera. Proporcionar esta información es voluntario, pero no proporcionar toda o parte de la información puede impedirnos a ayudarle con la solicitud. Según lo permita la ley, podemos usar y compartir la información que usted envíe, incluso con otras agencias federales, empleadores, contactos de terceros y otros, como se describe en los usos de rutina en System of Records Notices (Avisos del sistema de registros [SORN, por sus siglas en inglés]) 60-0094, 60-0103 y 60-0320, disponible en https://www.ssa.gov/privacy (solo disponible en inglés). La información que envíe también se puede utilizar en programas de cotejo por computadora para establecer o verificar el derecho para programas de beneficios federales y para recuperar deudas bajo estos programas. Ley de Confidencialidad Recopilación y uso de información personal Declaración de la Ley de Reducción de Trámites
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.af.mil/News/Features/Tag/100486/tramtic-brain-injury/index.html.json	- Oct. 4, 2017The show must go on Butterflies begin to invade their stomachs as they step foot on the battered floor. The smell of painted wood fills their nose and the heat of the spotlight touches their skin like a tanning bed. A geyser of adrenaline shoots through their body increasing their heart rate to an all-time high. The
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions_tr2020/tables/table_run137.pdf.json	## Cost RateIncome RateAnnual Balance Cost RateIncome RateAnnual Balance 13.92 13.00 -0.92 261 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.05 12.90 -1.15 248 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.25 12.93 -1.32 233 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.4312.94 -1.49 217 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.6412.98 -1.67 200 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.88 13.00 -1.88 183 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.11 13.12 -1.99 166 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.35 13.15 -2.20 150 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.58 13.19 -2.39 133 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.8313.23 -2.61 115 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.02 13.24 -2.78 98 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.19 13.26 -2.93 81 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.3313.27 -3.07 63 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.45 13.28 -3.17 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.55 13.29 -3.26 27 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.6313.29 -3.33 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.69 13.30 -3.39 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.7413.30 -3.43 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.79 13.31 -3.48 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.82 13.31 -3.50 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.85 13.32 -3.53 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8613.32 -3.54 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8613.32 -3.54 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.85 13.32 -3.53 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8313.32 -3.51 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.82 13.32 -3.50 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8013.32 -3.48 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.79 13.32 -3.47 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.79 13.32 -3.47 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.78 13.32 -3.46 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.79 13.32 -3.46 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.79 13.32 -3.47 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.81 13.33 -3.48 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8313.33 -3.50 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.8613.33 -3.53 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.89 13.33 -3.56 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.9313.34 -3.59 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.98 13.34 -3.63 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.0313.35 -3.68 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.08 13.35 -3.73 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.1413.36 -3.79 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.2013.36 -3.84 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.2713.37 -3.90 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.3313.37 -3.96 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.39 13.38 -4.02 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.4613.38 -4.08 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.52 13.39 -4.14 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.59 13.39 -4.20 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.6613.40 -4.27 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.7313.40 -4.33 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.8013.41 -4.40 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.8713.41 -4.46 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9313.41 -4.51 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.98 13.42 -4.57 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.0413.42 -4.61 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.08 13.43 -4.65 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.11 13.43 -4.68 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.1413.43 -4.71 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.15 13.43 -4.72 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.15 13.43 -4.72 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.1413.43 -4.70 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.12 13.43 -4.69 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.09 13.43 -4.66 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.0713.43 -4.64 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.0313.43 -4.60 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.0013.43 -4.57 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9613.42 -4.53 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.92 13.42 -4.50 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9013.42 -4.48 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.88 13.42 -4.46 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.8713.42 -4.45 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.8713.42 -4.45 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.88 13.42 -4.46 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9013.42 -4.48 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9413.42 -4.51 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.9713.42 -4.55 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cost RateIncome RateActuarial Balance Cost RateIncome RateActuarial Balance 16.84%213.97%2-2.87%2 2035 -0.22%20.12%20.34%2 1 2 Office of the Chief Actuary Social Security Administration April 22, 2020 A change in the investment of trust fund reserves to include some equities affects the size of all summarized measures because increased "present-value" discounting reduces the weight on values for more distant future years. As a result, the magnitude of the current-law actuarial balance and the summarized effects of most proposals is reduced. Therefore, the size of the change in the long-range actuarial balance indicated here cannot be interpreted directly as a reduction in the shortfall. The actual reduction in the shortfall from equity investment depends on the amount of reserves that are available for investment throughout the period. For example, if provisions to change revenue or scheduled benefits resulted in a purely pay-as-you-go system (reserves just above zero throughout the period), then investment in equities would have no effect on the actuarial balance. Year of reserve depletion1 ## Summarized Estimates: Change from Current Law 2020 -2094 Under current law, the year of Trust Fund reserve depletion is 2035. Estimates based on Intermediate Assumptions of the 2020 Trustees Report ## Summarized Estimates: Proposal 2092 2093 2094 2095 2091 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2079 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2067 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2055 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2043 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2031 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 ## Detailed Single Year Tables Category of Change: Trust Fund Investment in Equities Proposal Change from Current Law Proposed Provision: G6. Invest 25 percent of the OASI and DI Trust Fund reserves in equities (phased in 2023-2032), assuming an ultimate 5.8 percent annual real rate of return on equities. Expressed as a percentage of current-law taxable payroll ## Trust Fund Ratio 1-1-year Expressed as a percentage of current-law taxable payroll ## Year
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www.cbp.gov/bulletins/38slipno30.pdf.json	Decisions of the United States Court of International Trade Slip Op. 04–51 KAIYUAN GROUP CORP., et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and PENCIL SECTION WRITING INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURERS ASS’N, et al., Defendant-Intervenors. Before: WALLACH, Judge Consol. Court No.: 02–00573 PUBLIC VERSION [Plaintiff Kaiyuan Group Corp.’s Motion for Judgment On the Agency Record is denied; Plaintiffs China First Pencil’s Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record Pursuant to Rule 56.2 is granted in part and denied in part; and the United States Department of Commerce’s Final Results are remanded] Dated: May 14, 2004 DeKieffer & Horgan, (James Kevin Horgan and Wakako Takatori) for Plaintiff Kaiyuan Group Corporation. Lafave & Sailer LLP, (Francis J. Sailer) for Plaintiffs China First Pencil Co., Ltd., et al. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General; David M. Cohen, Director; Ada E. Bosque, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch; and Philip J. Curtin, Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Counsel, for Defendant United States. Neville Peterson LLP, (George W. Thompson) for Defendant-Intervenors. OPINION WALLACH, Judge: I Introduction This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff Kaiyuan Group Corp.’s (‘‘Kaiyuan’’) Motion for Judgment Upon the Agency Record (‘‘Kaiyuan’s Motion’’), and Plaintiffs’, China First Pencil Co. (‘‘China First’’), Guangdong Provincial Stationary & Sporting Goods Import & Export Corp. (‘‘Guangdong’’), Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. (‘‘SFTC’’), and Three Star Stationary In65 dustry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Three Star’’), (collectively, ‘‘Plaintiffs China First’’), Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record Pursuant to USCIT R. 56.2 (‘‘China First’s Motion’’). Plaintiffs challenge certain aspects of the United States Department of Commerce’s (‘‘Commerce’’) decision in Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China; Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 67 Fed. Reg. 48,612 (July 25, 2002) (‘‘Final Results’’), as amended in Notice of Amended Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China, 67 Fed. Reg. 59,049 (Sept. 19, 2002) (‘‘Amended Final Results’’). The court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c) (1999). For the reasons set forth below, Kaiyuan’s Motion is denied; China First’s Motion is granted in part and denied in part; and Commerce’s Final Results are remanded for action consistent with this opinion. II Background In 1994, Commerce published an antidumping order for certain cased pencils from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 66,909 (Dec. 28, 1994) (‘‘Antidumping Order’’). On December 20, 2000, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of certain cased pencils sold during the period of review (‘‘POR’’), December 1, 1999, through November 30, 2000, from the PRC.1 Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review and Request for Revocation in Part, 65 Fed. Reg. 79,802 (Dec. 20, 2002). Commerce received requests for administrative review from Kaiyuan, Plaintiffs China First, and the Defendant-Intervenors.2 On January 31, 2001, Commerce published a notice initiating the review. Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 66 Fed. Reg. 8,378 (Jan. 31, 2001). 1The scope of the administrative review covered ‘‘certain cased pencils of any shape or dimension which are writing and/or drawing instruments that feature cores of graphite or other materials, encased in wood and/or man-made materials, whether or not decorated and whether or not tipped . . . in any fashion, and either sharpened or unsharpened.’’ Certain Cased Pencils From the People’s Republic of China; Preliminary Results and Rescission in Part of Antidumping Administrative Review, 67 Fed. Reg. 2,402, 2,403 (Jan. 17, 2002). The cores of a black lead pencils are composed of graphite, clay, wax, and other ingredients. See Kaiyuan’s Motion at 3. The particular combination of these materials determines the core’s hardness. Id. 2The Defendant-Intervenors are the Writing Instrument Manufacturers Association, Inc., Pencil Section (‘‘WIMA’’); Sanford Corp.; Dixon-Ticonderoga Corp.; Aakron Rule, Inc.; General Pencil Co.; Moon Products Inc.; Tennessee Pencil Co.; and Musgrave Pencil Co. 66 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Commerce published its notice of preliminary results and partial rescission of the 1999–2000 review on January 17, 2002. Certain Cased Pencils From the People’s Republic of China; Preliminary Results and Rescission in Part of Antidumping Administrative Review, 67 Fed. Reg. 2,402. (Jan. 17, 2002) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). In the Preliminary Results, the review was partially rescinded as to Guangdong and Three Star ‘‘because they made no shipments of the subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.’’ Id. at 2,403. China First, Kaiyuan and SFTC actively participated in the review. Id. Guangdong and Three Star stated that they did not export the subject merchandise during the POR. Id. A Commerce’s Investigation and the Parties’ Questionnaire Responses 1 China First Pencil and Three Star On February 12, 2001, Commerce issued antidumping questionnaires. China First indicated in its questionnaire response of April 11, 2001, that it was ‘‘a shareholding company listed on the Shanghai Stock exchange... owned by its approximately 25,000 shareholders... [and that m]ore that 47 percent of [its] shares were held by foreign (non-Chinese) shareholders.’’ China First’s Motion at 4. China First stated that one of its shareholders, Shanghai Light Industry Group Co., Ltd. (‘‘SLI’’), had administrative responsibility for the protection of Three Star’s state-owned assets. China First also stated that while it was under the oversight of SLI, it was neither affiliated with Three Star nor did it coordinate prices, suppliers, customers or business operations with Three Star. On May 8, 2001, Defendant-Intervenors provided Commerce with information regarding the relationship between Three Star and China First Pencil. Defendant-Intervenors stated that ‘‘[the documents included in the Joint Submission demonstrate that China First was provided wide-ranging, substantive oversight of Three Star by SLI, the common owner of both; there is nothing indirect or advisory about China First’s role.]’’ 3 Letter from DefendantIntervenors to Commerce (May 8, 2001), Defendant’s Opposition to 3Previously, during the 1998–1999 review, Defendant-Intervenors had urged Commerce to determine that Three Star was no longer a separate producer, but had become a single entity with China First. Although Commerce did not agree, it stated that it would ‘‘revisit this issue if additional evidence regarding [China First’s] and Three Star’s relationship is presented in a future review.’’ Issues and Decision Memorandum from The People’s Repiblic of China; Final Results and Partial Recission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 Fed. Reg. 37,638 (July 19, 2001), Comment 2. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 67 Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment Upon the Agency Record (‘‘Defendant’s Opposition’’), Appendix 2 at 8. On May 18, 2001, Commerce inquired in a supplemental questionnaire about the oversight functions of SLI as a state assets company. In its June 11, 2001, response to the supplemental questions, China First provided a copy of its 2000 annual report including its 1999 and 2000 audited financial statements. This audited report described the state-owned assets company SLI as an ‘‘affiliated party’’ and referred to Three Star, though not by name, as ‘‘an affiliate of SLI,’’ but did not indicate that China First had any connection with Three Star. China First’s Motion at 5. China First said it had a contractual arrangement with SLI to provide administrative guidance to Three Star relating to sanitation and environmental management issues, production safety measures, and oversight of Three Star’s yearbook. China First’s Motion at 5. Plaintiffs claimed that SLI ‘‘review[ed] the financial statements of its ‘subsidiary’ companies, owned by ‘All the People’ to ensure that independent company management is responsibly managing the businesses.’’ Id. at 5–6 During January and February of 2002, as part of its antidumping investigation, Commerce conducted verifications of China First and Three Star. After verification of China First’s balance sheet and investments ledgers, Commerce stated that ‘‘[w]e noted no investment which might indicate unreported [China First Pencil] affiliates, associates or subsidiaries.’’ Id. at 7. After the verification of Three Star, Commerce stated that ‘‘[w]e noted no investment by Three Star in [China First Pencil].’’ Id. at 8. In addition to its responses regarding its business structure, China First submitted surrogate value information for several raw materials, including pencil cores, on March 1, 2002. China First included a price list from an Indian producer of black and colored pencil leads. In its Preliminary Results, Commerce determined the values of cores using Indian tariff subheading 9610.20 and relied on the export price quotes, rather than on the Indian Import Statistics, to value cores. By letter dated April 12, 2002, the Defendant-Intervenors submitted a Chinese document which they said demonstrated that China First and Three Star had merged in 1997, three years before the POR. Defendant-Intervenors also noted the fact that China First and Three Star had offices in the same building in Shanghai. They asserted that the information concerning the two companies’ merger should have been provided to Commerce in response to Commerce’s questionnaires. The document, entitled ‘‘Order No. 1997 005’’ (‘‘the Order’’), was a PRC government agency4 order requiring the merger of Three Star and China First. It directed China First to absorb 4The order was issued by Shanghai Light Industy (Group) Co., Ltd., ‘‘a state-owned corporate entity that functioned like a government agency with administrative responsibility 68 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Three Star’s capital and form a group company to include Three Star, and it gave China First the role of managing Three Star and coordinating Three Star’s sales and purchases. As a result of its receipt of the Order, Commerce extended the deadline for submission of new factual information pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (2000),5 reopened the administrative record, and sought comments from interested parties regarding the Order. On May 24, 2002, Commerce issued a supplemental questionnaire to China First and Three Star that asked questions regarding the alleged merger between the two companies and accepted the Defendant-Intervenors submission. By letter dated June 4, 2002, China First and Three Star filed various documents in response to Commerce’s ‘‘opportunity allowing China First and Three Star to submit rebutting, clarifying and correcting information concerning the alleged merger between the two companies.’’ China First’s Motion at 10. On June 6, 2002, China First and Three Star responded to Commerce’s supplemental questionnaire of May 24, 2002. In their responses, the companies stated that they had never merged as claimed by the Defendant-Intervenors. On June 11, 2002, Defendant-Intervenors submitted to Commerce a series of photographs taken at a Chinese domestic trade fair held in Beijing from May 7–9, 2002, which they said showed China First and Three Star jointly marketing pencils. They also submitted a series of documents that were included in the administrative record of the previous review. Subsequently, on June 13, 2002, China First submitted a rebuttal including documents intended to explain the photographs. As a result of the Order, Commerce reevaluated the evidence regarding the relationship between Three Star and China First. Commerce found that ‘‘the degree of interaction between these two companies [was] far greater than... previously believed and the form this interaction takes corresponds very closely to Order 005 as it was for the over-sight of state owned assets that was the corporate successor to the former Shanghai Municipal State Assets Management Committee.’’ China First’s Motion at 4. 5 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 sets forth the procedures for requesting an extension of a time limit: (b) Extension of time limits. Unless expressly excluded by statute, [Commerce] may, for good cause, extend any time limit established by this part. (c) Requests for extension of specific time limit. Before the applicable time limit specified under § 351.301 expires, a party may request an extension pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section. The request must be in writing and state the reasons for the request. An extension granted to a party must be approved in writing. (d) Return of untimely filed or unsolicited material. (1) Unless the Secretary extends a time limit under paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretary will not consider or retain in the official record of the proceeding: (i) Untimely filed factual information, written argument, or other material that the Secretary returns to the submitter, except as provided under § 351.104(a)(2). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 69 issued by SLI, indicating that the order may have been effectively implemented.’’ Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Administrative Review of Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China; Final Results, Comment 12 at 36 (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). In addition, Commerce rejected Plaintiffs’ arguments that cores should be valued using private party price quotes and instead continued to use the Indian Import Statistics. Commerce considers the PRC a nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) country, thus, classifying it as an administering authority which did not operate on market principles of cost or pricing structures, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677(18) (2000).6 Commerce selected a surrogate market economy against which to value the PRC’s factors of production (‘‘FOPs’’). 2 Guangdong During this administrative review, Guangdong responded to Commerce’s questionnaires under protest and requested that Commerce terminate its review because it only exported pencils produced by Three Star, and thus, claimed it was excluded by the order during the period of review. See Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Cased Pencils From the People’s Republic of China and Thailand, 58 Fed. Reg. 64,548 (Dec. 8, 1993). Guangdong had been excluded previously from the original Antidumping Order because Commerce determined that Guangdong had a zero margin and it exported pencils produced by Three Star. Commerce explained that it excluded ‘‘from the application of any order issued imports of subject merchandise that are sold by... Guangdong and manufactured by the producers whose factors formed the basis for the zero margin.’’ 7 Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 6An NME is defined as ‘‘any foreign country that the administering authority determines does not operate on market principles of cost or pricing structures, so that sales of merchandise in such country do not reflect the fair value of the merchandise.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1677(18) (2000). 7Commerce stated that Guangdong was excluded because under the NME methodology: the zero rate for each exporter is based on a comparison of the exporter’s U.S. price and FMV based on the factors of production of a specific producer (which may be a different party). The exclusion, therefore, applies only to subject merchandise sold by the exporter and manufactured by that specific producer. Merchandise that is sold by the exporter but manufactured by other producers will be subject to the order, if one is issued. This is consistent with Jia Farn [Jia Farn Manufacturing Co. v. United States, 17 CIT 187 (1993)] which held that exclusion of merchandise manufactured and sold by respondent did not cover merchandise sold but not manufactured by respondent. Therefore, merchandise that is sold by China First or Guangdong but produced by another producer is subject to suspension of liquidation at the ‘‘all others’’ cash deposit rate. Final Determination, 59 Fed. Reg. at 55,631. 70 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 55,625, 55,631 (Nov. 8, 1994) (‘‘Final Determination’’). The Final Determination did not include the identities of the referenced producers, however, the antidumping order issued on December 28, 1994, excluded the exporter/producer combination China First/China First, and Guangdong/Three Star.8 Response Brief of DefendantIntervenors Pencil Section, Writing Instrument Manufacturers Association, et al., Pursuant to Rule 56.2 to Brief Filed by China First Pencil Co., Ltd., et al. at 4 (‘‘Defendant-Intervenor’s Response to China First’’). On July 11, 2001, Guangdong and Three Star responded to Commerce’s supplemental questionnaire and provided copies of their financial statements for 2000. Commerce found in its Final Results that the China First/Three Star entity was distinct from the Three Star entity which was excluded from the antidumping order. Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 1 at 3. Commerce decided not to exclude the Three Star/Guangdong sales chain from the order and to treat China First and Three Star as a single entity for the purposes of assigning the antidumping duty rate. Ultimately, Commerce assigned to Guangdong the PRC-wide rate with respect to its other sales. At the time of the initiation of the 1999–2000 review, the China-wide rate applicable to any company whose separate rate was not identified because it had never responded to Commerce’s questionnaires was 53.65 percent. Commerce calculated a zero antidumping duty rate for Guangdong’s exports to the United States of subject merchandise by Three Star and therefore excluded the Guangdong/ Three Star export/production channel from the order. 3 Kaiyuan and Laizhou Commerce issued questionnaires to Kaiyuan and in response, Kaiyuan and its supplier Laizhou City Guangming Pencil-Making Co., Ltd. (‘‘Laizhou’’), provided information concerning the latter’s Factors of Production (‘‘FOP’’) in a Section D questionnaire response. Laizhou produced the subject merchandise exported by Kaiyuan, and on April 27, 2001, Laizhou prepared the section D questionnaire 8Petitioners challenged Commerce’s Final Determination and Commerce requested and received a remand order from the Court to correct procedural deficiencies in the investigation, and thereafter conducted a remand investigation. The remand proceedings resulted in a determination that China First was selling pencils at less than fair value, but that Guangdong was not. The CIT and the Federal Circuit affirmed the remand determination. See Writing Instrument Mfrs. Ass’n, Pencil Section v. United States, 21 CIT 1185 (1997), aff’d without opinion, Writing Instrument Mfrs. Ass’n v. United States, 178 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 1998). Commerce issued an amended antidumping duty order that covered pencils made and exported by China First, which excluded the exporter/producer combination Guangdong/Three Star. Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China; Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value and Amended Antidumping Duty Order in Accordance with Final Court Decision, 64 Fed. Reg. 25,275 (May 11, 1999). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 71 response, which Kaiyuan filed with Commerce. Plaintiff Kaiyuan claimed that in its FOP data Laizhou included an inaccurate translation of the Chinese word ‘‘paraffin wax’’ that was unintentionally translated into ‘‘petrol wax.’’ Defendant-Intervenors suggested that Commerce seek additional information from Kaiyuan concerning Laizhou’s FOPs, because they believed that the information provided in the Section D response for a number of factors provided insufficient detail for surrogate valuation purposes. Commerce issued a request to Kaiyuan, and Kaiyuan and Laizhou provided copies of invoices. Subsequently, other parties to the review, but not Kaiyuan, submitted surrogate value data, including Indian and Indonesian import statistics. The data submitted to Commerce included Indian import statistics for HTS subheading 9610.20. In the preliminary results, Commerce determined the surrogate value of petrol wax using Indonesian import statistics for HTS item 2712.90.900, ‘‘other petroleum jelly.’’ Commerce determined the value of the cores using Indian tariff subheading 9610.20. Kaiyuan submitted a letter dated February 8, 2002, which requested that Commerce make corrections on behalf of Kaiyuan and Laizhou. Kaiyuan’s Motion at 3. In this letter, Kaiyuan identified the type of wax used in the production of its pencils as ‘‘ParafinicmaxMelting point: 53C–56C.’’ Id. B. Results of the Department of Commerce’s Investigation On July 25, 2003, Commerce published a notice announcing its final results.9 Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 48,612. In those results, Commerce changed its rescission of the review as to Guangdong and Three Star, found Three Star to be affiliated with China First, held that Three Star and China First were ‘‘sufficiently entwined to warrant assigning the combined entry a separate rate,’’ and assigned Three Star the same rate as it found for China First. Guangdong was assigned the China-wide rate of 123 percent, the rate based on calculations for a new respondent. On July 30, 2002, Kaiyuan asked Commerce to amend its Final Results to correct clerical errors reflected in the calculation of Kaiyuan’s dumping margin. Memorandum from Holly A. Kuga, Senior Director, Import Administration, Office IV to Bernard T. Carreau, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Group II, Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s republic of China -Final Results, Allegation of Ministerial Errors; Kaiyuan’s Motion for Judgment on the Agency 9By notice, dated May 8, 2002, Commerce indicated that it was not practicable to complete the review in the time allotted by statute and so extended the final results until July 16, 2002. 72 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Record, Appendix at 9 (‘‘Kaiyuan’s Appendix’’). Commerce rejected Plaintiff Kaiyuan’s request that cores should be valued using private party price quotes and continued to use Indian import statistics. Commerce rescinded the review with respect to Laizhou. Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 48,612. Additionally, on July 31, 2002, Plaintiffs China First filed a submission alleging that Commerce made ministerial errors. Subsequently, on August 5, 2002, the DefendantIntervenors submitted comments rebutting some of Plaintiffs allegations. Commerce found that the factual information submitted in support of Kaiyuan’s request for correction of ministerial errors was untimely. By a notice dated September 11, 2002, Commerce revised its Final Results, and amended the rates applicable to China First and SFTC, and consequently revised the China-wide rate to 114.9 percent. Amended Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 59,049. III Arguments A Plaintiffs China First Plaintiffs China First argue that Commerce’s finding that Three Star is effectively part of China First is without basis, unsupported by substantial evidence, and contrary to law. Additionally, they claim that Commerce erroneously initiated a review of Guangdong and then erroneously determined that Guangdong was not entitled to a separate rate, but rather the ‘‘China-wide’’ rate of 114.90 percent. This, they argue, effectively applied adverse facts available to Guangdong. Finally, Plaintiffs claim that Commerce erroneously used Indian import statistics to value black and color cores used by China First and SFTC’s suppliers. Defendant and Defendant-Intervenors’ claim that Commerce’s decision to initiate a review of Guangdong; assign Guangdong the PRC-wide margin rate; determine that China First and Three Star are sufficiently intertwined and should be considered a single entity for purposes of review; and determine the surrogate valuation for pencil cores using Indian import data are supported by substantial evidence and otherwise in accordance with law. B Plaintiffs Kaiyuan Plaintiffs Kaiyuan argue that Commerce’s use of a surrogate value for ‘‘petrol wax,’’ instead of ‘‘paraffin wax,’’ is neither in accordance with law nor supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. Nor, Plaintiffs Kaiyuan claim, is Commerce’s use of surrogate value for black pencil cores in accordance with law and supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 73 Defendant and Defendant-Intervenors claim that Commerce’s decision not to correct Plaintiffs Kaiyuan’s error, and Commerce’s utilization of data from Indian import statistics as the surrogate value for black pencil cores was supported by substantial evidence and otherwise in accordance with law. IV Standard of Review In reviewing Commerce’s antidumping determinations, the court ‘‘shall hold unlawful any determination, finding, or conclusion found . . . to be unsupported by substantial evidence on the record, or otherwise not in accordance with law.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(1)(B)(i) (1999); Fujitsu General Ltd. v. United States, 88 F.3d 1034, 1038 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Substantial evidence is defined as ‘‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’’ Timken Co. v. United States, 894 F.2d 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1990); Consol. Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229, 59 S. Ct. 206, 83 L. Ed. 126 (1938). ‘‘Substantial evidence supporting an agency determination must be based on the whole record, and a reviewing court must take into account not only that which supports the agency’s conclusion, but also ‘‘whatever in the record fairly detracts from its weight.’’ Melex USA, Inc. v. United States, 19 CIT 1130, 1132 (1995) (citing Universal Camera Corp v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 488, 71 S. Ct. 456, 95 L. Ed. 456 (1951)). However, the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from evidence contained in the record does not render Commerce’s conclusion unsupported by substantial evidence. Consolo v. Federal Maritime Comm’n, 383 U.S. 607, 620, 81 S. Ct. 1018, 16 L. Ed. 2d 131 (1966). The court determines whether Commerce’s interpretation and application of the antidumping statutes are ‘‘in accordance with law’’ by applying the two-step analysis prescribed in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842, 104 S. Ct. 2778, 81 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1984) (‘‘Chevron’’). Under the first step, the Court reviews Commerce’s construction of the statute to determine whether Congress has directly spoken to the question at issue. See id. at 842. If the statute unambiguously deals with the matter at issue, the court and the agency must give deference to Congress’s intent. Id. at 842–43. The court determines Congress’s intent by employing the ‘‘traditional tools of statutory construction,’’ by first examining the statute’s text and giving it its plain meaning, because a statute’s text is Congress’s final expression of its intent. Id. at 843 n.9. ‘‘If the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter.’’ Id. at 842 If, after employing the first prong of the Chevron two-step analysis, the court determines that the statute is silent or ambiguous as to 74 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 the issue, the court must then decide whether Commerce’s construction is permissible, rational, reasonable, and supported by the record as a whole. See id., 467 U.S. at 843; Koyo Seiko Co. v. United States, 24 CIT 364, 367 (2000). The court examines Commerce’s interpretation to determine whether it is reasonable by considering such factors as the express terms of the provisions at issue, the objectives of those provisions, and the objectives of the antidumping scheme as a whole. See Mitsubishi Heavy Indus. v. United States, 22 CIT 541, 545 (1998). V Discussion Commerce is required to impose antidumping duties on foreign goods that are being or are likely to be sold in the United States at less than fair value. 19 U.S.C. § 1673(1) (2000); Micron Tech., Inc. v. United States, 243 F.3d 1301, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Administrative reviews of antidumping duties are conducted in accordance with 19 U.S.C.§ 1675 (2000). Section 1675(a)(2)(A) requires that Commerce ‘‘determine . . . the normal value [‘‘NV’’] and export price [‘‘EP’’] (or constructed export price [‘‘CEP’’]) of each entry of subject merchandise, and . . . the dumping margin for each such entry.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1675(a)(2)(A). The dumping margin is the difference between the NV and the export price EP or CEP of the subject merchandise. 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) (2000). In a ‘‘market economy’’ antidumping case, the NV of a product is the price at which the foreign product is first sold in the exporting country. 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B)(i); Shakeproof Assembly Components Div. of Ill. Tool Works v. United States, 268 F.3d 1376, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2001). Antidumping cases involving an NME, however, require that the subject product’s NV be determined, if possible, as if a market economy country were involved. See Baoding Yude Chem. Indus. Co. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1335, 1337 (2001). The antidumping statute provides that if subject merchandise is exported from an NME, and ‘‘the administering authority finds that available information does not permit the normal value of the subject merchandise to be determined,’’ Commerce ‘‘shall determine the normal value of the subject merchandise on the basis of the value of the factors of production utilized in producing the merchandise.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1); Anshan Iron & Steel Co. v. United States, CIT , SLIP OP. 2003–83 at 8–9, 2003 Ct. Int’l Trade LEXIS 109 (July 16, 2003). Commerce may determine the NV of merchandise exported from an NME by valuing the FOPs based on the ‘‘best available information’’ in ‘‘one or more market economy countries that are at a level of economic development comparable to that of the non-market economy country’’ and that is a significant producer of U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 75 merchandise ‘‘comparable’’ to the subject merchandise, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1)–(2).10 Under the statute, Commerce has ‘‘broad discretion to determine the ‘best available information’ in a reasonable manner on a case-bycase basis.’’ Timken Co. v. United States, 201 F. Supp. 2d 1316, 1321 (CIT 2002). In general, Commerce derives the best available information from the answers to the questionnaires issued during the course of the investigation. In making its determination, Commerce must also assess the reliability of the NME company’s information and determine whether it does constitute the best available information for purposes of the FOP analysis. Olympia Indus., Inc. v. United States, 23 CIT 80, 83 (1999). Once the investigation is complete, Commerce instructs the United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (‘‘Customs’’) to assess antidumping duties. Commerce conducts its administrative review in antidumping proceedings involving NMEs, such as the PRC, with the rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control.11 Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F.3d 1401, 1405 (Fed. Cir. 1997). All companies are assessed a single antidumping duty deposit rate unless they demonstrate that they are independent of government control. Commerce’s instruction to Customs to apply the ‘‘all others’’ rate in an NME investigation is limited to companies that established their entitlement to a separate rate and expressed a willingness to participate at the investigative stage, but which Commerce did not investigate. This is unlike market economy cases, in which Commerce applies the ‘‘all others’’ rate to companies for which a company-specific rate 10Additionally, 19 C.F.R. § 351.408(c) (2000) provides for the calculation of NV for merchandise from NME countries. It states that: For purposes of valuing the factors of production, general expenses, profit, and the cost of containers, coverings, and other expenses... under section 773(c)(1) of the Act the following rules will apply: (1) Information used to value factors. [Commerce] normally will use publicly available information to value factors. However, where a factor is purchased from a market economy supplier and paid for in a market economy currency, [Commerce] normally will use the price paid to the market economy supplier. In those instances where a portion of the factor is purchased from a market economy supplier and the remainder from a nonmarket economy supplier, [Commerce] normally will value the factor using the price paid to the market economy supplier. 11 In its Preliminary Results, Commerce stated that ‘‘[i]n every case conducted by [Commerce] involving the PRC, the PRC has been treated as an NME.’’ Preliminary Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 2,405. None of the parties to this proceeding contested Commerce’s treatment of the PRC as an NME. Id. 76 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 is not applicable.12 See Transcom, Inc. v. United States, 294 F.3d 1371, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2002). A Commerce’s Determination that Three Star and China First Should be Collapsed and Considered a Single Entity is not in Accordance With the Law In its Final Results, Commerce concluded that China First and Three Star were ‘‘sufficiently intertwined to warrant assigning the combined entity a separate rate.’’ Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 12 at 35. Plaintiffs China First claim that Commerce erroneously found that Three Star was effectively part of China First. Although not required by the Tariff Act of 1930, Commerce has a practice of assigning multiple entities a single antidumping margin in a market economy case when it determines that the entities are affiliated during an antidumping review. See Hontex Enters., Inc. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1323, 1338 (CIT 2003); see also Antidumping Manual, Chapter 7 at 24. Commerce ‘‘collapses’’ those companies into one and then calculates a single weighted-average margin for those affiliated companies. In order to collapse companies in a market economy investigation, Commerce must first determine that the companies are affiliated. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677(33)(F), affiliated or affiliated persons means ‘‘two or more persons directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with, any person.’’ After determining affiliation, Commerce then examines whether the producers share ‘‘production facilities for similar or identical products.’’ 19 C.F.R. § 351.401(f)(1) (2000). Finally, Commerce determines whether there is ‘‘significant potential for the manipulation of price or production.’’ 19 C.F.R. § 351.401(f)(2). Commerce’s initial affiliation determination is concerned with the parties potential to impact decisions concerning price or production, while Commerce’s collapsing determination is concerned with the potential for manipulation of price or production by the parties. In making its collapsing determination, Commerce considers factors such as the level of common ownership, the presence of interlocking boards of directors, and the extent to which the companies are intertwined as evidenced by coordination of pricing decisions, 12 In 1991, Commerce determined that individual dumping rates were inappropriate in an NME country, and NME exporters would be subject to a single, countrywide antidumping duty rate unless they demonstrated legal, financial and economic independence from their government. Transcom, 294 F.3d at 1373; see Iron Construction Castings From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 56 Fed. Reg. 2,742, 2,744 (Jan. 24, 1991). This is referred to as the NME Presumption. Sigma Corp. v, United States, 20 CIT 852, 858 (1996). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 77 shared employees, or transactions between the companies.13 Id.; see Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. United States, 24 CIT 1357, 1374 (2000). Collapsing ‘‘has been reviewed by this court in the context of market economy producers,’’ and found to be a permissible interpretation of the antidumping statute. Hontex, 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1338. 1 Commerce’s ‘‘Sufficiently Intertwined’’ Methodology in this Case is not a Permissible Interpretation of the Antidumping Statute Commerce determined that China First and Three Star were a single entity and should receive a single antidumping duty margin. Defendant claims that the market economy regulatory ‘‘collapsing’’ analysis is not directly applicable because China First and Three Star are NME producers. Commerce stated that ‘‘antidumping cases involving nonmarket economies are unique because the centralized pricing and production decisions of these countries make internal prices and costs ‘inherently suspect.’ ’’ Issues and Decisions Memorandum, Comment 12 at 35. It also stated that because the statutes and regulations do not provide explicit guidance on how to analyze relationships between companies located in a nonmarket economy country, it analyzes their relationships on a case-by-case basis. Id. Defendant stated that when ‘‘determining whether [China First] and Three Star should be treated as a single entity, Commerce considered whether the companies were ‘sufficiently intertwined.’ ’’ Defendant’s Opposition at 15; see Issues and Decisions Memorandum, Comment 12 at 35. Because the collapsing statute is silent in the NME context, Commerce’s generally conferred authority permits the agency to address the ambiguity. See United States v. Mead, 533 U.S. 218, 229, 121 S. Ct. 2164, 150 L. Ed. 2d 292 (2001. A reviewing court ‘‘is obliged to accept Commerce’s position if Congress has not previ13The regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 351.401(f), provides that the affiliated producers in antidumping proceedings are treated as a single entity where: those producers have production facilities for similar or identical products that would not require substantial retooling of either facility in order to restructure manufacturing priorities and the Secretary concludes that there is a significant potential for the manipulation of price or production. (2) Significant potential for manipulation. In identifying a significant potential for the manipulation of price or production, the factors the Secretary may consider include: (i) The level of common ownership; (ii) The extent to which managerial employees or board members of one firm sit on the board of directors of an affiliated firm; and (iii) Whether operations are intertwined, such as through the sharing of sales information, involvement in production and pricing decisions, the sharing of facilities or employees, or significant transactions between the affiliated producers. 19 C.F.R. § 351.401(f). 78 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 ously spoken to the point at issue and the agency’s interpretation is reasonable.’’ Mead, 533 U.S. at 229; see Chevron 467 U.S. at 843–44. ‘‘The fair measure of deference to an agency administering its own statute has been understood to vary with circumstances, and courts have looked to the degree of the agency’s care, its consistency, formality, and relative expertness, and to the persuasiveness of the agency’s position.’’ Mead, 533 U.S. at 228; see Chevron, 467 U.S. at 842–43. To uphold Commerce’s NME collapsing methodology, Commerce must have clearly articulated which set of factors formed the basis of its collapsing determination. See Hontex, 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1341 (CIT 2003). Commerce has not articulated a cognizable procedure for collapsing NME companies nor has it followed its former methodology. In determining whether Commerce’s collapsing practice is in accordance with law in this case, ‘‘the question for the court is whether the agency’s answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute.’’ 14 Koenig & Bauer-Albert A.G. v. United States, 24 CIT 157, 159 (citing Chevron, 467 U.S. at 843). Prior to the reduction of Commerce’s current collapsing methodology in market economy cases to regulations, the court in Queen’s Flowers de Colom. v. United States, 21 CIT 968, 979 (1997) reviewed Commerce’s market economy collapsing methodology, and stated that because Commerce had ‘‘articulated a reasonable set of inquiries for answering the central question, whether parties are sufficiently related to present the possibility of price manipulation . . . the Court finds Commerce’s articulation of collapsing factors . . . to be in accordance with law.’’ Hontex, 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1342 (citing Queen’s Flowers, 981 F. Supp. at 628). The court’s analysis in Hontex further explained that ‘‘to the extent that Commerce has followed its market economy collapsing regulations the NME exporter collapsing methodology is necessarily permissible. Where the NME exporter methodology departs from these regulations, however, the court must examine it to determine whether it is a permissible interpretation of the antidumping statute.’’ Id. In this case, Commerce has departed from the regulations 14 In Koenig, the court had originally ordered a remand because Commerce had not substantiated its decision to collapse plaintiff’s affiliated companies in determining antidumping duties for respondent’s merchandise imported into the United States. The plaintiff had exported a product produced at one location from a subsidiary in another location. The court stated in a footnote that Commerce must decide ‘‘whether the affiliated companies are sufficiently intertwined as to permit the possibility of price manipulation.’’ Koenig, 24 CIT at 160 n.5. It reviewed Commerce’s remand determination and stated that because Commerce had considered factors such as the level of common ownership; whether the companies had interlocking boards of directors; whether the companies had production facilities for similar or identical products; and whether the companies operations were intertwined, as evidenced by coordination in pricing decisions, shared employees or transactions between the companies, its determination was permissible. Id. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 79 and interpreted the antidumping statutes.15 One of its decisions was that 19 U.S.C. § 1677(33)(F)’s definition of affiliated, ‘‘ two or more persons directly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with, any person’’ was not instructive in the NME context. Defendant’s Opposition at 16. Commerce is free to develop its practice regarding NME collapsing. However, in Hontex, Commerce found 19 U.S.C. § 1677(33)(F) instructive.16 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1342 (stating that ‘‘[h]ere, Commerce identified 19 U.S.C. § 1677(33)(F) as ‘instructive’ for determining whether two NME exporters are affiliated.... [T]o the extent that Commerce investigated by means of questionnaires and otherwise in accordance with established regulations whether the Companies were affiliated, such portion of its [collapsing] methodology is a permissible interpretation of the antidumping statue.’’). Commerce has not explained adequately why affiliation is not similarly instructive in this instance. It appears that Commerce examined the information before it and, based on that information, determined which portions of its market economy collapsing regulations were satisfied and deemed the remainder of the regulations inapplicable. Defendant states in its brief that ‘‘[t]he intertwining of [China First] and Three Star creates the significant potential for manipulation because [China First/Three Star] can circumvent the order by utilizing the exclusion granted to the Guangdong/Three Star export/production channel.’’ Defendant’s Opposition at 25. Defendant-Intervenors provided Commerce with information regarding the relationship between Three Star and China First Pencil. Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 48,612. They submitted a document issued in January 1997 requiring China First and Three Star to merge. The document is entitled the ‘‘Order of Shanghai Light Industry Holding (Group), Order # (1997) 005’’ (‘‘the 15 In general, the court is not bound by the agency regulations, but rather is obliged to apply the statutory provisions. See Writing Instrument Mfrs. Ass’n, Pencil Section v. United States, 21 C.I.T. 1185, 1193 (1997). Thus, if Commerce chooses to focus on the statutory language to the neglect of its own regulations in making its determination the court will review the statutory interpretation to see if it is in accordance with law. See id. Commerce’s regulations do not stand on their own, but rather find their basis in the statutory language. See id. 16 In Hontex, Commerce considered whether two companies were ‘‘connected in such a way that it would frustrate the purpose of the statute to grant [them] separate antidumping duty margins.’’ 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1341. Specifically, it considered whether the record showed any control relationships that may have existed between the two companies as contemplated by 19 U.S.C. § 1677(33). Furthermore, in the Department of Commerce’s Final Results of Determination Pursuant to Court Remand, for Hontex, 248 F. Supp. 2d at 1323, Public Version of Proprietary Doc. A–570–848 at 9, Commerce states that in examining whether NME exporters should be collapsed and treated as one entity, the Department applies the factors identified in its regulations concerning collapsing, in addition to examining the export decisions of the exporters being examined. In addressing whether a significant potential for manipulation exists, the Department will consider whether there is common control among the exporters based on the concept of control provided for in section 771(33) of the act. 80 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Order’’), and addresses China First and Shanghai Pen & Pencil Company. According to the Defendant-Intervenors, the Order directs China First to absorb Three Star’s capital and form a group company that includes Three Star. Additionally, the Order instructs China First to manage Three Star and coordinate its sales and purchases during the capital reorganization. Plaintiffs China First claim that ‘‘[a]s China First documented over the course of two separate reviews, through the disclosure of financial statements spanning a five-year period, China First has never invested in, purchased, merged with, or even engaged in joint marketing efforts with Three Star.’’ China First’s Motion at 20 (emphasis in original). Commerce appears to have relied significantly on the Order in making its determination to collapse China First and Three Star. Commerce found that the timing and circumstances surrounding certain loans called into question China First’s claim that it was Three Star’s competitor. Commerce also found that evidence on the record indicated that China First changed its name from China First Pencil Co., Ltd. to China First Pencil Group Co., Ltd. See Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 12 at 37. Commerce noted that the internet page that Defendant-Intervenors submitted showed that Three Star’s address was the same as China First, except for the floor number. Therefore, based on the information submitted by the Defendant-Intervenors, Commerce found that the degree of interaction between the two companies was greater than previously believed, and that the interaction between the company’s took a form corresponding very closely to the Order as issued by SLI. Defendant states in its brief that ‘‘the issue here is not whether [China First] and Three Star actually merged. Rather, the issue is whether [China First] and Three Star acted in a manner demonstrating that they are sufficiently intertwined, creating the potential for manipulation.’’ Defendant’s Opposition at 24. Commerce’s actions should promote rule of law; supremacy of specifically defined government practice, over arbitrary government action. Absent a definite and articulated set of inquiries, the court is unable to determine whether Commerce’s conclusion that the companies did in fact act in a manner that created the potential for manipulation was reasonable. Commerce decided that Three Star was effectively part of China First, and consequently, the potential for manipulation between these two entities was significant.17 This conclusion has no legal basis. On remand, Commerce must articulate a 17Defendant stated in its brief that Commerce was concerned about the potential manipulation because Three Star and [China First] are producers of the subject merchandise. The intertwining of [China First] and Three Star creates the significant potential for manipulation because [China First/ Three Star] can circumvent the order by utilizing the exclusion granted to the Guangdong/Three Star export/ production channel. As Commerce stated: U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 81 set of inquiries or methodology through which the court may independently ascertain whether the evidence supports Commerce’s findings. Plaintiffs China First argue that even if Commerce considered China First and Three Star to be affiliated, there was no basis upon which to collapse them. Plaintiffs China First claim that Three Star was a subsidiary of SLI and that SLI was Three Star’s sole investor and managing authority. The court will not decide in this case whether this information is sufficient to collapse China First and Three Star because Commerce has failed to articulate an acceptable NME collapsing methodology under which the court might examine the basis for its decision. B. Commerce’s Determination Regarding Guangdong Is Not Accordance with the Law and Must be Re-Examined Plaintiffs China First claim that a negative dumping finding requires that any reseller found, on a weighted-average basis, not to be dumping is excluded from the order. An antidumping duty order is issued when an a final determination of an antidumping investigation is affirmative. 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(c)(2) (2000). 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(e)(3) (2000) provides that ‘‘[i]n the case of an exporter that is not the producer of subject merchandise, the Secretary normally will limit an exclusion of the exporter to subject merchandise of those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.’’ 18 In the initial antidumping order, Guangdong, who is a reseller/exporter of pencils, was determined not to be selling pencils at less than fair value, Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cased Pencils From the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 55,625, 55,631 (Nov. 8, 1994), and was excluded from the order, Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Cased We note that in finding Three Star and [China First] sufficiently intertwined to warrant assigning the combined entity a separate rate, we are also finding that Three Star’s sales through Guangdong are no longer excluded from the order. These determinations reflect the fact that, based on the evidence, Three Star is effectively part of [China First], and at least does not operate as a separate entity. Consequently, the potential for manipulation between these two entities is significant. Defendant’s Opposition at 25 (citing Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 12 at 35). 18Furthermore, 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(e)(3) provides this example: During the period of investigation, Exporter A exports to the United States subject merchandise produced by Producer X. Based on an examination of Exporter A, the Secretary determines that the dumping margins with respect to these exports are de minimis, and the Secretary excludes Exporter A. Normally, the exclusion of Exporter A would be limited to subject merchandise produced by Producer X. If Exporter A began to export subject merchandise produced by Producer Y, this merchandise would be subject to the antidumping duty order, if any. 82 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Pencils from the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 66,909 (Dec. 28, 1994) (‘‘Antidumping Order’’).19 China First’s Motion at 3. Commerce had originally indicated that the exclusion of Guangdong from the antidumping order was in accordance with 19 C.F.R. § 353.21 (1994) and consistent with Jia Farn Mfg. Co. v. United States, 17 CIT 187 (1993).20 Plaintiffs claim that the concerns raised in Jia Farn are not present in this case and Guangdong should have been excluded from the review. In Jia Farn, a producer/exporter was excluded from an antidumping order as a producer/exporter. The plaintiff was alleged to be circumventing the antidumping order by acting as a reseller of products manufactured or produced by other companies whose products were subject to the order. Commerce determined that Jia Farn was transshipping merchandise manufactured by other companies under the order. Commerce argued that it had authority under 19 U.S.C. § 1675 to conduct administrative reviews of Jia Farn as a reseller, exporting the merchandise produced by other manufacturers. Jia Farn, 17 CIT at 191. The court explained that ‘‘the exclusion of a firm from the order applies only when the firm acts in the same capacity as it was excluded from the order.’’ Id. at 192. Likewise, in this case, the regulations permit Commerce to include Guangdong if it begins to export merchandise produced by a supplier subject to the antidumping order. See 19 C.F.R. § 351.204 (2000); Jia Farn, 17 CIT at 192–93. Thus explained, Commerce has the authority to inquire whether shipment of merchandise to another manufacturer subjected it to the antidumping order. Commerce properly asked that question about Guangdong. Plaintiffs also argue that, if China First and Three Star are collapsed into one entity, Guangdong should receive the collapsed rate because it cooperated in the review, underwent verification, and only exported pencils from Three-Star. See China First Motion at 38. The 19The order’s language was based on the final determination’s conclusion that it ‘‘would exclude from an order imports of subject merchandise that are sold by either China First or Guangdong and manufactured by the producers whose factors formed the basis for the zero margin.’’ Antidumping Order, 59 Fed. Reg. at 66,910; See Response Brief of DefendantIntervenors Pencil Section, Writing Instrument Manufacturers Association, et al., Pursuant to Rule 56.2 to Brief Filed by China First Pencil Co., Ltd. et al. (‘‘Defendant-Intervenor’s Response to China First’’) at 4. 20Section 353.21 required that Commerce publish in the Federal Register an ‘‘Antidumping Duty Order’’ that excluded from the application of the order any producer or reseller for which it found that ‘‘there was no weighted-average dumping margin during the period for which [Commerce] measured dumping in the investigation.’’ This section was replaced by 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(e) (1997), which states that ‘‘[Commerce] will exclude from an affirmative final determination under section... 735(a) of the Act or an order under section... 736(a) of the Act, any exporter or producer for which [it] determines an individual weighted-average dumping margin . . . of zero or de minimis.’’ ‘‘In the case of an exporter that is not the producer of the subject merchandise, [Commerce] normally will limit an exclusion of the exporter to subject merchandise of those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.’’ 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(3). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 83 exclusion given to Guangdong in the antidumping order was narrow, and it participated in this antidumping review and had sufficient notice that if it exported goods from one of the named producers it would be subject to their antidumping rate. Id. at 41. After participating in this review, however, Commerce then assigned Guangdong the China-wide rate. Commerce’s practice as to NME exporters is to presume all exporters are under the control of the central government until they demonstrate an absence of government control. This approach has been upheld by the courts. Air Prods. & Chems. Inc. v. United States, 22 CIT 433, 436 (1998); Sigma Corp., 117 F.3d at 1405 (Fed. Cir. 1997). ‘‘Those exporters who do not respond or fail to prove absence of de jure/de facto control are assigned the country-wide rate. Therefore, a NME exporter normally receives one of two rates: either the separate rate for which it qualified or a country-wide rate.’’ Coalition for the Pres. of Am. Brake Drum and Rotor Aftermkt. Mfrs. v. United States, 23 CIT 88, 107 (1999) (citing Transcom Inc. v. United States, 22 CIT 315, 322 (1998). ‘‘This approach obviates the need for an ‘all others’ rate calculation.’’ Coalition, 23 CIT at 107. Defendant states in its brief that ‘‘[a]n ‘all others’ rate was not calculated during the investigative stage of this proceeding. Guangdong cites no precedent, and none exists, for calculating an ‘all others’ rate during an administrative review of an NME proceeding.’’ Defendant’s Opposition at 30. In Coalition, which was an NME antidumping investigation, Commerce did assign an ‘‘all others’’ rate, which this court found to be a reasonable.21 23 CIT at 107–12. The respondents in Coalition who proved an absence of government control received separate company-specific rates during the investigation; respondents who fully participated in the review, but who were not investigated, received averaged non-adverse ‘‘all others’’ rates; and respondents who did not qualify for separate rates or those who did not respond to questionnaires received the China-wide rate based on adverse facts 21Additionally, in Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Honey from the People’s Republic of China, 60 Fed. Reg. 14,725, 14,729–30 (Mar. 20, 1995), Commerce confronted a situation where ‘‘administrative constraints prevented it from fully investigating NME Respondents who complied fully with questionnaire requests.’’ Coalition, 23 CIT at 110. It stated that Because it would not be appropriate for the Department to refuse to consider an affirmative documented request for an examination of whether these companies were independent of any non-respondent firms and then assign to the cooperative firms the rate for the noncooperative firms, which in this case is an adverse margin based on best information available, the Department has assigned a special single rate for these firms. Id. (quoting Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Honey from the People’s Republic of China, 60 Fed. Reg. at 14,729–30). 84 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 available.22 See Id. at 107. Therefore, precedent does exist for assigning an ‘‘all others’’ rate. Whether Commerce ultimately determines that Three Star and China First are one entity and should be collapsed does not negate the evidence that Guangdong only exported pencils produced by Three Star. Moreover, Guangdong cooperated in this administrative review.23 China First’s Motion at 38; see Preliminary Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 2,402. Commerce verified that Guangdong only exported pencils from Three Star. Id. In its verification report for Guangdong, Commerce stated that ‘‘[a]ll of the U.S. sales that we examined were of pencils manufactured by Three Star. We found no evidence that pencils sold to the United States were procured from producers other than Three Star.’’ Memorandum from Case Analysts to The File, No Shipment Verification of Guangdong Stationary & Sporting Goods Import & Export Corp. in the 1999–2000 Administrative Review of Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China (A–570–827) at 4, China First’s Appendix to Brief, Vol. III, Exhibit 9. Commerce did not find that Guangdong either transshipped pencils from China First or sold pencils made by China First. The record evidence solely shows that Guangdong sold pencils made by Three Star. Plaintiffs China First argue that by virtue of Guangdong’s participation in the review and its verification that it only exports pencils produced by Three Star, Commerce’s application of the China-Wide rate effectively applied adverse facts available to Guangdong. Commerce has previously assigned the China-wide rate to respondents who did not qualify for separate rates or those who did not respond to questionnaires based on adverse facts available. See Coalition, 23 CIT at 107. It has assigned an ‘‘all others’’ rate to cooperative, participating respondents. Commerce normally calculate its antidumping assessment rate by ‘‘dividing the dumping margin found on the subject merchandise examined by the entered value of such merchandise for normal customs duty purposes.’’ 19 C.F.R. 22 In Coalition, Commerce ‘‘investigat[ed] the selected respondents and [after] finding all but two qualified for separate rates, Commerce concluded that an average margin based on the selected Respondents should be assigned to the fully cooperative but uninvestigated Respondents.’’ 23 CIT at 108; see Notice of Final Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Brake Drums and Brake Rotors from the People’s Republic of China, 62 Fed. Reg. 9,160, 9,173–74 (Feb. 28, 1997). ‘‘Commerce reasoned that it would be inappropriate to assign a rate based on adverse facts available that would also apply to PRC exporters who refused to cooperate. Coalition, 23 CIT at 108. 23 In the Preliminary Results Commerce stated that it was [P]reliminarily rescinding this review with respect to Three Star and [Guangdong] because they made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. The Department reviewed Customs data which indicates that Three Star and [Guangdong] did not export subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. . . . 67 Fed. Reg. at 2,403. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 85 § 351.212(b)(1) (2000). And the court has previously found that Commerce’s assignment of a rate which is the simple average of dumping margins determined for the exporters individually investigated to be in accordance with the law. Coalition, 23 CIT at 111–12. Certainly, the antidumping statutes give Commerce the discretion to apply an adverse inference when a party fails to comply with its requests for information for determining that rate.24 See 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(b) (2000). However, in order to make this inference, Commerce must first make a determination that facts available is warranted pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(a). Following that determination, Commerce may then apply an adverse inference if Commerce makes the additional finding that ‘‘an interested party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(b). In applying adverse facts available, Commerce must articulate the reasons for its determination that a party failed to act to the best of its ability. Mannesmannrohren-Werke AG v. United States, 23 CIT 826, 838 (1999). If Commere applies an adverse facts available rate, it must ‘‘balance the statutory objective of finding an accurate dumping margin and inducing compliance, rather than creating an overly punitive result.’’ Timken Co. v. United States, 354 F.3d 1334, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2004); see F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. v. United States, 216 F.3d 1027, 1032–33 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Moreover, the court in Usinor Sacilor v. United States, rejected an adverse facts available rate for a respondent who has substantially complied with Commerce’s requests. 19 CIT 1314, 1316 (1995) (‘‘assessing the circumstances present — i.e., Usinor’s near total compliance with Commerce’s limited reporting arrangement as well as the presence of particular data flaws that were outside of Usinor’s control — the court finds that Commerce’s inclusion of the highest non-aberrant margin in the weighted average calculated margin is improper.’’); see Coalition, 23 CIT at 115. Guangdong participated in the review and the verification, therefore, Commerce’s application of the China-wide rate is not in accordance with the law and effectively applies a punitive result to a cooperative respondent.25 See Id. at 107–12. Additionally, Commerce’s 24Commerce may employ adverse inferences to a party who has not cooperated in supplying missing information ‘‘to ensure that the party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.’’ Uruguay Round Agreements Act, Statement of Administrative Action, H.R. Doc. No. 103–826 at 870 (1994). 25 In Shandong Huarong Gen. Group Corp. v. United States, Slip-Op. 2003–135 at 61–62, 2003 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 153 (Oct. 22, 2003), the court found that Commerce’s determination to reject the Companies’ separate rates evidence and, thus, assign them the PRC-wide antidumping duty margin based on the presumption of state control due to verification failures, the inadequacy of cooperation and the lack of integrity of reported data ‘‘cannot be the basis for assigning the Companies the PRC-wide antidumping duty margin based on facts available, as it is clear the Companies did provide evidence of their entitlement to separate 86 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 NME collapsing methodology regarding Three Star and China First was not in accordance with the law. Therefore, on remand, Commerce’s decision regarding Guangdong as well as its application of the China-wide rate to Guangdong must be re-examined. C Commerce’s Utilization of Data from Indian Import Statistics as the Surrogate Values for ‘‘Petrol Wax,’’ instead of ‘‘Paraffin Wax,’’ and Decision not to Correct Plaintiffs Kaiyuan’s Translation Error Was in Accordance with Law and Supported by Substantial Evidence in the Administrative Record Commerce is required to value a company’s FOPs based on the ‘‘best available information,’’ in one or more market economy countries, which are at a level of economic development comparable to that of the NME country, and ‘‘that [are] a significant producer of ‘comparable’ subject merchandise.’’ Shandong Huarhong Gen. Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 714, 719 (2001); see 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4) (1999). Plaintiffs reported FOPs included numerous types of wax: paraffin wax, emulsified wax, bees wax, wax, clear wax, mixed wax, and petrol wax. Memorandum from The Team to The File, Preliminary Results of the Administrative Review of Certain Cased Pencils from the People’s republic of China (PRC), Selection of Surrogate Values for Factors of Production at 5–6, Kaiyuan’s Appendix 12. Commerce must calculate antidumping duty margins as accurately as possible. See Rubberflex SDN. BHD. v. United States, 23 CIT 461, 469 (1999). However, in order to calculate the correct margin, an interested party must provide Commerce with ‘‘accurate, credible, and verifiable information.’’ Gourmet Equip. Corp. v. United States, 24 CIT 572, 574 (2000). Furthermore, it is the respondent’s responsibility to provide that information. Chinsung Indus. Co. v. United States, 13 CIT 103, 106 (1989). Commerce is afforded discretion in determining what constitutes the ‘‘best available information,’’ see Timken, 201 F. Supp. 2d at 1325, and Commerce derives this information from a party’s questionnaire responses. Commerce must determine that the information that it bases its surrogate values on is the best available; whether the information relates to the respondent’s production or related to prices and values in the surrogate country. Timken, 201 F. Supp. 2d at 1325–26. Information that is provided in questionnaire responses rates and there is no indication that any necessary information was missing or incomplete. See [Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2003)].’’ The court did not uphold Commerce’s determination in part because the parties in the case provided evidence of their independence from government control which Commerce verified, and thus, the court did not sustain Commerce’s determination that the Companies should be assigned the PRC-wide antidumping duty margin based on facts available. Id. at 62–64. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 87 or publicly available information used to value factors in nonmarket economy cases, allegations concerning market viability, and upstream subsidy allegations, are considered factual information. World Finer Foods, Inc. v. United States, 24 CIT 541, 549 (2000); 19 C.F.R. § 351.301(a) (1999). Commerce, with its limited resources, cannot guarantee that the parties’ submissions are correct. Murata Mfg. Co. v. United States, 17 CIT 259, 265 (1993). However, in cases where Commerce makes an error, Congress intended that Commerce establish procedures for the correction of ‘‘ministerial errors’’ propagated by Commerce that occur after the final results of a review are published.26 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(e) (2000). Ministerial errors are errors in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function; clerical errors that result from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like; and any other similar types of unintentional or inadvertent errors.27 World Finer Foods, 24 CIT at 549–50; 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(f) (1999). It is these types of ministerial errors that Commerce must correct, especially if the error is so obvious and egregious that the failure to correct it would be ‘‘an abuse of discretion’’ and ‘‘undermine the interests of justice.’’ 28 Tehnoimportexport v. United States, 15 CIT 250, 258–59 (1991) (explaining that where a plaintiff’s mistake was obvious, the government’s failure to correct it was an abuse of discretion). The procedures that Commerce promulgated to correct these errors are found in 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(1) (2000), which provides that comments from A party to the proceeding to whom [Commerce] has disclosed calculations performed in connection with a preliminary determination may submit comments concerning a significant ministerial error in such calculations. A party to the proceeding to whom [Commerce] has disclosed calculations performed in connection with a final determination or the final results of a review may submit comments concerning any ministerial error in such calculations. Comments concerning ministerial errors 26Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(e), Commerce ‘‘shall establish procedures for the correction of ministerial errors in final determinations within a reasonable time after the determinations are issued under this section. Such procedures shall ensure opportunity for interested parties to present their views regarding any such errors.’’ 27From the context of the statute and the regulations themselves, it is clear that ‘‘Congress intended to cover only an error committed by Commerce itself.’’ Alloy Piping Prods. Inc. v. Kanzen Tetsu Sdn. Bhd., 334 F.3d 1284, 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2003). 28 In Serampore Indus. Pvt., v. United States, the court stated that it was ‘‘loathe to affirm a determination that might be based on a questionable record.’’ 12 CIT 825, 834 (1988). Furthermore, in Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. v. United States, the court held that Commerce erroneously refused plaintiffs’ request that it correct clerical and transcription errors in data it submitted to Commerce which was used in the final determination. 14 CIT 680, 683 (1990). The limited burden imposed by virtue of a remand ordering the correction of input errors was outweighed by the preference for accuracy. Id. 88 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 made in the preliminary results of a review should be included in a party’s case brief. Id. (emphasis added). The regulations further provide that Commerce ‘‘will analyze any comments received and, if appropriate... correct any significant ministerial error by amending the final determination.’’ 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(e) (emphasis added). On September 21, 2001, Plaintiffs China First submitted a letter to Commerce containing comments and information regarding ‘‘Commerce’s selection of surrogate countries and the information to be used by [Commerce] in valuing the factors of production.’’ Kaiyuan’s Appendix 11. The letter stated that ‘‘[t]he principal materials used in Respondents production of pencils include the following materials: tallow, graphite powder, kaolin (china) clay, white glue, paraffin wax, pencil slats, plastic foil/film, lacquer, erasers, and aluminum ferrules,’’ and provided the value for ‘‘paraffin wax. Id. Plaintiffs Kaiyuan view their submission’s inclusion of petrol wax as a facial error, and that Commerce should have realized a mistake had been made in Kaiyuan’s submissions. In a letter dated October 4, 2001, Commerce informed Kaiyuan that it did not possess publicly available information to value petrol wax. Defendant’s Opposition at 7. Kaiyuan argues that because there were no values or technical specifications placed on the record for petrol wax, that this leads to the conclusion that it is an industry norm to use paraffin wax in the manufacturing and pencil making process and that in this particular industry wax has only one meaning. Kaiyuan’s Motion at 8–9. The parties, however, provided no evidence or citation to an industry norm.29 If a respondent’s error is apparent from the face of Commerce’s final decision or from the underlying calculations, Commerce is required to make corrections, see Koyo, 14 CIT at 683, and should it fail to correct that error its lack of action is arbitrary and capricious. See Alloy Piping Prods., Inc. v. United States, 334 F.3d 1284, 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Moreover, if Commerce fails to correct an error that is or should have been apparent from the face of the final determination, the error in effect becomes a government error, and thus, a ‘‘ministerial error,’’ which Commerce is statutorily required to correct. Id. at 1293. Commerce, to the extent possible, relies on publicly available information from the relevant surrogate country to value a company’s FOPs. See Antidumping Manual, Chapter 8 at 70–71. On December 31, 2001, Commerce published a letter outlining its decision to value 29The Kirk-Othmer Concise Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology 1260 (3d ed 1985), under mineral waxes, describes a paraffin wax as a ‘‘petroleum wax consisting principally of normal alkanes.’’ The encyclopedia then states that petroleum wax is ‘‘outstanding as a cost-effective moisture and gas barrier... [m]uch of the petroleum wax produced is foodgrade quality, although such quality may well be used in non-food-grade applications to simplify inventorying.’’ Id. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 89 petrol wax using Indonesian import data from the Foreign Trade Statistical Bulletin of Indonesia (‘‘FTSBI’’). Kaiyuan’s Appendix 12. Commerce stated that: [i]n determining the appropriate surrogate value for each factor of production, we selected, where appropriate and to the extent possible, from publically available information which was: (1) an average, non-export value; (2) representative of a range of prices within the POR, or closest in time to the POR; (3) product-specific; and (4) tax-exclusive. Whenever possible, we selected surrogate values that were from the primary country in accordance with Commerce’s preference to select data from a single country Id. In response, Kaiyuan submitted a letter dated February 8, 2002, which requested that Commerce make corrections on behalf of Kaiyuan and Laizhou. Kaiyuan’s Motion at 3, Appendix 6. In this letter, Kaiyuan identified the type of wax used in the production of its pencils as ‘‘Parafinicmax- Melting point: 53C–56C.’’ Id. Kaiyuan’s FOP submissions included numerous types of wax: paraffin wax, emulsified wax, bees wax, wax, clear wax, mixed wax, and petrol wax. Kaiyuan’s Appendix 12. However, in its letter of February 8, 2002, Kaiyuan did not indicate what item Parafinicmax was in addition to or what item it was to replace in its submission. On July 30, 2002, Kaiyuan submitted a clerical-error allegation to Commerce. Kaiyuan’s Appendix 8. In this letter, Kaiyuan argued that Commerce improperly used a surrogate value for petrol wax when it claimed that the record demonstrated that Kaiyuan used paraffin wax. Commerce disagreed and its memorandum stated that ‘‘throughout this segment of the proceeding, Kaiyuan unequivocally and consistently identified the type of wax used in pencil production as petrol wax.’’ Kaiyuan’s Appendix 9. The court affords Commerce substantial discretion in determining what types of unintentional or inadvertent errors qualify errors are ‘‘ministerial.’’ Shandong, 159 F. Supp. 2d at 728; Cemex, S.A. v. United States, 19 C.I.T. 587, 593 (1995). In this case, Commerce properly refused to correct Kaiyuan’s translation error. Kaiyuan did not provide clear evidence so that Commerce might determine that it was using the incorrect product in making its determination. Information that is provided in questionnaire responses or publicly available information used to value factors in nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) cases, allegations concerning market viability, and upstream subsidy allegations, is considered factual. 19 C.F.R. § 351.301(a). Commerce use of Plaintiff’s erroneous translation in making its determination does not convert Plaintiff’s mistake into a ‘‘ministerial’’ error. Furthermore, because the mistakes in this case were made by the Plaintiff, they are not the 90 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 type of ‘‘ministerial’’ errors Congress intended Commerce to correct. Kaiyuan’s error was not so obvious or patent that it would result in injustice, nor did Commerce ignore relevant record evidence. D. Commerce’s Use of Surrogate Values in Calculating the Dumping Margin is in Accordance with Law and Supported by Substantial Evidence in the Administrative Record Plaintiffs China First argue that the choice of India as the principal surrogate country in an NME analogy lead to the use of data they claim is unreliable. They argue that while there is Indonesian surrogate data on the record for only 25 of the 69 FOPs, the Indonesian data is nonetheless of better quality because the Indian surrogate data available for virtually every significant factor of production are allegedly aberrational, unreliable, and non-specific. Commerce values FOPs using the costs of the FOP in a market economy that was at a level of economic development comparable to the PRC, and a significant producer of comparable merchandise during the POR. Commerce found India to be the appropriate surrogate country at a level of economic development comparable to the PRC, because India was comparable to the PRC in terms of per capita gross national product and the national distribution of labor. See Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 7 at 19; Memorandum from The Team, Through Howard Smith, Program Manager, Group II, Office 4, To The File, Factors of Production (FOP) Valuation (July 16, 2002) (‘‘FOP Memorandum’’); China First’s Appendix to Brief, Vol. I Exhibit 20. Moreover, it determined that India was a significant producer of comparable merchandise. Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 7 at 19. Commerce determined that Indonesia was comparable to the PRC in terms of its per capita gross national product and national labor distribution, as well as being a significant producer of comparable merchandise. Commerce relied on Indonesian values and U.S. values in instances where Indian surrogate value information was not available. For purposes of calculating NV, Commerce attempted to value the FOPs using surrogate values that were in effect during the POR. Commerce valued FOPs regarding graphite, kaolin clay, bees wax, mixed wax, wax, clear wax, lacquer, paint, dipping lacquer, glue, clear glue, foil, sealing paper, stearic acid, printing ink, key chain, plastic, foam grip, glitter, talcum powder, heat transfer film, pigment, dye, dyestuff, diluent, hardening oil, and cellulose based on Indian import data from the Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India (‘‘MSFTI’’) for April–August 2000. Preliminary Results, 67 Fed. Reg. at 2,406. Commerce valued black cores, color cores, raw pencils, erasers, and ferrules based on Indian import data from the MSFTI for January–December 2000. Id. It also valued ‘‘petrol wax’’, tallow, paraffin wax, and emulsified paraffin wax based on IndoneU.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 91 sian import data from the Foreign Trade Statistical Bulletin of Indonesia (‘‘FTSBI’’) for January–December, 2000. Kaiyuan’s Appendix 12. Plaintiffs Kaiyuan claim that the import statistics were comprised of data relating to both black and colored cores without differentiating between the two. They claim that this resulted in the calculation of a single average unit value used as the surrogate value for Plaintiffs’ black core usage and color core usage and that this single average value was premised upon a small total annual volume of imports into India of both types of cores. They further claim that the value from the import statistics was aberrational and that Commerce refused to use what they call ‘‘legitimate values’’ from two other independent and corroborating sources that provided separate black and color core values that demonstrated the aberrational nature of the Indian Import statistics-based value.30 The ‘‘possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not prevent an administrative agency’s finding from being supported by substantial evidence.’’ Consolo, 383 U.S. at 620. Substantial evidence requires that the agency’s determination be based on the whole record and the reviewing court must examine all evidence that fairly supports and detracts from the determination. Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 488 (1951). Commerce considers small-quantity import information or data unreliable when the per-unit value is substantially different from the perunit values of the larger quantity imports of that product from other countries. Shakeproof, 24 CIT at 490–91. Commerce claimed that although the volume of cores imported into Indonesia during 2000 was substantially greater than that imported into India during the POR, it did not find Indian imports of over 3,400 kgs. of pencil leads from seven different market economy countries to be insignificant. Commerce derived weighted average Indian and Indonesian import values of 7.69 USD/kg. and 6.47 USD/ kg. Commerce noted that the weighted-average Indian import price did not substantially vary from the weighted-average Indonesian import price. Commerce decided not to consider the Indian price quotes that the Plaintiffs submitted because they were undated, were export prices, and it was not clear that any sales were made pursuant to these quotes. It did not consider the Indonesian price quotes placed on the record because the quotes were for sales to the United States, rather than for sales within a potential surrogate country, and were dated outside the POR. The Indian and Indonesian import statistics each only include a category for black and colored cores together without providing any more details regarding the types of 30The cores data consisted of an undated price quote from an Indian exporter and a price quote dated January 10, 2002, from an Indonesian company for export of cores to the United States. 92 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 cores being imported. Moreover, the price quotes for cores were placed on the record by a party affiliated with a U.S. importer of subject merchandise. Therefore, Commerce valued black and color cores based on Indian import statistics, which it concluded was the best available information on the record. Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comment 4 at 12–13; Defendant’s Opposition at 10. This decision is supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with the law. VI. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, Commerce’s decision in the Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. 48,612 (July 25, 2002), as amended in the Amended Final Results, 67 Fed. Reg. 59,049 (Sept. 19, 2002) is remanded to Commerce for proceedings consistent with this opinion. On remand, Commerce must articulate specifically the portions of the existing collapsing statutes and regulations which are applicable or inapplicable in the NME context. It must then provide the court with a clearly articulated methodology for collapsing companies in NME countries. Commerce must reevaluate Guangdong’s rate in light of the court’s decision that its collapsing methodology was not in accordance with the law. It must also reevaluate the application of the China-wide rate to Guangdong because Commerce effectively applied adverse facts to a participating and cooperative respondent. Commerce’s refusal to correct Kaiyuan’s translation error is supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with the law as is its decision to use values from black and color cores based on Indian import statistics. Slip Op. 04–58 MOTION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States, and ROBERT B. ZOELLICK, United States Trade Representative, Defendants, and CCL INDUSTRIAL MOTOR LTD., Defendant-Intervenor. Court No. 03–00146 [Summary judgment granted for defendants] Decided: June 3, 2004 Fitch, King & Caffentzis (Richard Carville King, James Caffentzis) for plaintiff. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David M. Cohen, Director, Jeanne E. Davidson, Deputy Director, Steven C. Tosini, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 93 Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; David L. Weller, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, of counsel, for defendants. Kaye Scholer LLP (Michael P. House and Margaret S. Rudin) for defendantintervenor. OPINION STANCEU, Judge: Plaintiff Motion Systems Corporation challenges a decision by the President of the United States to deny import relief to the U.S. industry manufacturing ‘‘pedestal actuators,’’ which are components of electrically-powered vehicles used by persons whose mobility is impaired. Plaintiff’s principal argument is that the President exceeded his statutory authority in declining to impose import quotas on pedestal actuators from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘China’’) following a recommendation by the United States International Trade Commission that import quotas are needed to remedy ‘‘market disruption’’ adversely affecting the U.S. pedestal actuator industry. Plaintiff contends in particular that the President acted contrary to the relevant statute in denying relief without quantifying the adverse impact of providing relief and demonstrating that this adverse impact was ‘‘clearly greater’’ than the benefits that such relief would provide to the domestic industry. Motion Systems has named as defendants the President and the United States Trade Representative, who issued a recommendation to the President addressing the issue of import relief after publishing a notice soliciting comment and conducting a public hearing. In addition to its primary argument, plaintiff raises objections to the U.S. Trade Representative’s conduct of the public hearing, to the President’s considering certain political factors that Motion Systems considers improper, and to the apparent denial of Motion Systems’ request to the U.S. Trade Representative that the President reconsider the final decision. This matter is before the court on two motions by defendants. Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to USCIT Rule 12(b)(1) and, previous to that motion, sought dismissal of this action through judgment upon an agency record pursuant to USCIT Rule 56.1. This court concludes that it has subject matter jurisdiction of this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i). This court further concludes that the President’s decision declining to impose restraints on imports of pedestal actuators must be upheld because it is within the authority delegated to the President by the relevant statute. The court finds no basis to conclude that the presidential decision misconstrued statutory provisions or must be overturned for noncompliance with procedural requirements. Additionally, the court finds no basis to order a reopening of proceedings for reconsideration of the final presidential 94 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 decision. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed below, defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. I. BACKGROUND The pedestal actuators imported from China, and the pedestal actuators manufactured in the United States by Motion Systems Corporation, are motor-driven mechanical devices chiefly used as components in mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs. As typically installed in a mobility scooter or electric wheelchair, a pedestal actuator converts rotary motion, created by the electric motor, to the linear motion required to raise and lower the seat. Motion Systems Corporation sought import relief through the administrative proceedings summarized below. Electric Mobility Corporation, a manufacturer of mobility scooters and purchaser of Chinese-origin pedestal actuators, opposed the imposition of import relief in those administrative proceedings, as did defendantintervenor CCL Industrial Motor Ltd., a Chinese manufacturer of pedestal actuators. A. Procedures Leading to the President’s Decision to Deny Relief Motion Systems, on August 19, 2002, petitioned the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ‘‘USITC’’) for relief from imports of pedestal actuators from China, under procedures established by section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2451) (‘‘Section 421’’). Section 421, added to the Trade Act of 1974 by the U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000, establishes procedures under which the President, following an affirmative ‘‘market disruption’’ determination by the USITC, is empowered to proclaim ‘‘increased duties or other import restrictions’’ on a product of China that ‘‘is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities or under such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause market disruption to the domestic producers of a like or directly competitive product.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(a). ‘‘Market disruption’’ is found to exist ‘‘whenever imports of an article like or directly competitive with an article produced by a domestic industry are increasing rapidly, either absolutely or relatively, so as to be a significant cause of material injury, or threat of material injury, to the domestic industry.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(c). The Section 421 procedures involve separate determinations by the USITC and potentially by the President, who is to make the actual decision whether or not to grant import relief after receiving a recommendation of the U.S. Trade Representative. To initiate the process, a domestic producer may petition the USITC to investigate whether a product of China is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities or under such conditions as to cause or U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 95 threaten to cause market disruption to domestic producers of like or directly competitive products. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(b). The statute directs the USITC, upon making an affirmative determination of market disruption, to propose actions in the form of increased duties or other import restrictions necessary to prevent or remedy the market disruption. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(f). The statute further directs the U.S. Trade Representative, after receiving the report of the USITC, to publish in the Federal Register notice of any import relief measure the U.S. Trade Representative proposes to be taken and to invite public comment, with the opportunity to request a public hearing on the appropriateness of the proposed measure. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(h)(1). Further, the statute authorizes the U.S. Trade Representative to enter into agreements with the People’s Republic of China under which China would take action to prevent or remedy market disruption and provides that the Trade Representative ‘‘should seek to conclude such agreements’’ within a 60-day period commencing five days after receiving an affirmative determination of the USITC. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(j)(1). Section 421 vests in the President the discretion whether to provide import relief. Within 15 days of receiving the Trade Representative’s final recommendation, the President is directed to provide import relief for the domestic industry ‘‘unless the President determines that provision of such relief is not in the national economic interest of the United States’’ or, in extraordinary cases, that it would cause serious harm to the national security. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(k)(1). The import relief may take the form of increased duties or other import restrictions and is to remain in effect ‘‘for such period as the President considers necessary to prevent or remedy the market disruption.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(a). The President’s discretion to deny import relief following an affirmative USITC finding of market disruption is subject to specific limitations. The statute provides that ‘‘[t]he President may determine... that providing import relief is not in the national economic interest of the United States only if the President finds that the taking of such action would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(k)(2). In the proceedings leading up to this litigation, the USITC issued its report on the petition of Motion Systems on November 7, 2002, following the submission of briefs and a public hearing. See Pedestal Actuators from China: Investigation No. TA–421–1, USITC Pub. 3557. The USITC concluded in its report that pedestal actuators from China are being imported in such increased quantities or under such conditions as to cause market disruption to the domestic producers of like or directly competitive products. The USITC proposed, as a remedy to the market disruption it had found to exist, a threeyear period of quantitative restrictions on Chinese pedestal actuator 96 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 imports, to consist of 5,626 units in the first year, 6,470 units in the second year, and 7,440 units in the third year.1 See International Trade Commission: Pedestal Actuators, 67 Fed. Reg. 69,557, 69,558 (Nov. 18, 2002). After seeking, unsuccessfully, an agreement with the People’s Republic of China to prevent or remedy market disruption from pedestal actuator imports, and after inviting written comments2 and conducting a public hearing, the U.S. Trade Representative submitted its recommendation to the President on January 2, 2003.3 On January 17, 2003, the President issued a determination not to impose restrictive measures on imports of pedestal actuators from China. B. The President’s Decision to Deny Relief to the Domestic Pedestal Actuator Industry The President’s decision was released in the form of a Federal Register notice setting forth a memorandum to the U.S. Trade Representative (‘‘USTR’’ or ‘‘Trade Representative’’).4 The decision included the following findings: (1) providing import relief for the U.S. pedestal actuator industry is not in the national economic interest; and (2) import relief would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action. The presidential decision went on to state four reasons for the decision, as follows: (1) the facts indicate that the USITC’s recommended quota would not likely benefit the domestic industry and instead would cause imports to shift to other offshore sources; (2) even if the quota were to benefit the primary domestic producer (i.e., Motion Systems), the cost of the quota to consumers, downstream purchasers of pedestal actuators, and users of the downstream products would substantially outweigh any benefit to producers’ income; (3) the cost of the quota would increase pressure on domestic producers of the downstream products (i.e., mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs) to move offshore, causing more economic harm than good due to the larger number of workers in the downstream industry; and (4) the quota would negatively affect the many elderly and disabled purchasers of the downstream products. The portion of the 1These quantitative limits were proposed by Vice Chairman Hillman and Commissioner Miller. As authorized by 19 U.S.C. § 2451(g)(2)(C), Commissioner Koplan separately proposed a three-year period of quantitative restrictions consisting of 4,425, 4,514, and 4,604 units per year, respectively. Chairman Okun and Commissioner Bragg made negative determinations concerning market disruption. 2Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Notice of Proposed Measure and Opportunity for Public Comment Pursuant to Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974: Pedestal Actuators from the People’s Republic of China, 67 Fed. Reg. 71,007 (Nov. 27, 2002) (‘‘USTR Notice’’). 3The U.S. Trade Representative did not make public, and was not required by Section 421 to make public, its recommendation to the President. 4The President, Presidential Determination on Pedestal Actuator Imports from the People’s Republic of China, 68 Fed. Reg. 3,157 (Jan. 22, 2003). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 97 presidential decision setting forth the two findings and the four aforementioned reasons reads as follows. After considering all relevant aspects of the investigation, I have determined that providing import relief for the U.S. pedestal actuator industry is not in the national economic interest of the United States. In particular, I find that the import relief would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action. In determining not to provide import relief, I considered its overall costs to the U.S. economy. The facts of this case indicate that imposing the USITC’s recommended quota would not likely benefit the domestic producing industry and instead would cause imports to shift from China to other offshore sources. Even if the quota were to benefit the primary domestic producer, the cost of the quota to consumers, both the downstream purchasing industry and users of the downstream products, would substantially outweigh any benefit to producers’ income. The USITC’s analysis confirms this conclusion. In addition, downstream industries are already under pressure to migrate production offshore to compete with lower-cost imports of finished products. Higher component costs resulting from import relief would add to this pressure. Given the significantly larger number of workers in the downstream purchasing industry when compared with the domestic pedestal actuator industry, I find that imposing import restrictions would do more economic harm than good. Finally, a quota would negatively affect the many disabled and elderly purchasers of mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs, the primary ultimate consumers of pedestal actuators. C. Motion Systems’ Request for Reconsideration of the President’s Decision Following issuance of the President’s decision to deny import relief on Chinese-origin pedestal actuators, Motion Systems filed with the U.S. Trade Representative a submission, dated February 12, 2003, requesting ‘‘reconsideration’’ of that decision and citing ‘‘new evidence which has come to light since January 17, the date of the President’s determination.’’ The ‘‘new evidence’’ consisted of documents that Motion Systems presented in support of claims that Electric Mobility did not reduce the prices of mobility scooters it sold to the Department of Veterans Affairs and did not make an electricallypowered seat lift (which incorporates a pedestal actuator) standard equipment on 70 percent of its models. Motion Systems contended 98 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 that this ‘‘new evidence’’ contradicted statements made by the president of Electric Mobility Corporation (‘‘EMC’’), Michael Flowers, before the USTR hearing and raised credibility concerns. The postdecision submission stated as follows: If EMC did not, in fact, include the seat lift as standard equipment on 70 percent of its scooters, then that calls into serious question Mr. Flowers’ claim that EMC reduced the prices for those scooters as a result of switching to the lower-priced Chinese unit, particularly since Mr. Flowers acknowledged that EMC did not reduce the price of the seat lift as an option. And if it is the case that EMC did not, in fact, reduce the prices when it switched to the Chinese unit, then it calls into question the credibility of Mr. Flowers’ claim that EMC would be forced to increase its prices $200 if relief were granted. Once Mr. Flowers’ testimony is put aside, there is no evidence to indicate the extent to which the costs of relief would outweigh the benefits. Stewart and Stewart letter to USTR, February 12, 2003 at 16–17, in Pl.’s Ex. 2. In a letter to counsel for plaintiff dated March 7, 2003, the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for North Asian Affairs, in an apparent reference to the February 12, 2003 submission, acknowledged with appreciation the ‘‘supplemental information you have provided’’ but did not indicate that the President would reconsider the decision to deny import relief. The March 7, 2003 letter stated, inter alia, that ‘‘[y]our letter points to evidence that, in your view, shows the sole U.S. purchaser of Chinese pedestal actuators, Electric Mobility, did not reduce prices for its mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs after it began sourcing pedestal actuators from China and thus did not pass along to consumers any cost savings.’’ That letter went on to state that the issue whether Electric Mobility reduced its prices after purchasing Chinese pedestal actuators was clearly reflected ‘‘as disputed between the parties’’ in the materials before the President at the time of the President’s decision, adding that ‘‘this issue relates only indirectly to the considerations identified by the President as dispositive in his decision.’’ This action followed. II. DISCUSSION A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction The court concludes that it is granted jurisdiction over the instant action by 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i). Under paragraphs (2)–(4) of subsection (i) of § 1581, this Court has exclusive jurisdiction of civil actions commenced against the United States, its agencies, or its officers that arise out of any law of the United States providing for ‘‘tariffs, duties, fees, or other taxes on the importation of merchandise for reasons other than the raising of revenue’’ [paragraph (2)], ‘‘embarU.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 99 goes or other quantitative restrictions on the importation of merchandise for reasons other than the protection of the public health or safety’’ [paragraph (3)], or ‘‘administration and enforcement with respect to the matters referred to in paragraphs (1)–(3) of this subsection....’’ [Paragraph (4)]. Section 421 provides for increased tariffs for reasons other than raising revenue, specifically, for preventing or remedying market disruption adversely affecting a domestic industry. It also authorizes quantitative import restrictions to serve these same purposes, which are reasons ‘‘other than the protection of the public health or safety.’’ Plaintiff has commenced an action against the President of the United States and the U.S. Trade Representative, both of whom are officers of the United States. With respect to the President, status as an officer of the United States stems from the Constitution itself, for the President is the essential constitutional officer under Article II of the Constitution. ‘‘The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years....’’ U.S. CONST., Art. II, § 1. ‘‘This grant of authority establishes the President as the chief constitutional officer of the Executive Branch, entrusted with supervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity.’’ Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731, 750 (1982). The court concludes, therefore, that this action falls squarely within the express terms of the jurisdictional provisions in § 1581(i)(2) and (i)(3). Defendants move to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, advancing an argument based on two contentions. Defendants contend, first, that the President must be dismissed from this action, relying on the recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Corus Group PLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n. 352 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Specifically, defendants interpret Corus Group to require that a challenge such as this to a presidential decision be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because of the Federal Circuit’s statement in Corus Group that ‘‘section 1581(i) does not authorize proceedings directly against the President.’’ Id., 352 F.3d at 1359. The second contention by defendants is that this case may not proceed as a challenge to an action of the U.S. Trade Representative, who in the statutory Section 421 procedure performs the role of advising the President regarding import relief. Defendants argue that this Court, lacking ‘‘jurisdiction to entertain plaintiff’s claims against the President, likewise lacks jurisdiction to entertain challenges to the President’s advisors.’’ Defs.’ Mot. to Dismiss at 3. According to their argument, the U.S. Trade Representative’s recommendation to the President addressing the issue of import relief is purely advisory, rather than determinative of legal rights, and hence it is unreviewable under principles announced by the Supreme Court in Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154, 177–78 (1997), and cited by the Federal Circuit in Corus Group. 100 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Having contended that this action may be brought neither against the President nor against the U.S. Trade Representative, defendants conclude that this court must dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court disagrees with defendants’ jurisdictional analysis for two reasons. First, if this court were to construe the Federal Circuit’s decision in Corus Group to require dismissal of this action, it would be acting contrary to the jurisdictional principles applied by the Federal Circuit in a line of cases in which presidential action was challenged directly, including Humane Society of the United States v. Clinton, 236 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2001), a decision not overturned by Corus Group. See Corus Group, 352 F.3d at 1359–1360. Second, were the court to accept defendants’ reasoning, it would be holding, in the particular posture of this case, that decisions by the President to deny import relief pursuant to authority delegated by Congress in Section 421 are entirely outside the scope of judicial review under 28 U.S.C § 1581(i). Such a holding, which would go beyond the holding in Corus Group, cannot be reconciled with the express language of § 1581(i). These two points are discussed below. In Corus Group, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the Court of International Trade should have dismissed the President from an action brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) challenging certain decisions made during an ‘‘escape clause’’ proceeding affecting steel imports that was conducted under section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974. The Court of Appeals reasoned that § 1581(i) does not authorize proceedings directly against the President, observing that it ‘‘refers only to actions ‘against the United States, its agencies, or its officers’ and does not specifically include the President.’’ 352 F.3d at 1359. The Court of Appeals in Corus Group held that the Court of International Trade nevertheless had jurisdiction over the subject matter of the dispute under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) and concluded that relief still could have been sought against the Commissioner of Customs, who along with the President and the U.S. International Trade Commission was named as a defendant. The Court of Appeals observed that had plaintiffs prevailed, the Customs Commissioner could have been enjoined from collecting duties, as proclaimed by the President under the escape clause, on the imported tin mill steel products that were at issue in the case. Id. In Humane Society of the United States v. Clinton, as in Corus Group, plaintiffs sought relief against, and named as defendants, the President of the United States and other government officials (in that case, the Secretaries of State and Commerce). The plaintiffs in Humane Society sued the government officials for their alleged failure to comply with the Driftnet Fishing Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1826– 1826g. See Humane Society, 236 F.3d at 1323. Specifically, plaintiffs appealed from a decision of this Court refusing to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the President to impose sanctions on Italy for U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 101 large-scale driftnet fishing and refusing to find arbitrary and capricious a certification by the Secretary of Commerce that large-scale driftnet fishing during a specified time period had been terminated by Italy. See id. Plaintiffs had brought their case in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i). The defendants in Humane Society sought dismissal on the ground that ‘‘there has been no waiver of sovereign immunity by the United States.’’ 236 F.3d at 1325. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, observing that ‘‘[s]overeign immunity and subject matter jurisdiction are related but different juridical concepts,’’ id. at 1326, further observed that ‘‘[u]nless the grant of jurisdiction carries with it a coextensive waiver of sovereign immunity, the Congressional grant would be a hollow act, with no significant consequences to the sovereign, and no significant benefits to the sovereign’s subjects.’’ Id. at 1328. Analogizing to the Supreme Court’s analysis of jurisdiction and waiver of sovereign immunity under the Tucker Act in United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206 (1983), the Federal Circuit concluded in Humane Society that 28 U.S.C. § 1581 ‘‘not only states the jurisdictional grant to the Court of International Trade, but also provides a waiver of sovereign immunity over the specified class of cases.’’ 236 F.3d at 1328. The Court of Appeals further concluded in Humane Society that ‘‘[t]he Court of International Trade properly exercised jurisdiction over this case.’’ Id. With respect to the scope of the jurisdictional grant in 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i), the decision of the Court of Appeals in Humane Society was consistent with a line of previous decisions in which challenges to presidential action pursuant to tariff statutes were brought thereunder. In its opinion in Humane Society, the Court of Appeals noted with approval the plaintiffs’ citation of ‘‘numerous cases in which the Court of International Trade has since considered challenges to the actions of the President pursuant to the grant of jurisdiction in § 1581(i). See, e.g., Florsheim Shoe Co. v. United States, 744 F.2d 787 (Fed. Cir. 1984); United States Cane Sugar Refiners’ Ass’n v. Block, 69 C.C.P.A. 172, 683 F.2d 399 (1982); Kemet Electronics Corp. v. Barshefsky, 976 F. Supp. 1012 (CIT 1997); Luggage & Leather Goods Mfrs. of America, Inc. v. United States, 588 F. Supp. 1413 (CIT 1984).’’ 236 F.3d at 1327. This court cannot adopt the interpretation of Corus Group advanced by defendants and, at the same time, adhere to the jurisdictional principles set forth in Humane Society and the predecessor cases in which presidential actions were challenged pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i). Nor is this court able to reconcile the construction of § 1581(i) advanced by defendants with the plain meaning of that statutory provision. As noted above, Corus Group did not overturn Humane Society. See Corus Group, 352 F.3d at 1359–1360. Furthermore, it did not overturn the previous cases identified in Humane Society as ‘‘numerous cases in which the Court of International Trade has since consid102 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 ered challenges to the actions of the President pursuant to the grant of jurisdiction in § 1581(i).’’ Humane Society, 236 F.3d at 1327. Moreover, under precedent of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, these earlier decisions may be overturned only en banc. See Sacco v. Dep’t of Justice, 317 F.3d 1384, 1386 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citing Newell Companies, Inc. v. Kenney Mfg. Co., 864 F.2d 757, 765 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (‘‘A panel of this court is bound by prior precedential decisions unless and until overturned en banc.’’)). To the extent of any conflict between the decision in Corus Group and the decision in Humane Society, this court concludes that it should follow the earlier decision, because a decision of one panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should not be read to overturn the decision of a previous panel. ‘‘Where there is a direct conflict, the precedential decision is the first.’’ Newell Companies, Inc., 864 F.2d at 765 (Fed. Cir. 1988). The second part of defendants’ argument on jurisdiction is that the recommendation of the U.S. Trade Representative in the administrative proceeding was purely advisory, rather than determinative of legal rights, and hence is unreviewable under principles announced by the Supreme Court in Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. at 177–78, and cited by the Federal Circuit in Corus Group. Having contended that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over an action brought directly against the President and that the Trade Representative’s action cannot be challenged, defendants present what is in effect an argument that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because there is no officer of the United States against whom relief may be sought. The court finds this argument unpersuasive. As confirmed by the jurisdictional analyses in Humane Society and in prior decisions involving challenges to presidential action under trade statutes, 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) provides subject matter jurisdiction in this Court over a challenge such as this to final presidential action taken under Section 421. Accordingly, the court need not reach the issue whether the Trade Representative’s recommendation to the President, standing by itself, would have been appealable in this forum as a final decision, or, alternatively, ‘‘purely advisory’’ under principles advanced in Bennett v. Spear. See Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. at 178. The procedural actions taken by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative are challenged in this proceeding. They are reviewable pursuant to the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court as procedural predicates to the final presidential action. See Dalton v. Specter, 511 U.S. 462, 478 (1994) (Blackmun, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment); see also Fed. Trade Comm’n v. Standard Oil of Calif., 449 U.S. 232, 244–245 (1980) (Preliminary decision to issue complaint by Federal Trade Commission is not insulated by finality requirement, and ‘‘a court of appeals reviewing a [final] cease-and-desist order has the power to review alleged unlawfulness in the [preliminary] issuance of the complaint.’’). U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 103 Furthermore, were this court to accept the two premises of defendants’ jurisdictional argument, subject matter jurisdiction would be found to exist in this Court where a challenge is brought to a presidential decision granting import relief under Section 421 but not where the challenge is brought against a presidential decision denying such relief. Where the action challenged is one in which the President granted import relief, the Commissioner of Customs could be enjoined from collecting duties or from excluding merchandise from entry. Where, as here, the President denied such relief, defendants’ construction of § 1581(i) would leave no officer of the United States who could be sued. Support for such an anomalous distinction can be found neither in the language of 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) nor in the congressional purpose underlying this jurisdictional provision. The jurisdictional bifurcation that would be created by defendants’ interpretation of § 1581(i) would appear to blur the distinctions between subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. It also would lead to confusion of the type Congress intended to prevent when it included 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) as part of the Customs Courts Act of 1980, Pub. L. 96–417. As the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit observed in American Association of Exporters and Importers–Textile and Apparel Group v. United States, 751 F.2d 1239, 1245–46 (Fed. Cir. 1985), that intent was ‘‘to establish clear rules and to center international trade litigation in the CIT.’’ For the foregoing reasons, this court rejects the interpretations of § 1581(i) and of Corus Group that are advanced by defendants. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied. B. Summary Judgment and Judgment on an Agency Record In seeking dismissal of this action, defendants have moved for judgment on an agency record pursuant to USCIT Rule 56.1, ‘‘Judgment Upon an Agency Record for an Action Other Than That Described in 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c).’’ Subsection (a) of that Rule provides, in pertinent part, that ‘‘where a party believes that the determination of the court is to be made solely upon the basis of the record made before an agency, that party may move for judgment in its favor upon all or any part of the agency determination.’’ In this action, however, the determination of the court cannot be made solely on the basis of the record made before an agency, because the decision under review is that of the President, not that of an administrative agency. For the same reason, this case cannot be decided on the basis of judgment ‘‘upon all or any part of the agency determination.’’ Therefore, the subject matter of Rule 56.1 does not precisely describe the issue pending before the court. This case presents no genuine issue as to any material fact. Both plaintiff and defendants are seeking judgment as a matter of law. Specifically, plaintiff Motion Systems seeks an order granting it 104 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 judgment on the record setting aside the President’s determination not to grant relief from imports. Defendants and defendantintervenor CCL Industrial Motor Ltd. seek judgment as a matter of law dismissing this action. These circumstances are within the ambit of Rule 56, Summary Judgment.5 Accordingly, the court will consider defendants’ motion as a motion for summary judgment under USCIT Rule 56 and, similarly, treat the submission of plaintiff opposing defendants’ motion as a cross motion for summary judgment.6 C. Standard of Review for Presidential Actions under Trade Statutes In reviewing final actions of the President, courts have applied a standard of review considerably narrower and more deferential than the standards most often accorded to final actions by administrative agencies, which Congress has subjected generally to standards of review prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’), 5 U.S.C. § 706. The APA provisions include the standard of review commonly referred to as the ‘‘arbitrary and capricious’’ or ‘‘abuse of discretion’’ standard, under which a court will ‘‘hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be... arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.’’ 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). For cases brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i), 28 U.S.C. § 2640 refers this court to the APA, providing that the court ‘‘shall review the matter as provided in section 706 of title 5.’’ However, 5 U.S.C. § 706 is expressly confined to the review of an ‘‘agency action.’’ As the Supreme Court recognized in Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788 (1992), ‘‘the President is not an agency within the meaning of the Act,’’ concluding in that instance that ‘‘there is no final agency action 5USCIT R. 56(c) states, in the relevant part: The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. 6At oral argument held October 22, 2003, the parties indicated that they do not oppose the court’s consideration of the relief sought by defendants and plaintiff as a motion and cross motion, respectively, for summary judgment under Rule 56. Oral Arg. Tr. at 64 – 66. Subsequent to oral argument, plaintiff filed with the court a letter, dated November 18, 2003, stating that plaintiff now considered summary judgment to be inappropriate and seeking to ‘‘withdraw any concession that consideration under Rule 56 is in order.’’ In its opposition to defendants’ motion under Rule 56.1, plaintiff had acknowledged that ‘‘[t]here are no material issues of fact in issue in this action’’ and sought judgment on the record in its favor. Plaintiff has not sought to amend its pleadings. Most significantly, plaintiff’s letter of November 18, 2003 does not establish that this case presents a genuine issue as to any material fact. Under these circumstances, Rule 56 is the applicable rule under which this case is to be decided. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 105 that may be reviewed under the APA standards.’’ Id. at 796. The Franklin Court reasoned as follows: The President is not explicitly excluded from the APA’s purview, but he is not explicitly included, either. Out of respect for the separation of powers and the unique constitutional position of the President, we find that textual silence is not enough to subject the President to the provisions of the APA. We would require an express statement by Congress before assuming it intended the President’s performance of his statutory duties to be reviewed for abuse of discretion. 505 U.S. at 800–801. ‘‘Although the President’s actions may still be reviewed for constitutionality, we hold that they are not reviewable for abuse of discretion under the APA....’’ Id. at 801 (citations omitted). Franklin v. Massachusetts involved a judicial challenge to presidential action under the statutory congressional reapportionment provisions. When reviewing presidential actions taken under the authority of tariff statutes, courts also have limited the scope of their reviews, noting in particular the relationship between actions taken under tariff statutes and the President’s unique role in foreign affairs. In Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States, 762 F.2d 86 (Fed. Cir. 1985), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stated as follows: In international trade controversies of this highly discretionary kind–involving the President and foreign affairs–this court and its predecessors have often reiterated the very limited role of reviewing courts. See, e.g., American Association of Exporters and Importers v. United States, 751 F.2d 1239, 1248–49 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Florsheim Shoe Co. v. United States, 744 F.2d 787, 793 795–97 (Fed. Cir. 1984). For a court to interpose, there has to be a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority. 762 F.2d at 89. Maple Leaf Fish Co. involved the review of presidential action under the ‘‘escape clause’’ established by section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, 19 U.S.C. §§ 2251–53. In Florsheim Shoe Co., the Federal Circuit applied essentially the same standard of review in considering a challenge to the President’s exercise of authority under the Generalized System of Preferences (‘‘GSP’’) program (specifically, Section 504 of Title V of the Trade Act of 1974, 19 U.S.C. § 2464) to limit duty-free tariff treatment for a certain class of imported goods. The Federal Circuit in Florsheim Shoe Co. concluded that ‘‘[b]oth the Supreme Court and Court of Customs and Patent Appeals precedent have established that the Executive’s decisions in the sphere of international trade are reviewable only to determine whether the President’s action falls within his delegated authority, whether the statutory language has been properly construed, and whether the 106 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 President’s action conforms with the relevant procedural requirements.’’ Florsheim Shoe Co. v. United States, 744 F.2d 787, 795 (1984). The court further concluded that ‘‘[t]he President’s findings of fact and the motivations for his action are not subject to review.’’ Id. (citing United States v. George S. Bush & Co., 310 U.S. 371, 379–80 (1940); United States Cane Sugar Refiners’ Association v. Block, 683 F.2d at 404; Aimcee Wholesale Corp. v. United States, 468 F.2d 202, 206 (CCPA 1972)). As do the trade enactments at issue in Maple Leaf Fish Co., supra, and Florsheim Shoe Co., supra, Section 421 grants the President considerable discretion. The President may decide to provide import relief to the domestic industry, or, after making certain findings, may decide not to do so. If he decides to provide such relief, he may do so by means of ‘‘increased duties or other import restrictions.’’ Section 421(a), 19 U.S.C. § 2451(a). The time period for the relief is also left to the President’s discretion; the relief is to remain in effect ‘‘for such period as the President considers necessary to prevent or remedy the market disruption.’’ Id. Section 421 does not indicate congressional intent to subject the President’s determinations thereunder to an APA ‘‘abuse of discretion’’ or similar standard. Therefore, in reviewing the President’s determination of January 17, 2003 not to proclaim restrictive measures on imports of pedestal actuators from China, this court will uphold the President’s action absent ‘‘a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority.’’ Maple Leaf Fish Co., 762 F.2d at 89. D. Analysis of the President’s Decision under the Applicable Standard of Review 1. Construction of the Governing Statute and Action Within Delegated Authority This court finds no basis to conclude that the January 17, 2003 decision not to grant import relief to the U.S. pedestal actuator industry is based on a misconstruction of Section 421. The decision is consistent with the statute with respect to the types of factual determinations that are required to support a denial of import relief to a domestic industry and with respect to the requirement that the published decision include the ‘‘reasons therefor.’’ Moreover, because it contains a specific determination and a specific finding responsive to the statutory criteria for denying relief and presents reasons that are sufficient under the applicable standard for judicial review, the President’s decision did not exceed the authority delegated by Congress in Section 421. The aforementioned statutory criteria are set forth in Section 421(k). Section 421(k)(1) requires that a decision denying import relief be based on a presidential determination that provision of relief U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 107 is ‘‘not in the national economic interest of the United States, or, in extraordinary cases, that the taking of action pursuant to subsection (a) of this section would cause serious harm to the national security of the United States.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(k)(1). If the President decides to deny relief under the ‘‘economic interest’’ criterion as opposed to the ‘‘national security’’ criterion, the President may do so only upon a presidential finding under Section 421(k)(2) that ‘‘the taking of such action would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(k)(2). The President’s January 17, 2003 decision contains a presidential determination under the economic interest criterion: ‘‘After considering all relevant aspects of the investigation, I have determined that providing import relief for the U.S. pedestal actuator industry is not in the national economic interest of the United States.’’ The decision also contains a presidential finding that ‘‘the import relief would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action.’’ Finally, with respect to the President’s decision to deny relief, the notice states ‘‘reasons therefor.’’ This court’s consideration of the reasons stated in the presidential decision must be informed by the degree of deference to be accorded to the President under the applicable standard of review. As discussed previously, ‘‘[t]he President’s findings of fact and the motivations for his action are not subject to review.’’ Florsheim Shoe Co. v. United States, 744 F.2d at 795. Although the President must state reasons for his decision, those reasons are not to be reviewed in this court under the ‘‘abuse of discretion’’ standard of 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), nor are the underlying findings of fact to be subjected to a standard such as the ‘‘substantial evidence’’ standard described in 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(E). The reasons set forth in the President’s notice refer to factual matters that were before the President as a result of the investigation conducted by the USITC. They relate specifically to the statutory ‘‘economic interest’’ criterion and the statutory requirement that denial of relief under that criterion be based on a presidential finding that ‘‘the taking of such action would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action.’’ As a result, they are directed to the specific determination and finding which, under the plain meaning of Section 421(k), must guide the exercise of presidential discretion to deny relief. Having made both the ‘‘economic interest’’ determination required by subsection (k)(1) and the finding under subsection (k)(2) that imposing import relief would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action, and having presented reasons for his decision in the published notice that are sufficient under the applicable standard for judicial review, the 108 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 President was acting within the boundaries of the discretion Congress delegated to him in deciding not to impose import relief for the domestic pedestal actuator industry. Motion Systems contends that the President, in denying import relief following the affirmative determination of market disruption by the USITC, both misconstrued Section 421 and exceeded his authority thereunder. Once the USITC has made such a determination, plaintiff argues, the President ‘‘is acting under a mandate to provide relief,’’ unless the President invokes what plaintiff views ‘‘is meant to be a rare exception to that relief.’’ Pl.’s Br. in Supp. of its Opp. to Defs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. upon an Agency R. (‘‘Pl.’s Br.’’) at 28. In plaintiff’s view, the statute creates a presumption of relief in the use of the words ‘‘shall... proclaim’’ in subsection (a) of Section 421, under which the President, following an affirmative USITC determination, ‘‘shall, in accordance with the provisions of this section, proclaim increased duties or other import restrictions.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 24. Motion Systems finds further support for its interpretation in the language of subsection (j)(2) of Section 421, which provides that the President, in the absence of an agreement with the People’s Republic of China, ‘‘shall provide import relief in accordance with subsection (a) of this section.’’ Id. In asserting that the provision in subsection (k)(2) of Section 421 ‘‘is meant to be a rare exception’’ to relief, Motion Systems places emphasis on the words ‘‘clearly greater’’ as used therein (‘‘The President may determine under paragraph (1) that providing import relief is not in the national economic interest of the United States only if the President finds that the taking of such action would have an adverse impact on the United States economy clearly greater than the benefits of such action’’). Based on the words ‘‘clearly greater’’ as used in subsection (k)(2), plaintiff construes the statute to require that ‘‘[i]n order to support a denial of relief . . . the evidence supporting the denial must be ‘clear,’ or beyond a reasonable doubt’’ and that ‘‘the burden was on the President to make such a negative determination only where such more-than-substantial evidence was produced.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 3. Plaintiff further contends that ‘‘[t]he record must contain evidence quantifying the adverse economic impact on the United States economy of providing such relief, not mere conjecture that there might be some adverse impact.’’ Id. Regarding benefits of relief, plaintiff argues that ‘‘[t]he President has simply not examined or quantified the benefits of relief, and thus the Court cannot sustain his determination that the adverse impact on the United States economy of providing the recommended import relief would be greater than those benefits.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 46. The court does not agree with plaintiff’s construction of Section 421. Subsection (k)(2) describes the nature of the presidential finding that must precede a presidential determination that providing import relief is not in the national economic interest. It does not imU.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 109 pose on the President a burden to establish or support that finding with ‘‘evidence quantifying the adverse economic impact,’’ ‘‘evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,’’ ‘‘clear and convincing evidence,’’ or ‘‘more-than-substantial evidence.’’ The provision itself makes no reference to evidence or burden of proof. Nor does it indicate congressional intent to impose a standard of review different from that which the courts consistently have applied in the judicial review of presidential action under tariff statutes. The use of the words ‘‘shall... proclaim’’ and ‘‘shall provide’’ in subsections (a) and (j)(2) of Section 421, respectively, when read together with subsection (k)(2), do not impose on the President the evidentiary requirements that plaintiff ascribes to these statutory provisions. The words ‘‘shall... proclaim increased import duties or other restrictions,’’ as used in subsection (a), are expressly qualified with the phrase ‘‘in accordance with the provisions of this section,’’ which includes the exceptions provided for in subsections (k)(1) and (k)(2). Similarly, the ‘‘shall provide’’ language of subsection (j)(2) incorporates the same exceptions through the use of the phrase ‘‘in accordance with subsection (a) of this section.’’ A judicial inquiry commensurate with plaintiff’s construction of the statute would require this court to evaluate the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the President’s findings. That is not within the court’s power. Again, ‘‘[t]he President’s findings of fact and the motivations for his action are not subject to review.’’ Florsheim Shoe Co., 744 F.2d at 795. Plaintiff relies on a number of cases for its contention that the President’s findings should be subjected upon judicial review to a ‘‘clear and convincing’’ evidentiary standard. The cited cases include Finnigan Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n., 180 F.3d 1354, 1366 n.8 (1999) (The applicable standard for determining existence of invalidating activities in a patent case is ‘‘clear, satisfactory and beyond a reasonable doubt,’’ which is ‘‘indistinguishable from the more modern parlance of ‘clear and convincing’ evidence.’’); United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948) (Appellate review of a trial court’s findings of fact will be affirmed unless ‘‘clearly erroneous.’’); Connor v. United States, 24 CIT 195, 198 (2000) (To establish jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) plaintiff must show by clear and convincing evidence that the immediate threat of a harm occurring exists.). The cases cited by plaintiff are unavailing. None establishes a rule of law under which this court, based on the effect of statutory words such as ‘‘clearly greater’’ or any words to similar effect, is to subject presidential findings to a substantial evidence test or a more stringent test requiring ‘‘clear and convincing’’ evidence or evidence ‘‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’’ In summary, the President’s decision of January 17, 2003 contains the determination and the finding required by Section 421 to support a denial of import relief and presents ‘‘reasons therefor’’ that are 110 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 sufficient to support that decision under the applicable standard for judicial review. The court finds no basis to conclude that the President’s decision is based on ‘‘a clear misconstruction of the governing statute’’ or that it constituted ‘‘action outside delegated authority.’’ Maple Leaf Fish Co., 762 F.2d at 89. 2. Compliance with Procedures The President’s decision not to impose import relief for the pedestal actuator industry is subject to review by this court to determine ‘‘whether the President’s action conforms with the relevant procedural requirements.’’ Florsheim Shoe Co., 744 F.2d at 795. As to review of procedure, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stated in Maple Leaf Fish Co. that ‘‘[f]or a court to interpose, there has to be . . . a significant procedural violation.’’ 762 F.2d at 89. The court finds no such violation. The Section 421 proceeding involved an affirmative finding by the USITC of market disruption and a proposed remedy by the USITC, pursuant to Section 421(g). If the U.S. Trade Representative proposes a measure to prevent or remedy the market disruption found by the USITC to exist, the Trade Representative is required by Section 421(h) to publish notice of that measure in the Federal Register and ‘‘of the opportunity, including a public hearing, if requested, for importers, exporters, and other interested parties to submit their views and evidence on the appropriateness of the proposed measure and whether it would be in the public interest.’’ 19 U.S.C. § 2451(h)(1). In this proceeding, the Trade Representative’s notice proposes the remedy recommended by the USITC ‘‘for further consideration by domestic producers, importers, exporters, and other interested parties, and invites any of these parties to submit their views and evidence on the appropriateness of the proposed remedy and whether it would be in the public interest.’’ USTR Notice, 67 Fed. Reg. at 71,008.7 At the request of Motion Systems, the U.S. Trade Representative conducted a public hearing, which was held on December 18, 2002. Thus, the Trade Representative’s procedures satisfied the basic procedural requirements of the statute for public notice and comment and for a public hearing. Motion Systems raises two objections to the Trade Representative’s conduct of the hearing. First, Motion Systems asserts that the hearing procedures were not strict enough to prevent Electric Mobil7The notice also requested public comment ‘‘on other possible actions, including: imposition of a quota on imports of pedestal actuators from China, with a quantity and/or duration different from the USITC recommendation; imposition of a tariff-rate quota on imports of pedestal actuators from China; increased duties on imports of pedestal actuators from China; an import monitoring mechanism; or no import relief (pursuant to a determination under Section 421(k) of the Trade Act regarding the national economic interest or national security).’’ USTR Notice, 67 Fed. Reg. at 71,008. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 111 ity Corporation from placing on the record ‘‘views,’’ rather than ‘‘hard evidence,’’ which views Motion Systems asserts would have been exposed as false if subjected to ‘‘cross-examination.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 52–53. Plaintiff contends that the less-than-formal procedures allowed Electric Mobility to place on the record statements indicating that Electric Mobility’s switch to a Chinese supplier of actuators had reduced the price of that company’s scooters. In testimony at the Trade Representative’s hearing, the president of Electric Mobility, Mr. Michael Flowers, stated that when Electric Mobility switched its sourcing of pedestal actuators from Motion Systems to the Chinese supplier it reduced the price of its Rascal Scooter by over $300. A.R. Ex. IV at 7–8. Mr. Flowers followed that statement with the statement that he ‘‘believe[d] the import quotas recommended will increase our average sale price by at least $200 next year....’’ Id. at 8. Motion Systems, in a post-hearing submission, challenged the credibility of Mr. Flowers’s testimony on several points. A.R. Ex. V, Comment 29. On the specific issue of price, Motion Systems claimed that Electric Mobility had not reduced its scooter prices after the change to the Chinese supplier. Id. Motions Systems placed two documents on the record to support its claim. The first document is a transcript of a hearing from a different federal court proceeding in which another company official of Electric Mobility, Mr. George Flowers, stated that the company had not sought out a cheaper supplier for the purpose of passing along savings to consumers. Id. The second document is an article by an unidentified author that is described as having appeared on the website www.geocities.com/ stuportner/files/news.htm with the headline ‘‘Electric Mobility To No Longer Sell Through Dealers.’’ The article states that ‘‘by going direct, Electric Mobility can sell its popular Rascal scooter for $4,000 –$5,000, compared to the roughly $2,900 dealers sell them for, sources say.’’ Id. Motion Systems, before this court, claims that by allowing Mr. Flowers to place on the record ‘‘unsubstantiated’’ testimony, not based on ‘‘hard evidence’’ and contradicted by documents on the record, the process allowed incorrect statements on the record, without which the President’s findings cannot be affirmed. Motion Systems reasons that Electric Mobility’s alleged failure to lower the price in the absence of import quotas undermines the contention that imposing import quotas will result in increased prices. The second procedural violation plaintiff claims is that the advance ‘‘notice’’ Electric Mobility gave of its intended presentation at the hearing was misleading. The Federal Register notice of the hearing had requested that parties intending to appear provide ‘‘a brief summary of the comments to be presented.’’ USTR Notice, 67 Fed. Reg. at 71,008. Electric Mobility filed a letter stating that its president, Michael Flowers, would testify. It summarized Mr. Flowers’s comments as follows: 112 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Mr. Flowers will testify that Electric Mobility is the only purchaser of the actuators at issue, and that, no matter what remedy is imposed, Electric Mobility will not resume purchases from Motion Systems. He will also testify that the imposition of import restrictions would harm the domestic economy and cause additional burdens to the elderly and mobility-impaired. A.R. Ex. III, Patton Boggs letter, Dec. 11, 2002. Motion Systems claims that Mr. Flowers’s discussion at the hearing of the probability of increased prices for mobility scooters if the proposed import relief were granted was outside the scope of the summary and, therefore, improperly before the U.S. Trade Representative. See Pl.’s Br. at 54– 55. Plaintiff’s first procedural objection is not a sufficient basis upon which this court may overturn or otherwise disturb the presidential decision. The Trade Representative’s procedures afforded interested parties the opportunity to be heard in the precise manner required by Section 421(h). Although Motion Systems may have desired a more trial-like hearing with sworn testimony and cross-examination, nothing in the statute required such procedures. So long as it satisfies the specific statutory requirements and adheres to ‘‘fundamentals of fair play,’’ an agency has considerable latitude over its method of inquiry. FCC v. Pottsville Broad. Co., 309 U.S. 134, 143–144 (1940). The Supreme Court has expressed this principle as follows: But this much is absolutely clear. Absent constitutional constraints or extremely compelling circumstances the ‘‘administrative agencies ‘should be free to fashion their own rules of procedure and to pursue methods of inquiry capable of permitting them to discharge their multitudinous duties.’ ’’ Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 435 U.S. 519, 543–544 (1978) (quoting FCC v. Schreiber, 381 U.S. 280, 290 (1965), in turn quoting from FCC v. Pottsville Broad. Co., 309 U.S. at 143). In this case, the Trade Representative’s procedures allowed witnesses to make extensive statements at a public hearing and allowed participating parties to submit supporting material. The President was free to consider the statements submitted, weigh their credibility, and ignore irrelevant submissions. Motion Systems was afforded the opportunity in a post-hearing submission to respond to the entire case made by the importer, the Chinese manufacturer, and the Chinese government. Its objections to the placing of the ‘‘views’’ of Electric Mobility on the record and to its lack of an opportunity to cross-examine Electric Mobility’s witness do not establish, in the words of the opinion in Maple Leaf Fish Co., a ‘‘significant procedural violation.’’ 762 F.2d at 89. Plaintiff’s second claimed procedural error, that the ‘‘notice’’ given by Electric Mobility with regard to its presentation at the Trade RepU.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 113 resentative’s hearing was misleading, also fails to suffice as a basis to invalidate the President’s decision. Electric Mobility’s pre-hearing summary indicated that Mr. Flowers would discuss harm to the domestic economy and ‘‘additional burdens’’ to consumers of the downstream products. Prices for the downstream products are among the subjects relevant to the topic of ‘‘additional burdens’’ referred to in the pre-hearing letter filed by Electric Mobility. In addition, Motion Systems had the opportunity to make a post-hearing submission to the Trade Representative with the potential to cure the effect of any unfair surprise Motion Systems may have encountered because of the content of Mr. Flowers’s testimony. Motion Systems in fact made a post-hearing comment submission in which it contested the validity of Mr. Flowers’s statements about the price of the downstream products. A.R. Ex. V, Comment 29. That submission was part of the record available for the President’s consideration. With respect to both of its objections to the Trade Representative’s hearing, plaintiff has not established a procedural irregularity that denied it fundamental fairness, nor is it able to show that it was harmed by the procedural errors it alleges. See Intercargo Ins. Co. v. United States, 83 F.3d 391, 394 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (‘‘It is well settled that principles of harmless error apply to the review of agency proceedings.’’). E. Other Challenges by Motion Systems to the President’s Decision In addition to its challenge to the President’s construction of Section 421, its claim that the President exceeded his authority thereunder, and its objections to the Trade Representative’s hearing procedure, Motion Systems raises two challenges to the President’s decision and decision-making process, which the court summarizes as follows: (1) the President and the Trade Representative improperly considered ‘‘political factors’’ after the close of the statutory U.S.-China consultation period; and (2) the President was required to reopen the proceeding after the submission of additional evidence by Motion Systems in rebuttal to information submitted by Electric Mobility. 1. The President Is Not Prohibited from Considering ‘‘Political Factors.’’ Plaintiff alleges that the President and the U.S. Trade Representative acted improperly in considering what it terms ‘‘political factors’’ after the conclusion of the period identified by Section 421(j)(1) for consultations with China. In support of its claim, Motion Systems points to a comment letter submitted to the Trade Representative by the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China and testimony at the Trade Representative’s hearing by an official of the People’s Republic of China, each of which, according to plaintiff, ‘‘argued that proceed114 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 ing under this provision [i.e., Section 421] threatened ‘harm to China-U.S. trade and economic relations.’ ’’ Pl.’s Br. at 50–51, 51 n.34. Plaintiff submits that consideration of such ‘‘political factors’’ was improper after the consultation period and that the President was then required to confine his consideration to ‘‘economic factors.’’ Under Section 421(j)(1), ‘‘[t]he Trade Representative is authorized to enter into agreements for the People’s Republic of China to take such action as necessary to prevent or remedy market disruption, and should seek to conclude such agreements before the expiration of the 60-day consultation period’’ provided for in the Protocol of Accession of the People’s Republic of China to the World Trade Organization. If no agreement is reached, or if the President ‘‘determines tha[t] an agreement reached . . . is not preventing or remedying the market disruption,’’ then the President is directed to provide import relief in accordance with subsection (a) of Section 421. 19 U.S.C. § 2451(j)(2). Motion Systems argues that, subsequent to the consultation period, ‘‘[t]hreats of retaliation by China for application of the provisions of the law whose enactment it agreed to as a condition of support for Chinese accession to the WTO were improperly entertained and considered by USTR and the President.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 50–51. The court finds no merit in plaintiff’s argument regarding ‘‘political factors.’’ Neither the record before the court nor the text of the President’s decision establishes that trade relations between the United States and China were a factor in the President’s decision. Regardless, the court finds nothing in Section 421 that would have prohibited the President from considering a wide range of factors, including an effect on trade relations between the United States and China, in determining whether there would be an adverse impact on the U.S. economy clearly greater than the benefits of granting relief. Nor does the court perceive any violation of Section 421 in the actions of the Trade Representative that included the Embassy letter in the record and that allowed the testimony of the official of the People’s Republic of China. In enacting Section 421, Congress gave no indication of an intent to interfere with the Executive Branch function of communicating with foreign governments. 2. The President Was Not Required to Reopen the Proceedings. Motion Systems argues that ‘‘[w]here, as here, the President’s decision is based on testimony that is itself erroneous... there is an obligation to re-consider that decision in light of the new information that has come to light,’’ adding that ‘‘[o]therwise, the integrity of a section 421 proceeding, including in particular the President’s decision on remedy, is compromised and justice is denied.’’ Pl.’s Br. at 60. In its post-decision submission, plaintiff cited as the ‘‘new information’’ price lists from the Department of Veteran Affairs for Electric Mobility’s scooters indicating that Electric Mobility did not decrease U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 115 the prices of its downstream mobility scooters after it switched to the Chinese pedestal actuator supplier and that Electric Mobility did not make the ‘‘seat lift’’ standard equipment on 70 percent of its scooters. Plaintiff contends that these price lists establish that the testimony by Electric Mobility’s president at the hearing conducted by the office of the U.S. Trade Representative was incorrect or misleading. The matter raised in plaintiff’s post-decision submission does not suffice as a basis upon which this court may compel the President or the Trade Representative to reopen the proceedings for reconsideration of the President’s final decision. Plaintiff correctly observes that administrative bodies have the authority to reconsider their decisions based on a showing of perjury or fraud. See Pl.’s Br. at 58 (citing Alberta Gas Chemicals, Ltd. v. Celanese Corp., 650 F.2d 9 (2d Cir. 1981)); see also Elkem Metals Co. v. United States, 26 CIT , , 193 F. Supp. 2d 1314, 1320 (2002). However, the decision to reconsider is one left to the agency in question. A court will not disturb the decision of the agency not to reconsider, except upon a showing of abuse of discretion. See United States v. Pierce Auto Freight Lines, Inc., 327 U.S. 515, 535 (1946). Even more deference likely would be due a decision not to reconsider a final action taken by the President. Plaintiff has not made a showing that the President or the Trade Representative committed an abuse of discretion following issuance of the final presidential decision. In its post-decision submission, Motion Systems addressed a general subject that the party already had addressed in its post-hearing submission and that was not pivotal to the reasons underlying the President’s decision as stated by the President in the Federal Register notice of January 22, 2003. Accordingly, the ‘‘new information’’ offered in the post-decision submission does not establish that the President’s final decision was, as plaintiff alleges, ‘‘based on testimony that is itself erroneous.’’ (Emphasis added). Nor does it present facts that would compel the President, in the exercise of his overall discretion as granted by Congress in Section 421, to reach a different decision. The Assistant Trade Representative’s letter following plaintiff’s post-decision submission responded that the issue raised in that submission was neither novel nor determinative in the proceedings. The letter stated that ‘‘[t]he issue of whether Electric Mobility reduced its price after purchasing Chinese pedestal actuators was clearly reflected in [the materials submitted prior to the decision] as disputed between the parties.’’ The letter concludes that the ‘‘issue relates only indirectly to the considerations identified by the President as dispositive in his decision.’’ For these reasons, the matters raised in plaintiff’s post-decision submission are insufficient to form the basis upon which this court may compel a reopening of the administrative proceedings. 116 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the court concludes that it has subject matter jurisdiction of this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) and that the President’s decision denying import relief to the pedestal actuator industry did not misconstrue the governing statute and did not exceed the authority delegated to the President thereunder. The court finds no basis to overturn that decision on procedural grounds or to order the President or the U.S. Trade Representative to reopen the administrative proceedings. Summary judgment is granted for defendants and will be entered accordingly. Slip Op. 04–78 HEARTLAND BY-PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, Court No. 03–00307 Before: Barzilay, Judge [Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss granted.] Decided: July 1, 2004 Serko & Simon (David Serko, Daniel J. Gluck) for Plaintiff. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General; Barbara S. Williams, Attorney-inCharge, International Trade Field Office; Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, Department of Justice (Aimee Lee); Karen P. Binder, Assistant Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, (Yelena Slepak) and Allan Martin, Associate Chief Counsel, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, (Ellen Daly), of counsel, for Defendant. OPINION BARZILAY, JUDGE: This case involves an ongoing dispute between Heartland ByProducts, Inc., a Canadian sugar refiner and importer, and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (‘‘Customs’’ or ‘‘the government’’). The original substantive issue, which involved Heartland’s challenge to a revocation ruling by Customs, has already been decided and settled. The subject of the instant litigation is the proper disposition of entries imported by Heartland in reliance on this court’s favorable decision in Heartland By-Prods., Inc. v. United States, 23 CIT 754, 74 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (1999) (‘‘Heartland I’’), during the time between the issuance of that opinion and the issuance of the Federal Circuit’s mandate reversing it, Heartland By-Prods., Inc. v. United States, 264 F.3d 1126 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (‘‘Heartland II’’). At U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 117 this stage, however, the sole issue before the court is its jurisdiction over the dispute, raised in the government’s motion to dismiss. For the reasons stated herein, the government’s motion is granted and the case is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. I. Background In Heartland I, Heartland, seeking to import sugar syrup from Canada, challenged a Customs revocation ruling that imposed a significantly higher duty rate than had originally been established in a previous ruling. 74 F. Supp. 2d 1324. In its initial inquiry, Heartland had sought a pre-importation ruling regarding the duty rate applicable to its sugar syrup, and Customs had ruled that a non-Tariff Rate Quota (‘‘TRQ’’) rate of 0.35¢/liter applied (‘‘the non-TRQ rate’’). In reliance upon this ruling, Heartland began to import the sugar syrup. Afterward, in a Revocation of Ruling Letter, Customs indicated that the duty rate would instead be 35.74¢/kg (‘‘the TRQ rate’’) — an effective duty rate approximately 10,000 percent higher than the non-TRQ rate. Obtaining jurisdiction under section 1581(h) pre-importation review, Heartland challenged the Revocation Ruling before this court. This court held in favor of Heartland, reversing Customs’ imposition of the TRQ rate. Heartland I, 74 F. Supp. 2d 1324. Relying on this decision, Heartland continued to import large quantities of the sugar syrup. Customs appealed this court’s decision, but did not seek an order staying it pending the appeal. On August 30, 2001, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in favor of the government, reversing this court’s decision and re-implementing the Revocation Ruling and the TRQ rate. Heartland II, 264 F.3d 1126. On August 31, 2001, Heartland stopped importing the sugar syrup. All along, as Heartland was importing syrup, Customs had been liquidating Heartland’s entries, some at the pre-revocation non-TRQ rate and some at the TRQ rate. After the Federal Circuit decision, Customs then began re-liquidating earlier entries at the TRQ rate. Heartland, in a motion for entry of judgment, challenged Customs’ liquidation of entries made after this court’s Heartland I decision and before the Federal Circuit’s reversal, arguing that because this court’s decision was not stayed, the pre-revocation rate applied to merchandise entered during this interval. The government challenged this court’s authority to hear Heartland’s claims, arguing that the court no longer had jurisdiction under section 1581(h) because all of Heartland’s entries at issue had already been entered, and were thus now considered ‘‘actual’’ entries. In an extensive opinion this court rejected the government’s contention, stating that it retained section 1581(h) jurisdiction over Heartland’s entries. Any other interpretation of the statutory provision, this court indicated, would be contrary to the clear intent of the Customs Courts Act of 1980 (‘‘1980 Act’’) and would in effect render 118 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 this court’s decisions made pursuant to section 1581(h) unconstitutional as advisory opinions. See Heartland By-Prods., Inc. v. United States, 26 C.I.T. , 223 F. Supp. 2d 1317, 1333–1334 (2002) (‘‘Heartland III’’). This court declined to exercise its jurisdiction, however, in order to allow factual ambiguities to become clarified and because the possibility of a better alternative existed — namely, establishing jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a). Id. at 1335. As section 1581(a) requires a valid protest be denied as a prerequisite to obtaining jurisdiction, one of the alternative methods of establishing jurisdiction would have been an agreement between the parties that Heartland would protest the liquidation of a representative entry or entries, and that Customs would then deny the protest(s) and suspend liquidation of Heartland’s other entries pending the outcome of Heartland’s challenge.1 After unsuccessful attempts to come to such an agreement, Heartland filed the instant, entirely new, action seeking relief consistent with the court’s opinion in Heartland III and claiming jurisdiction under section 1581(h), section 1581(i), or alternatively, under the supplemental jurisdiction statute for the federal district courts, 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). The government argues that the court does not have jurisdiction to hear this case under any of Heartland’s pleaded bases, and that the only available avenue would be jurisdiction pursuant to section 1581(a). II. 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) Jurisdiction As stated above, the court found that it retained its original section 1581(h) jurisdiction over the entries at issue in Heartland III. 2 The court, however, declined to exercise its jurisdiction, denying Heartland’s motion and dismissing the case. Heartland III, 223 F. Supp. 2d at 1335–1336. As a result, unfortunately for Heartland, the court formally relinquished jurisdiction over that case. See, e.g., Lazorko v. Pa. Hosp., 237 F.3d 242 (3d Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 533 U.S. 930, 150 L. Ed. 2d 719, 121 S. Ct. 2552 (2001) (courts relinquish jurisdiction when dismissing all claims before them). While involving the same parties, entries and underlying dispute as Heartland III, the present action is an entirely separate, new cause of action. Therefore, Heartland carries the burden of re-establishing the jurisdiction of this court to survive the government’s motion to dismiss. See Former Employees of Sonoco Prods. Co. v. United States Sec’y of Labor, 27 CIT , 273 F. Supp. 2d 1336, 1338 (2003), aff’d, 2004 1At oral argument, government counsel suggested to the court that Heartland could establish section 1581(a) jurisdiction by protesting one entry, after which Customs ‘‘would likely’’ suspend action concerning Heartland’s other entries. The court then urged the parties to seek a mutually agreeable resolution to the issues in the present case. Hr’g Tr., 38– 40, Heartland By-Prods., Inc. v. United States, Ct. No. 99–09–00590 (Jan. 23, 2002). 2The same entries are the subject of this action as well. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 119 U.S. App. LEXIS 12071 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citing McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 189, 80 L. Ed. 1135, 56 S. Ct. 780 (1935)). During its deliberations, the court requested the parties provide supplemental briefing on the applicability of the doctrines of law of the case and issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) to the present action, of the court’s prior statement in Heartland III: [t]he court finds that 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) does confer subject matter jurisdiction on this court to consider issues applicable to actual entries, which were the contemplated entries considered when the court first took jurisdiction. 223 F. Supp. 2d at 1320. After careful review, the court finds that neither doctrine is applicable to the facts of the present case, and therefore the government is free to raise the issue of this court’s jurisdiction over the present case. The principle of law of the case indicates that the laws applied in decisions at earlier stages of a litigation become the governing principles at later stages of that same litigation. Cabot Corp. v. United States, 12 CIT 664, 670 n.5, 694 F. Supp. 949, 954 n.5 (1998). The instant case is not the same litigation as Heartland III, which was dismissed, and therefore, the legal principles established in Heartland III cannot be applied here. The doctrine of issue preclusion, on the other hand, applies to two different actions, but only when (1) an issue is identical to one decided in the first action; (2) the issue was actually litigated in the first action; (3) the resolution of the issue was essential to a final judgment in the first action; and (4) the party defending against issue preclusion had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the first action. Shell Petroleum, Inc. v. United States, 319 F.3d 1334, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 157 L. Ed. 2d 693, 124 S. Ct. 805 (2003). Although the court stated in Heartland III that it ‘‘finds’’ that section 1581(h) did confer subject matter jurisdiction, it held that the exercise of such jurisdiction would have been inappropriate at that time considering the factual circumstances. Therefore, the government is not collaterally estopped from challenging the jurisdiction of this court to adjudicate Heartland’s claim in the instant action. Having found that it no longer retains jurisdiction pursuant to section 1581(h), as derived from its original exercise of such jurisdiction in Heartland I, the court now turns its attention to the issue of whether a new basis exists. Section 1581(h) indicates that: [t]he Court of International Trade shall have exclusive jurisdiction of any civil action commenced to review, prior to the importation of the goods involved, a ruling by the Secretary of the Treasury, or a refusal to issue or change such a ruling, relating to classification, valuation, rate of duty . . . but only if the party commencing the civil action demonstrates to the court that he 120 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 would be irreparably harmed unless given an opportunity to obtain judicial review prior to such importation. 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) (emphasis added). Currently, all of Heartland’s entries have been imported, and as the Federal Circuit has settled the long-term outlook of Heartland’s sugar syrup importation business, Heartland has no prospective entries. Thus, in this new cause of action, there are no entries that can serve as a basis for maintaining section 1581(h) jurisdiction. Heartland argues that requiring importers to comply with section 1581(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 2637(a) (exhaustion of administrative remedies), despite having entered the goods in reliance on this court’s section 1581(h) judgment in Heartland I, would frustrate the Congressional intent underlying section 1581(h). This argument, although attractive, is not compatible with the procedural posture of the case. Pursuant to jurisdiction under section 1581(h), this court in Heartland I heard Heartland’s claims regarding Customs’ treatment of its entries and initially decided the law in Heartland’s favor. Because the government did not seek to stay this court’s decision pending appeal, it remained in force until the issuance of the Federal Circuit’s mandate, reversing the opinion of this court. Thus, if Heartland seeks to challenge Customs’ allegedly illegal liquidation or reliquidation of entries at the higher TRQ rate after this court’s decision and before the Federal Circuit’s mandate, it must do so using section 1581(a), the traditional jurisdictional route. Heartland submits, and the court agrees, that a single entry subject to a denied protest by Customs would be representative of all the ‘‘contemplated entries’’ that Heartland seeks to adjudicate. See Pl.’s Mem. of Law in Resp. to Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss (‘‘Heartland Brief’’) at 17. It is regrettable that such a procedure for establishing jurisdiction could not be worked out by the parties, particularly after the government’s seeming acquiescence at oral argument. See supra note 1. Nevertheless, because the court denied Heartland’s motion for entry of judgment and dismissed its action in Heartland III, and because the entries at issue in the present litigation are not prospective entries, Heartland cannot rely on section 1581(h) as a jurisdictional basis for the relief it seeks. III. 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) Jurisdiction According to the well-settled law of this court, jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i)3 may not be invoked when jurisdiction under an3 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) states: In addition to the jurisdiction conferred upon the Court of International Trade by subsections (a)–(h) of this section and subject to the exception set forth in subsection (j) of this section, the Court of International Trade shall have exclusive jurisdiction of any civil acU.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 121 other subsection of section 1581 is, or could have been available, unless the remedy provided under that other subsection would be manifestly inadequate. Miller & Co. v. United States, 824 F.2d 961, 963 (Fed. Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1041, 98 L. Ed. 2d 859, 108 S. Ct. 773 (1988). The fact that Heartland would be required to pay duties on a protested entry does not alone satisfy the requirement that a remedy under section 1581(a) would be manifestly inadequate. See Am. Air Parcel Forwarding Co., 718 F.2d 1546, 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 937, 80 L. Ed. 2d 458, 104 S. Ct. 1909 (1984); J.C. Penny Co. v. U.S. Treasury Dept., 439 F.2d 63, 68 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 869, 30 L. Ed. 2d 113, 92 S. Ct. 60 (1971) (‘‘Plaintiffs’ allegations of financial impossibility, even if accepted as true, do not place them within the ‘adequate remedy’ exception. The dispositive consideration in determining whether plaintiffs have an adequate remedy is the nature of the barrier and not its financial height. Any financial barrier is inherent in the system established by Congress, and must have been recognized by Congress...’’). Heartland claims that forcing it to satisfy the government’s $10 million security demand and to deposit the additional $26 million in duties would deprive it of the ability to adjudicate its rights. This claim alone, however, is insufficient to establish jurisdiction under section 1581(i). Heartland has made no factual showing of financial inability to pay, other than referring to the duties as ‘‘ruinous,’’ or that paying the duties, for example, would force it into bankruptcy. Thus, on the basis of the information provided to the court, Heartland cannot obtain jurisdiction under section 1581(i). Furthermore, Heartland’s argument that requiring it to pay duties as a condition precedent to invoking jurisdiction under section 1581(a), as required by section 2637(a), would frustrate its right to rely on this court’s section 1581(h) judgment is unpersuasive. Heartland had the option to pay the duties owed on a single denied protest and, if required to, seek an injunction against the liquidation of its tion commenced against the United States, its agencies, or its officers, that arises out of any law of the United States providing for— (1) revenue from imports or tonnage; (2) ariffs, duties, fees, or other taxes on the importation of merchandise for reasons other than the raising of revenue; (3) embargoes or other quantitative restrictions on the importation of merchandise for reasons other than the protection of the public health or safety; or (4) administration and enforcement with respect to the matters referred to in paragraphs (1)–(3) of this subsection and subsections (a)–(h) of this section. This subsection shall not confer jurisdiction over an antidumping or countervailing duty determination which is reviewable either by the Court of International Trade under section 516A(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 or by a binational panel under article 1904 of the North American Free Trade Agreement or the United States-Canada Free-Trade Agreement and section 516A(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930. 122 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 other entries. Treating the single entry as a test case, Heartland could have sought clarification of its rights under this court’s section 1581(h) judgment. Heartland did not do so.4 Therefore, because the remedies provided under section 1581(a) have not been shown to be manifestly inadequate, Heartland is precluded from relying on section 1581(i) as a basis for jurisdiction. IV. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) Supplemental Jurisdiction Heartland also pleads jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), which allows for supplemental jurisdiction in certain instances. Heartland contends that determination of the effective date of the reversal of the original classification ruling is so related to its original action that it forms part of the same case or controversy as the present action. Therefore, Heartland seems to argue, this court may extend its jurisdiction over the present claim. Section 1367(a) states that: Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) or as expressly provided otherwise by Federal Statute, in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution . . . 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). This argument is inapposite. Even if section 1367 does apply to the Court of International Trade, there exists no statutory basis for the assertion of supplemental jurisdiction in this court. Furthermore, if there were, Heartland’s analogy fails since exercising supplemental jurisdiction over a new claim would require an action pending before the court over which it presently has an independent basis for jurisdiction. In the instant case, Heartland’s previous claim was dismissed, and there is no pending action before the court to which Heartland’s present complaint relates. Therefore, this court cannot take jurisdiction over Heartland’s complaint under section 1367(a). 4 It is not entirely clear to the court why Heartland did not. The parties disagree as to why their discussions did not lead to a mutually agreed upon method for Heartland to bring its substantive claim before the court through the denied protest/filed summons procedure under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a). Clearly there were extensive oral and written discussions. The court regrets that they were not successful. Nevertheless, the jurisdictional prerequisites are clear and do not allow the court to assume jurisdiction over this case without their having been met. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 123 V. Conclusion Because Heartland has failed to establish this court’s jurisdiction under any of its pleaded bases, the government’s motion to dismiss is hereby granted. Slip Op. 04–79 Before: Judge Judith M. Barzilay UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, v. OPTREX AMERICA, INC., Defendant. Court No. 02–00646 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is a Motion to Compel Discovery by Plaintiff United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection1 (‘‘Customs’’ or ‘‘government’’) dated February 27, 2004, (see also the companion opinion and order issued in this case on Defendant’s Motion to Compel Discovery). This case involves Defendant Optrex’s alleged negligent misclassification of imported liquid crystal display (‘‘LCD’’) panels and modules evidenced by entering incorrect HTSUS item numbers onto entry documents submitted to Customs. Plaintiff desires: (1) to continue depositions of Ms. Tolbert and Ms. Banas, two Optrex employees, regarding questions previously terminated by Optrex’s assertion of attorney-client privilege, and continue with reasonably related follow-up questions; (2) to have Defendant submit full and complete answers to Interrogatories 41–45 and fulfill Production of Documents No. 6; (3) to answer Interrogatories 46 & 47 and amend Admissions 10–15 if the Answers to Interrogatories 46 and 47 so require; and (4) to depose lawyers at Sonnenberg & Anderson. See Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, 20–21. First, the court notes that ‘‘[t]he purpose of discovery procedures are (1) to narrow the issues; (2) to obtain evidence for use at trial; and (3) to secure information as to the existence of evidence that may be used at trial.’’ Wood v. Todd Shipyards, 45 F.R.D. 363, 364 (S.D. Tex. 1968). ‘‘Mutual knowledge of all the relevant facts gathered by both parties is essential to proper litigation.’’ Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507 (1947). Thus the spirit of the rules is violated when advocates attempt to use discovery tools as tactical weapons rather than to expose the facts and illuminate the issues by overuse of discovery or 1Formerly known as the United States Customs Service. 124 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 unnecessary use of defensive weapons or evasive responses. All of this results in excessively costly and time-consuming activities that are disproportionate to the nature of the case, the amount involved, or the issues or values at stake. Advisory Committee’s Note to 1983 Amendment to FED. R. CIV. P. 26; see also U.S.C.I.T. R. 26 (U.S.C.I.T. discovery rule detailing the scope of discovery at the court). In light of court rules and precedent governing discovery, the court grants the first three motions with exceptions and denies the fourth. During the depositions of Ms. Tolbert and Ms. Banas, two Optrex employees, Plaintiff sought to uncover advice they received from Sonnenberg & Anderson attorneys about the classification of imported LCD products submitted to Customs at time of entry. Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, Att. B 37–38 (Dep. Tr.), Att. F 77–78 (Dep. Tr.). Defendant objected to this line of questioning, asserting that it infringes upon Defendant’s attorney-client privilege. Id. In its motion, the government petitions the court to override Defendant’s claim of privilege and allow the government to continue the depositions. The privilege between attorney and client has long constituted a pillar of the American judicial system. See Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981); Genentech, Inc. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 122 F.3d 1409, 1415 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (‘‘The attorney-client privilege protects the confidentiality of communications between attorney and client made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.’’). However, courts have recognized that under certain narrowly tailored circumstances the privilege may be pierced in furtherance of justice. Defendant asserts that among several experts, it consulted counsel when determining the content of entry documents submitted to the government. Defendant invokes attorney-client privilege to protect this information. However, since this case turns upon a finding of a negligent act or omission as delineated in 19 U.S.C. § 1592, Plaintiff requires access to information from Defendant’s counsel that Defendant relied upon when classifying its imports so that Plaintiff may demonstrate such an act or omission occurred, if, indeed, it did. If Plaintiff proves an act or omission, Defendant then has the burden to prove it did not behave negligently. See 19 U.S.C. § 1592(e)(4).2 If Defendant uses the ostensibly privileged information its counsel provided as a defense, this use of information marks 2 19 U.S.C. § 1592(e) reads: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any proceeding commenced by the United States in the Court of International Trade for the recovery of any monetary penalty claimed under this section— ... U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 125 the defense as ‘‘affirmative.’’ See Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Inc. v. Home Indem. Co., 32 F.3d 851, 863 (3d Cir. 1994) (describing various cases in which attorney-client privilege has been waived because ‘‘the client has made the decision and taken the affirmative step . . . to place the advice of the attorney in issue.’’); Beery v. Thomson Consumer Elecs., 218 F.R.D. 599, 604 (S.D. Ohio 2003) (‘‘An attorney-client communication is placed at issue... when a party affirmatively uses privileged communications to defend against or attack the opposing party’’) (quotations omitted) (citations omitted). An affirmative defense, though, obviates attorney-client privilege with respect to the advice that Defendant received from counsel concerning the entry formulation because, when the content of counsel’s advice becomes the object of litigation, attorney-client privilege does not apply to that advice. A ‘‘ ‘party can waive the attorney client privilege by asserting claims or defenses that put his or her attorney’s advice in issue in the litigation,’ ’’ Beery, 218 F.R.D. at 604 (quoting Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Inc., 32 F.3d at 863); see Sax v. Sax, 136 F.R.D. 542, 543 (D. Mass. 1991), or ‘‘when a party affirmatively uses privileged communications to defend against or attack the opposing party.’’ Beery, 218 F.R.D. at 604; see Hearn v. Rhay, 68 F.R.D. 574, 581 (E.D. Wash. 1975). Similarly, in cases where a client’s state of mind or knowledge, such as whether the client acted negligently, is at issue, ‘‘the attorney-client privilege with respect to attorneyclient communications that have bearing on that state of mind or knowledge is impliedly waived.’’ King-Fisher Co. v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 570, 572 (2003). Negligence on the part of Optrex would be disproved if Defendant can show that it reasonably relied on its attorney’s advice. The government needs the content of this advice to assess the reasonableness of Defendant’s reliance upon it. To unwaveringly maintain attorney-client privilege in this circumstance would effectively allow Defendant to use the privilege as a shield and sword to protect itself against any such alleged misdeed and frustrate the purpose of discovery. See Sellick Equip. Ltd. v. United States, 18 CIT 352, 354 (1994) (describing the vast scope of the discovery process); accord Beery, 218 F.R.D. at 604 (Waiver therefore stops a party from manipulating an essential component of our legal system—the attorney client privilege—so as to release information favorable to it and withhold anything else.) (quotations omitted). Therefore, the court grants the government’s motion to continue depositions of Ms. Tolbert and Ms. Banas. Importantly, Plaintiff may seek only information given by counsel to Defendant about classifica- (4) if the monetary penalty is based on negligence, the United States shall have the burden of proof to establish the act or omission constituting the violation, and the alleged violator shall have the burden of proof that the act or omission did not occur as a result of negligence. 126 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 tion determinations submitted between October 12, 1997, and June 29, 1999—the period when Optrex made the entries at issue in this case. See Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, Ex. B. Interrogatories 41–45 seek information virtually identical to that sought from the depositions: Legal advice about filling out entry documents Defendant may have received from counsel. For the same reasons outlined above, Defendant must submit full and complete Answers to Interrogatories 41–45 and fulfill Production of Documents No. 6 with restrictions. Id. at 13–14. Again, the scope of information Plaintiff may obtain from Defendant may not involve advice, information, or events unrelated to the documents for entries submitted before October 12, 1997, or after June 29, 1999. To ensure both parties understand and adhere to the permitted scope of the questions, Interrogatory 41 should be modified to read: 41.3 If your answer to Interrogatory No. 40 is anything other than an unequivocal ‘‘no,’’ then state the advice Optrex obtained from Sonnenberg & Anderson regarding the classification of LCD Panels entered into customs territory of the United States between October 12, 1997, and June 29, 1999, under HTS tariff heading 8531 or any subheading thereof. Interrogatory 42 should read: 42. State whether Optrex intends to rely upon the advice of Sonnenberg & Anderson regarding the classification of LCD character modules entered into customs territory of the United States between October 12, 1997, and June 29, 1999, under HTS tariff heading 8531 or any subheading thereof. Interrogatory 44 should read: 44. State whether Optrex was advised by Sonnenberg & Anderson that certain Customs HQ Rulings were applicable to the classifications of the subject merchandise entered into customs territory of the United States between October 12, 1997, and June 29, 1999. Interrogatories 43 and 45, and document production request No. 6 require no modification. Interrogatories 46 & 47 and Admissions 10–15 concern the accuracy of Exhibit B, which primarily details information Defendant provided the government about the LCD imports such as the entry date, entry number, invoice part number, part value, entered HTS, 3 Italics in the Interrogatories indicates text inserted. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 127 entered duty rate, and duty paid, along with the government’s alleged corrections to Defendant’s entries. Optrex refuses to answer these Interrogatories and Admissions because it believes Exhibit B contains errors (though it will not identify the errors) and claims it is the government’s burden under 19 U.S.C. § 1592(e)(4) to establish the act or omission. However, these posited inaccuracies lie at the heart of Plaintiff’s claim. Def.’s Resp. to Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, 12. Without an accurate account of classifications Defendant submitted to Plaintiff, the court cannot evaluate the claim. Defendant previously submitted relevant information in the original entry documents. Providing Plaintiff with information once again to ensure Exhibit B’s accuracy will not infringe upon Defendant’s ability to mount an effective defense. Id. at 14. And while Defendant is correct in its assertion that under 19 U.S.C. § 1592(e)(4) Plaintiff bears the burden of proof ‘‘to establish the act or omission constituting the violation,’’ Defendant’s production of material it previously submitted will not temper that burden, since the information does not in itself comprise ‘‘the material facts which establish the alleged violation,’’ 19 U.S.C. § 1592(b)(1)(A)(iv). However, Plaintiff suggests some information in Exhibit B did not come from Defendant’s submissions to Customs. Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, 16. Therefore, when complying with the Interrogatories and document production requested, Defendant need not provide information about errors it detected in Exhibit B that cannot be corrected with recourse to documents or other information Defendant previously submitted to Customs. Consequently, one solution is to modify Interrogatory 47 as below: 47. If your answer to Interrogatory No. 46 is any other than an unequivocal ‘‘no,’’ list all the errors or produce the document indicating such errors that Optrex alleges are contained in Exhibit B of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint to the extent that the list and documents contain information Optrex has previously supplied Customs. After answering Interrogatories 46 and 47, Defendant should then amend Admissions 10–15 in accordance with its revised Answers.4 These actions and modifications outlined above will allow the government to substantially fulfill its discovery needs and thereby render deposition of Defendant’s attorneys redundant. Rule 3.7(a)(3) of THE ABA MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT states that ‘‘[a] lawyer shall not act as advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness unless... disqualification of the 4With regard to Admission 12, the term ‘‘Line Value’’ does not appear in Ex. B. The court assumes this term refers to column 5, ‘‘Part Value.’’ 128 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 lawyer would work substantial hardship on the client.’’ Allowing depositions of Defendant’s counsel, which could force Defendant to obtain new lawyers, could prove a substantial, unnecessary burden. Plaintiff’s motion to depose lawyers at Sonnenberg & Anderson is therefore denied. For all the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery is granted in part and denied in part; it is further ORDERED that Defendant must answer questions regarding information given by counsel to Defendant about classifications for entries submitted between October 12, 1997, and June 29, 1999; it is further ORDERED that Defendant allow Plaintiff to continue depositions of Ms. Tolbert and Ms. Banas; it is further ORDERED that Defendant, within two weeks of this order, submit to Plaintiff full and complete Answers to Interrogatories 41–45 and fulfill Production of Documents No. 6 in accordance with guidelines established above; it is further ORDERED that Defendant, within two weeks of this order, answer Interrogatories 46 & 47 according to guidelines established above and amend Admissions 10–15 if new Answers so require; it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to depose lawyers at Sonnenberg & Anderson is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that discovery for Plaintiff be reopened for 60 days from the date of this opinion. Slip Op. 04–80 Before: Judge Judith M. Barzilay UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, v. OPTREX AMERICA, INC., Defendant. Court No. 02–00646 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is a Motion to Compel Discovery by Defendant Optrex America, Inc., dated February 27, 2004, (see also the companion opinion and order issued in this case on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery). This case involves Defendant Optrex’s alleged negligent misclassification of imported liquid crystal display (‘‘LCD’’) panels and modules evidenced by entering incorrect HTSUS item numbers onto entry documents submitted to Plaintiff United States U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 129 Bureau of Customs and Border Protection1 (‘‘Customs’’ or ‘‘government’’). Defendant desires the court (1) to overrule the government’s ‘‘General Objections’’ to Defendant’s Interrogatories; (2) to overrule its ‘‘Specific Objections,’’ which are delineated in separate answers; (3) to overrule the objections and claims of privilege Plaintiff asserts in its Answers to Defendant’s Interrogatories and Requests for Production, as well as Plaintiff’s Privilege Log; and (4) to compel the government to provide new, complete Answers to the Interrogatories and to produce and specifically correlate, with their respective Interrogatories and Answers, all documents the government cites in its Answers and documentary production. Defendant also desires to receive an additional 30 days to depose Mr. Jeffrey Reim and any informants identified in the Answers given in response to the requests above. Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 41–42. Plaintiff counters with a crossmotion for a Protective Order for information that it considers privileged, as evidenced in a document it calls a Privilege Log. This log lists documents under the headings ‘‘Document Number,’’ ‘‘Date,’’ ‘‘Author,’’ Description,’’ and ‘‘Privilege,’’ and purports to assert privileged status for documents relating to Plaintiff’s answers to Defendant’s Interrogatories as well as information Defendant seeks from Mr. Reim. First, the court notes that ‘‘[t]he purpose of discovery procedures are (1) to narrow the issues; (2) to obtain evidence for use at trial; and (3) to secure information as to the existence of evidence that may be used at trial.’’ Wood v. Todd Shipyards, 45 F.R.D. 363, 364 (S.D. Tex. 1968). ‘‘Mutual knowledge of all the relevant facts gathered by both parties is essential to proper litigation.’’ Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 507 (1947). Thus the spirit of the rules is violated when advocates attempt to use discovery tools as tactical weapons rather than to expose the facts and illuminate the issues by overuse of discovery or unnecessary use of defensive weapons or evasive responses. All of this results in excessively costly and time-consuming activities that are disproportionate to the nature of the case, the amount involved, or the issues or values at stake. Advisory Committee’s Note to 1983 Amendment to FED. R. CIV. P. 26; see also U.S.C.I.T. R. 26 (U.S.C.I.T. discovery rule detailing the scope of discovery at the court). In light of court rules and precedent governing discovery, the court partially grants and partially denies Defendant’s Motion to Compel Discovery. 1Formerly known as the United States Customs Service. 130 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 (1) Before replying to Defendant’s Interrogatories, Plaintiff attached an eight-page list of General Objections that recites various grounds for opposing Defendant’s Interrogatories without referring to specific Interrogatories or subjects of dispute. Def.’s Mot. to Compel, App. B, 1–7. As Defendant correctly asserts, in this court General Objections are not allowed. In other words, in this court ‘‘[a]ll grounds for an objection to an interrogatory shall be stated with specificity,’’ U.S.C.I.T. R. 33(b)(4), and ‘‘[e]ach interrogatory shall be answered separately and fully ...’’ U.S.C.I.T. R. 33(b)(1) (emphasis added); see NEC Am., Inc. v. United States, 10 CIT 323, 325, 636 F. Supp. 476 (1986). Plaintiff insists it used the General Objections ‘‘[f]or convenience.’’ Pl.’s Opp. to Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 7. However, such claim is irrelevant because blanket objections are universally considered ‘‘improper.’’ In re Folding Carton Antitrust Litig., 83 F.R.D. 260, 264 (N.D. Ill. 1979). Some courts have even construed use of General Objections as a waiver of objections in their entirety. Id.; White v. Beloginis, 53 F.R.D. 480, 481 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). Thus, the court overrules Plaintiff’s General Objections. (2) Plaintiff’s Specific Objections mirror its General Objections, except that they appear in individual answers. Defendant notes that these objections offer ‘‘conclusory statements’’ without explanation. Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 9–10. As stated above, a party must support objections with specificity rather than sweeping statements, especially since the objecting party carries the burden of demonstrating the reasonableness of its objections. See United States v. 58.16 Acres of Land, 66 F.R.D. 570, 572–73 (E.D. Ill. 1975). ‘‘Objections to interrogatories must be specific and be supported by a detailed explanation as to why interrogatories or a class of interrogatories is objectionable.’’ Id. at 572 (emphasis added); see U.S.C.I.T. R. 33(b)(4) (All grounds for an objection to an interrogatory shall be stated with specificity . . .); see also U.S.C.I.T. R. 26(g)(2) (listing improper grounds for objections). ‘‘[M]ere assertion that interrogatories are overly broad, burdensome, oppressive, or irrelevant is not adequate to constitute a successful objection....’’ Sellick Equip. Ltd. v. United States, 18 CIT 352, 354 (1994). Likewise, no answer may ‘‘refer to the pleadings, depositions, documents, or other interrogatories.’’ Id. at 356 (quoting NEC Am., 10 CIT at 325). In sum, a successful objection offers a recognized reason for objection buttressed by substantiated, detailed proof of the claim. The government responds by blaming the allegedly ‘‘vague’’ and/or repetitive nature of Defendant’s questions for its use of Specific Objections. Pl.’s Opp. to Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 8–9. However, U.S.C.I.T. Rules 33(b)(1), (4) and 26(g)(2), and case precedent disallow complaints of vagueness and repetition as objections. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 131 Because Answers to Interrogatories 1, 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2, 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 2(f), 3(b), 3(d), 4(b), 5(h), 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9, 9(a), 11, and 12–21 raise unsound, unsubstantiated objections, the court overrules both the answers and the Specific Objections cited within them.2 The court also orders the government to resubmit answers to Defendant in accordance with this opinion and this court’s rules and case law. (3) Defendant correctly asserts that Plaintiff has not met its burden in asserting privileges to object to Defendant’s Interrogatories. Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 12. Plaintiff cites the grounds for most of these claims in its Privilege Log. However, information contained in that document is inadequate to support Plaintiff’s claims. With respect to all privilege claims, U.S.C.I.T. Rule 26(b)(5)3 deems that in general, [w]hen a party withholds information otherwise discoverable under these rules by claiming that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation material, the party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced or disclosed in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege or protection. See also Burns v. Imagine Films Entm’t, 164 F.R.D. 589, 593–594 (W.D.N.Y. 1996) (noting that ‘‘where Defendants... claimed that information requested and material sought were privileged but did not state nor demonstrate the underlying facts or circumstances of the privilege or protection... such privilege is denied’’); In re Shopping Carts Antitrust Litig., 95 F.R.D. 299, 306 (S.D.N.Y. 1982). Plaintiff’s invocation of the investigative files privilege to object to Interrogatory 2(e) does not effectively show that ‘‘the sources [of the information Defendant seeks] provided [the] information under an express assurance of confidentiality or in circumstances from which such an assurance could be reasonably inferred,’’ as use of the privilege requires. R. C. O. Reforesting v. United States, 42 Fed. Cl. 405, 408 (1998). The government may intend the court to passively accept its claim that the relevant documents ‘‘contain sensitive information relating to the Government’s investigative techniques and procedures...’’ Pl.’s Opp. to Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 16. To grant this privilege claim would have the court and Defendant place their complete trust in Plaintiff’s assertions without corroborating proof. Thus, 2See Att. A for a specific explanation of the error(s) contained within each overruled Answer. 3USCIT Rules closely mirror the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and thus cases under FRCP are applicable in our court. 132 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Plaintiff’s Answer to Interrogatory 2(e) and its claim of investigatory privilege are overruled. Plaintiff’s assertions of deliberative process privilege in its objections to Interrogatories 7 and 7(a) do not demonstrate, as necessary, that answering the Interrogatories would expose the government’s ‘‘decision-making processes’’ rather than merely purely factual information. Abramson v. United States, 39 Fed. Cl. 290, 293–95 (1997); see Seafirst Corp. v. Jenkins, 644 F. Supp. 1160, 1163 (W.D. Wash. 1986) (Communications are not within the purview of the privilege unless they are both (1) ‘‘predecisional’’ in that they have been generated prior to an agency’s adoption of a policy or decision and (2) ‘‘deliberative’’ in that they reflect the give-and-take of a deliberative decision-making process). The government may not deny Defendant access to discoverable information by citing deliberative process privilege unless the information fits into this narrow rubric. Because the court cannot determine if the information for which the government claims this privilege meets these standards, the court overrules Plaintiff’s assertion of deliberative process privilege and its Answers to 7 and 7(a). Further, Plaintiff’s Privilege Log does not meet the standards required to assert the privileges claimed because it contains only rudimentary information. See Pl.’s Opp. to Def.’s Mot. to Compel, App. E. To meet these standards, the log must contain a brief description or summary of the contents of the document, the date the document was prepared, the person or persons who prepared the document, the person to whom the document was directed, or for whom the document was prepared, the purpose in preparing the document, the privilege or privileges asserted with respect to the document, and how each element of the privilege is met as to that document. Burns, 164 F.R.D. at 594 (quoting FED. R. CIV. P. 26(b)(5), Advisory Committee Notes, 1993 Amendments). The government’s log contains only skeletal information and opaque descriptions of the documents’ contents. Due to the fragmentary nature of the Privilege Log, neither Defendant nor the court can determine the validity of the privilege claims. Thus, the court overrules Plaintiff’s Privilege Log along with the answers that depend upon it for support: 8, 9, 11, 12, and 16–19. The court orders government counsel to again review the documents contained in Plaintiff’s current Privilege Log, mindful of the admonitions concerning the use of privilege as set forth in this opinion. After review, should there be any documents remaining that Plaintiff continues to assert are privileged, Plaintiff will submit a U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 133 new Privilege Log to Defendant and this court with information adequate to support its remaining claims. (4) Defendant seeks to depose Customs Assistant Chief Counsel Jeffrey Reim because it believes he ‘‘may have acted outside of the scope of his duties as an attorney when he assumed the roles of special agent during the underlying investigation.’’ Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 13. To support this move, Defendant highlights that attorneyclient privilege applies only (1) [w]here legal advice of any kind is sought (2) from a professional legal advisor in his capacity as such, (3) the communications relating to that purpose, (4) made in confidence (5) by the client, (6) are at his [sic] instance permanently protected (7) from disclosure by himself or by the legal adviser, (8) except the protection be waived. Id. at 14 (quoting United States v. Lawless, 709 F.2d 485, 487 (7th Cir. 1983)). In response, the government dismisses Defendant’s assertion as ‘‘provid[ing] no detail concerning the nature of [the] claim’’ and not ‘‘identify[ing] any evidence supporting’’ it. Pl.’s Opp. to Def.’s Mot. to Compel, 18. While both parties’ arguments prove factually correct, they overlook the two crucial issues at stake: Did Mr. Reim provide Plaintiff with discoverable information, and if so, does this information fall within attorney-client privilege? Currently, the court cannot determine the nature of the information Mr. Reim may have provided the government, let alone whether it deserves privileged status. The court will hear counsels’ arguments on this issue as described below. Plaintiff’s Privilege Log discloses too little information for the court to judge the merits on this issue as well. See supra part (3). Therefore, the court orders government’s counsel to review again the documents in the Privilege Log, mindful of the court’s admonitions concerning the use of privilege as set out in the opinion. Should Plaintiff continue to assert privilege with regard to any remaining documents concerning Mr. Reim’s deposition or attorney-client privilege, those documents must be submitted to the court for the court’s in camera review. (5) Because most of the government’s Answers to Defendant’s Interrogatories should be resubmitted to Defendant in accordance with court rules, the government should also reformulate its Answers that depend upon the overruled ones. The Answers requiring revision include 1(c), 2(c), 3(e), 8(a), 9(a), 10, and 11(a). Plaintiff should also produce and specifically correlate with its respective Interrogatories and Answers all documents cited in its answers and documentary production for Defendant. 134 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 At oral argument, the court would also have government’s counsel explain why government’s counsel should not be sanctioned for delivering to Defendant’s counsel thirteen boxes of unorganized documents (later reduced to three) during discovery and for providing answers to Defendant’s Interrogatories that persistently violate court rules and case law. See U.S.C.I.T. R. 37; Burns, 164 F.R.D. at 600– 601; In re Folding Carton Antitrust Litig., 83 F.R.D. at 264; White, 53 F.R.D. at 481. For all the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for a Protective Order is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s General Objections to Defendant’s Interrogatories are overruled; it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Specific Objections in and Answers to Interrogatories 1, 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2, 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 2(f), 3(b), 3(d), 4(b), 5(h), 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9, 9(a), 11, and 12–21 are overruled (see App. A); it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Privilege Log and all of Plaintiff’s claims of privilege are overruled, as are Plaintiff’s Answers to Interrogatories 2(e), 7, 7(a), 8, 9, 11, 12, and 16–19, which rely upon these privilege claims (see App. A); it is further ORDERED that Answers to Interrogatories 1(c), 2(c), 3(e), 8(a), 9(a), 10, and 11(a) are overruled because their validity depends on already overruled Answers (see App. A); it is further ORDERED that for all Answers overruled for whatever reason, Plaintiff must provide Defendant with new Answers in accordance with court rules within 30 days; it is further ORDERED that discovery for Defendant be reopened for 60 days after this order; it is further ORDERED that if Plaintiff intends to maintain its claims of privileges with respect to any information, it must present a new privilege log to Defendant and the court within one week of this order; if the court again finds the log deficient, it may waive use of all privileges invoked therein (see U.S.C.I.T. R. 37; Burns, 164 F.R.D. at 600– 601; In re Folding Carton Antitrust Litig., 83 F.R.D. at 264; White, 53 F.R.D. at 481); it is further ORDERED that within one week of this order Plaintiff turn over to the court all documents for which Plaintiff plans to claim privilege related to the deposition of Mr. Reim for in camera review; it is further ORDERED that on July 14, 2004, the court will hear oral arguments specifically and only in reference to Defendant’s Motion to Depose Mr. Reim and to allow Plaintiff’s counsel to explain why the court should not sanction the government for its discovery actions which violate court rules and case law teachings. If counsel so desire, the court will hold oral argument via telephone. Counsel are to consult and inform chambers within one week of the date of this order. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 135 Appendix A Interrogatory Number Reason(s) for Overruling* 1 RD 1(a) RD 1(b) RD 1(c) RD, OA 2 RD 2(a) RD 2(b) RD 2(c) RD, OA 2(d) RD 2(e) B (see supra part (3)) 2(f) RD 3(b) RD 3(d) RD 3(e) OA 4(b) RD 5(h) R, V, AH 6(a) RD 7 B(see supra part (3)) 7(a) V, B (see supra part (3)) 8 AH, B, PL 8(a) OA 9 R, AH, PL 9(a) R, AH, OA 10 OA 11 R, PL, AH 11(a) OA 12 RD, PL, AH 13 RD 14 RD 15 I 16 R, PL, AH 136 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 38, NO. 30, JULY 21, 2004 Interrogatory Number Reason(s) for Overruling* 17 R, RD, PL, AH 18 RD, R, PL, AH 19 RD, R, PL, AH 20 I 21 RD *Explanation of the Abbreviations for Overruling R - Answer inappropriately objects to Interrogatory for being repetitive. V - Answer inappropriately objects to Interrogatory for being vague. RD - Answer inappropriately refers to documents not in Answer. I - Answer incomplete. AH- Answer inappropriately claims Defendant has requested documents in its possession. B- Burden of proof for privilege invoked in Answer not met. PL- Answer objects to Interrogatory based on overruled Privilege Log. OA- Answer depends on another overruled Answer. U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 137
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap_docs/2021/03/16/martha_winkler_v._city_of_phoenix.pdf.json	NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARTHA WINKLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PHOENIX, a public entity; JASON GILLESPIE, Officer; individually and in his official capacity as a police officer for Phoenix Police, Defendants-Appellees, and DANIEL V. GARCIA; JOSEPH YAHNER, Defendants. No. 19-16034 D.C. No. 2:15-cv-01786-DLR MEMORANDUM* Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted March 2, 2021 Phoenix, Arizona Before: BEA and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges, and CARDONE,** District Judge. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Kathleen Cardone, United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation. FILED MAR 16 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 2 Plaintiff-Appellant Martha Winkler appeals an adverse judgment on two claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging unlawful arrest and excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The trial court granted judgment as a matter of law on the unlawful arrest claim, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a), and the jury returned a verdict for Defendant-Appellee Officer Jason Gillespie on the excessive force claim. On appeal, Winkler claims the district court erred by: (1) incorrectly instructing the jury on excessive force, and (2) granting the Rule 50 motion. 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, and REMAND for a new trial on the excessive force claim. This court reviews preserved instructional challenges alleging a misstatement of law de novo, and unpreserved instructional challenges for plain error. Dunlap v. Liberty Nat’l Prod., Inc., 878 F.3d 794, 797 (9th Cir. 2017) (citation omitted). Because we ultimately find the excessive force instruction erroneous under either standard, we assume arguendo that plain error applies. United States v. Daniels, 760 F.3d 920, 923 (9th Cir. 2014). To obtain relief on plain error review, the challenger must show: (1) error, (2) that was plain, (3) that 1 Winkler also claims the district court erroneously denied her Batson challenge. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). Because we reverse this case due to the defective jury instruction, we need not address that issue. See United States v. Hernandez, 27 F.3d 1403, 1404 n.1 (9th Cir. 1994) (declining to address Batson challenge). 3 affected the challenger’s substantial rights, and (4) that seriously affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Bearchild v. Cobban, 947 F.3d 1130, 1139 (9th Cir. 2020) (citing C.B. v. City of Sonora, 769 F.3d 1005, 1017–19 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc)). We review de novo a district court’s order granting a motion for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(a). Torres v. City of Los Angeles, 548 F.3d 1197, 1205 (9th Cir. 2008) (citing Santos v. Gates, 287 F.3d 846, 851 (9th Cir. 2002)). 1. The district court misstated the law on excessive force when it gave the following curative instruction: When deciding whether an officer used excessive force during a lawful arrest you are to consider the 11 factors set forth in the Excessive Force Instruction found at pages 13 & 14. However, whether an officer provoked plaintiff to resist arrest or created the need to use force is not a factor to consider. (emphasis added). It is well settled that “the right to make an arrest . . . necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989) (citing Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22–27 (1968)). However, “the force used to make an arrest must be balanced against the need for force: it is the need for force which is at the heart of the” excessive force inquiry. Velazquez v. City of Long Beach, 793 F.3d 1010, 1025 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Blankenhorn v. City of Orange, 485 F.3d 463, 480 (9th Cir. 2007)). 4 Here, while much of the curative instruction was correct, a critical part of it was not. As discussed below regarding the excessive force claim, the district court had properly determined that the officer had probable cause to arrest Winkler as a matter of law. Yet, Winkler’s counsel insisted during his closing argument that the officer should have let her “walk away.” A curative instruction was necessary to correct that improper argument, and to preclude the jury from considering whether the officer’s decision to arrest Winkler “provoked plaintiff to resist.” However, by directing the jury not to consider whether the officer “created the need to use force,” the instruction went too far. In this circuit, among the factors the jury must consider when evaluating excessive force is whether the officer was “simply responding to a preexisting situation,” or instead “create[d] the very emergency he then resort[ed] to . . . force to resolve.” Nehad v. Browder, 929 F.3d 1125, 1135 (9th Cir. 2019) (quoting Porter v. Osborn, 546 F.3d 1131, 1141 (9th Cir. 2008)). The instruction precluded, for example, any inference that the takedown maneuver would have been unnecessary had Officer Gillespie not “created the dangerous situation,” Espinosa v. City & Cty. of S.F., 598 F.3d 528, 537 (9th Cir. 2010), created his “own sense of urgency,” Nehad, 929 F.3d at 1135 (citations omitted), failed to use alternative tactics such as de-escalation, see Lam v. City of San Jose, 869 F.3d 1077, 1087 (9th Cir. 2017), or failed to warn prior to using force, Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805, 831 (9th Cir. 2010). The 5 instruction thus undermined the requisite “fact-intensive inquiry” into “all circumstances pertinent to the need for the force used.” Velazquez, 793 F.3d at 1024 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). The Supreme Court’s decision in County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, 137 S. Ct. 1539 (2017), is not to the contrary. That case invalidated this court’s use of the “provocation rule.” See id. at 1543–44. But the Mendez Court expressly declined to decide the argument raised by Officer Gillespie: namely, whether the jury may consider “unreasonable police conduct prior to the use of force that foreseeably created the need to use it.” Id. at 1547 n.*. Given this court’s longstanding endorsement of that factor, the district court’s instruction precluding the jury from considering it was in error. See, e.g., Espinosa, 598 F.3d at 537. Viewed in context, that error was plain. See Bearchild, 947 F.3d at 1139–40 (“We consider the entire set of instructions as a whole to determine whether an individual instruction . . . incorrectly stated the law.”). An instruction is plainly erroneous when it “impermissibly deviate[s]” from “established legal principles.” See id. at 1148. Here, in the sentence immediately preceding the erroneous instruction, the jury was directed to consider the factors set forth in this court’s model instruction on excessive force, which includes the officer conduct factors mentioned above. See Ninth Circuit Jury Instructions Comm., Manual of Model Civil Jury Instructions, at 191–94 (2017) (Model Civil Jury Instruction 9.25). 6 Taken together, the instructions communicated to the jury that it should consider the proper factors, but not infer from them that the officer contributed to the need for force. This substantially undermined the excessive force inquiry. See Velazquez, 793 F.3d at 1024. To the extent the instructions were in conflict, we “cannot presume that the jury followed the correct one.” See United States v. Lewis, 67 F.3d 225, 234 (9th Cir. 1995) (reversing and remanding for new trial based on conflicting jury instructions). It was thus “sufficiently clear at the time of trial that the district court’s instruction was impermissible.” See Bearchild, 947 F.3d at 1139 (internal quotation marks and ellipsis omitted) (quoting Hoard v. Hartman, 904 F.3d 780, 790 (9th Cir. 2018)). And for similar reasons, we are persuaded that the error prejudiced Winkler’s substantial rights in a manner that seriously affected the fairness of the judicial proceeding. See id. (“We will usually find sufficient prejudice to warrant reversal where ‘it is impossible to determine from the jury’s verdict and evidentiary record that the jury would have reached the same result had it been properly instructed.’” (quoting Hoard, 904 F.3d at 791)); see also Dang v. Cross, 422 F.3d 800, 805 (9th Cir. 2005) (“In evaluating jury instructions, prejudicial error results when, looking to the instructions as a whole, the substance of the applicable law was not fairly and correctly covered.” (citation omitted)). 2. The district court did not err by granting Officer Gillespie’s Rule 50 7 motion on unlawful arrest. Although the court incorrectly suggested in a single stray remark that reasonableness was not the standard, the court’s analysis made clear that it was aware of and applied the correct rule. See Van Buskirk v. Baldwin, 265 F.3d 1080, 1085 (9th Cir. 2001). The court focused entirely on whether there was probable cause to arrest for trespass, and an “arrest is reasonable if the officer has probable cause.” District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577, 586 (2018). Any error in the court’s stray remark was therefore harmless. Moreover, the court correctly found that there was probable cause as a matter of law, despite Winkler’s arguments to the contrary. The uncontradicted facts known to the officer at the time of arrest were “sufficient for a reasonably prudent person to believe that the suspect ha[d] committed a crime.” See Reed v. Lieurance, 863 F.3d 1196, 1204 (9th Cir. 2017) (quoting Rosenbaum v. Washoe Cty., 663 F.3d 1071, 1076 (9th Cir. 2011)). Officer Gillespie arrested Winkler in a convenience store parking lot after being dispatched to the scene. According to the Computer Automated Dispatch, Winkler was “harassing people in the parking lot and refusing to leave.” The store clerks corroborated that information, reporting that their manager had asked Winkler to leave several times, but that she had remained in the parking lot. This evidence tended to prove each element of the trespass offense for which she was arrested: there was “a reasonable request to leave,” communicated by “a person having lawful control over [the] property,” but 8 Winkler had nevertheless “remain[ed] unlawfully.” See A.R.S. § 13-1502. Further, whether Winkler was in fact told to leave is beside the point. See Wilkinson v. Torres, 610 F.3d 546, 551 (9th Cir. 2010). The “inquiry is not whether [the arrestee] was trespassing,” but “whether a reasonable officer had probable cause to think [she] could have been.” Blankenhorn, 485 F.3d at 475 (citations omitted). The information then before Officer Gillespie was more than sufficient to establish probable cause. See id. at 472–73, 475 (finding probable cause as a matter of law where the evidence supported only two out of three elements of trespass). AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for a new trial on Winkler’s excessive force claim.
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.almd.45797/gov.uscourts.almd.45797.13.0.pdf.json	IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION DALLAS RAY WHITE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-CV-513-ID ) (WO) STATE OF ALABAMA OPERATOR ) ENGINEERS POSTAL GENERAL ) BIOGRAFT CLONE MAGNET, ) ) Defendant. ) O R D E R Before the court are the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Doc. #4), Plaintiff’s Objection, (Doc. #7), and the Plaintiff’s Amended Objection, (Doc. #11). Having conducted a de novo determination of those portions of the Recommendation to which objections are made, it is CONSIDERED and ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s Objection, (Doc. #7), and Plaintiff’s Amended Objection, (Doc. #11), be and the same are hereby OVERRULED; 2. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #4) be and the same is hereby ADOPTED, APPROVED and AFFIRMED; 3. This case be and the same is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). 1 Case 2:11-cv-00513-WKW-SRW Document 13 Filed 08/05/11 Page 1 of 2 DONE this the 5th day of August, 2011. /s/ W. Keith Watkins CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 Case 2:11-cv-00513-WKW-SRW Document 13 Filed 08/05/11 Page 2 of 2
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/ssnewsletter-feb2016.pdf.json	Student Service Updates U.S. Department of Education February 2016 Happy New Year! I hope everyone enjoyed the holiday season. This edition of Student Service Updates is filled with helpful information to better assist you with implementing your program, including how we will be utilizing technology creatively in the future. We will continue to work closely with you to provide hope and opportunity to the students that you serve. In 2015, Student Service (SS) worked very hard to ensure the successful completion of the Student Support Services Program competition, per the legislative mandate. I would also like to commend the grantee community for the timely submission of data for the 2014-15 annual performance reports. The year also marked the retirement of Ms. Frances Bergeron, Division Director, Student Program Development Division (SPDD). Frances retired with over 35 years of service to the U.S. Department of Education (Department). Her knowledge, skills and expertise will be missed. Ms. Julie Laurel assumed the responsibility as Division Director for SPDD in late December. I would also like to acknowledge Ms. Eileen Bland, who was instrumental in leading the SS office during a significant portion of the past two years. I am very thankful for her service. The end of the year concluded with the ending of Secretary Duncan’s tenure as Secretary of Education. Additional information regarding this transition is included on page 2. I would like to highlight the fiscal year (FY) 2015 award summary on page 3. This chart encapsulates the hard work conducted by staff during FY 2015. Please note that the Department is committed to the important work of awarding grants in a timely manner and is aware of the impact on grantees, new applicants, and most importantly, the students served by the projects funded under the Student Service Area. Staff was resolute in their commitment to addressing the challenges of making timely grant awards in FY 2015 and will work equally as hard to accomplish this task in FY 2016. We anticipate that 2016 will be as busy as the previous year, with the upcoming Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers Program competitions. In addition, our physical office location will soon change to the headquarters building in southwest Washington, DC. We will share more information about the move once it has been completed. Best wishes for a successful 2016! Linda Byrd-Johnson, Ph.D. Senior Director, Student Service Letter from the Director In This Edition Farewell to Sec. Duncan Page 2 Updates on FY 2016 TS and EOC Competitions Page 2 FY 2016 TRIO Training Competition Page 2 FY 2015 SS Award Summary Page 3 TRIO Story Map Page 4 Training Opportunities under TRIO Training Page 5 New Collaboration Page 5 New College Scorecard Page 5 New Report on Student Academic Achievements Page 5 Program and Student Spotlight Page 6 Technical Assistance Corner Page 7 Student Service and Technology Page 8 GEAR UP Capacity-Building Workshop Page 8 Student Aid Bulletin Board Page 9 Page 2 of 9 The Talent Search (TS) Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2015. The deadline for application transmittal is February 5, 2016. The deadline for Intergovernmental Review is April 20, 2016. All applicants are required to submit an application online through Grants.gov. Please note that on January 21, 2016, a correction notice to the FY 2016 Talent Search Program Notice Inviting Application published in the Federal Register. This correction notice provides updated guidance on Maximum Awards under the FY 2016 TS Program competition. Please visit the TS Homepage at the following link to access the correction notice, as well as other competition-related information: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/triotalent/applicant.html The Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program will also be holding a competition in FY 2016. The Notice Inviting Applications was published in the Federal Register on February 2, 2016, with an application deadline date of April 4, 2016. For updated information on the EOC Program competition, please visit the EOC Homepage at the following link: http:// www2.ed.gov/programs/trioeoc/index.html Farewell to Secretary Arne Duncan As you may be aware, the U.S . Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan stepped down at the end of December 2015 from his Cabinet position. Secretary Duncan has been one of the longest serving education secretaries to date, as well as the longest serving member of President Obama’s Cabinet. President Obama chose John B. King Jr., who previously acted as the Deputy Secretary of Education, to act as Secretary. For more information, including the President’s remarks, please see the following link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/02/remarks-presidentsecretary-arne-duncan-and-dr-john-king-personnel Updates on the FY 2016 Talent Search and Educational Opportunity Centers Program Competitions The Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs (TRIO Training) will conduct a competition in FY 2016. Please check the TRIO Training Homepage for additional information on the competition, as it becomes available. http://www2.ed.gov/programs/triotrain/index.html FY 2016 TRIO Training Competition 1 Includes $10,436,942 in FY 2014 forward funding to 44 McNair NCCs, which was used to fund program activities in FY 2015. Does not include $8,026,417 in FY 2015 forward funding to 34 McNair NCCs, which will be used to fund program activities in FY 2016. 2 Does not include $318,733 in FY 2015 forward funding to one off-cycle EOC NCC, which will be used to fund program activities in FY 2016. 3 Does not include $534,164 in FY 2015 forward funding to two off-cycle TS NCCs, which will be used to fund program activities in FY 2016. 4 Includes $3,973,901 in FY 2014 forward funding to three GEAR UP NCCs, which was used to fund program activities in FY 2015. Does not include $2,396,624 in FY 2015 forward funding to one GEAR UP NCC, which will be used to fund program activities in FY 2016. 5 Due to FY 2015 funds available, one of these 591 fellowships is a partial fellowship. We anticipate FY 2016 GAANN funds will support a supplemental award to bring this partial fellowship up to a full fellowship amount. 6 Does not include $313,403 in FY 2015 forward funding to one CCAMPIS NCC, which will be used to fund program activities in FY 2016. Fiscal Year 2015 Student Service Award Summary Program Number and Amount of New Awards Number and Amount of Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) Awards Total Number and Amount of All Awards Made in FY 2015 Upward Bound n/a 813 NCC awards $263,412,436 813 total awards $263,412,436 61,361 participants Upward Bound Math and Science n/a 162 NCC awards $43,050,368 162 total awards $43,050,368 10,034 participants Veterans Upward Bound n/a 49 NCC awards $13,548,241 49 total awards $13,548,241 6,566 participants Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement n/a 151 NCC awards $35,701,1971 151 total awards $35,701,197 4,293 participants Educational Opportunity Centers n/a 126 NCC awards $46,606,4232 126 total awards $46,606,423 189,733 participants Student Support Services 1,009 new awards $273,538,379 72 NCC awards $23,718,297 1,081 total awards $297,256,676 205,263 participants Talent Search n/a 449 NCC awards $134,520,5953 449 total awards $134,520,595 310,199 participants TRIO Training n/a 8 NCC awards $1,524,998 8 total awards $1,524,998 Participants n/a GEAR UP 4 new awards $7,951,602 123 NCC awards $291,838,1424 127 total awards $299,789,744 570,462 participants Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need 95 new awards $23,467,363 24 NCC awards $5,621,969 119 total awards $29,089,332 591 fellowships5 CCAMPIS n/a 85 NCC awards $14,820,5976 85 total awards $14,820,597 Participants n/a Visit TRIO’s New Online Interactive Story Map! http://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/storymaps/trio/ Student Service is excited to present this new tool for the TRIO community or anyone seeking to find and learn about the programs funded by the Federal TRIO Programs. Story maps are being used to convey data and information in a user-friendly, interactive format. The TRIO Story Map harnesses the power of geography to tell our story and to demonstrate the wide footprint of our programs. In developing this new tool, our office had three main goals: 1. Show the vast footprint and geographic distribution of our programs. 2. Convey information in an interesting, interactive and user-friendly format. 3. Provide a tool to encourage networking and collaboration. Hosted by NCES, the interactive story map shows the location of all TRIO program project sites as of the 2013-14 reporting year. In addition to displaying the geographic distribution of grantees both by individual program and for all programs at once, users can read about the main highlights of each program. Also, by clicking on any project site, users gain access to key institutional characteristics of grantees, including city, state, type of institution, regional location, funding amount, participants served, and the size of the institution. Future iterations of the map will include project contact information and outcome data (i.e., GPRA) that is currently available on the TRIO website under the performance tab for each of the programs. We hope you share in our excitement, use the TRIO Story Map for networking and collaborating with other grantees, and last but not least, share the TRIO story! Page 4 of 9 Training Opportunities under the TRIO Training Program The 2015-16 training opportunities offered through the Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs are now listed on the Department of Education’s website. These dates and locations can be found at http:// www2.ed.gov/programs/triotrain/opportunities.html. To register for a specific training, contact the entity responsible for the training you are interested in attending. The contact information and links for registration for COE, Renaissance Education Group, SAEOPP, Sonoma State, and UNLV may be found at the link provided. As space in these trainings is limited, please refrain from signing up for training that you have attended in recent years to allow those who have been on waiting lists to attend. Lastly, if you sign up for training, be certain to attend. We have asked the training grantees to notify us of those registrants who are no-shows for training, as this becomes a waste of valuable training resources. New Report on Student Academic Achievements Persistence and Completion in Postsecondary Education of Participants in the TRIO Student Support Services (SSS) Program Report On behalf of the Department’s Office of Postsecondary Education’s Student Service, we are pleased to present the report, Persistence and Completion in Postsecondary Education of Participants in the TRIO Student Support Services (SSS) Program. The report provides information on the academic achievements of students who first participated in the SSS program as college freshmen in 2007–08. Findings are contextualized using outcome information taken from a national sample of students who began college in 2003–04. The report is available at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/triostudsupp/resources.html. Announcing a New Collaboration in Support of Disconnected Youth Launch of the New College Scorecard On November 23, 2015, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced an exciting new collaboration in support of disconnected youth. Beginning in early 2016, we invite you to participate in a series of learning opportunities, such as webinars, trainings, and/or focus groups, which will be announced soon. These activities will be designed to enhance both ED and HHS grantees’ awareness of the resources available to meet the needs of disconnected students, as well as to foster crossDepartmental partnerships among grantees serving similar populations. You should have already received a copy of the letter announcing the partnership via blast email. It can also be accessed via the TRIO (http://www2.ed.gov/ about/offices/list/ope/trio/index.html) and GEAR UP (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/ index.html) homepages under “What’s New.” On September 12, 2015, President Obama announced the launch of a new College Scorecard, meant to help students and parents identify which schools provide the biggest bang for the buck. Designed with input from those who will use it most, the Scorecard offers reliable data on factors important to prospective students, such as how much graduates earn, and how much debt they have when they graduate. In an economy where some higher education is still the surest ticket to the middle class, the choices that Americans make when searching for and selecting a college have never been more important. That’s why the President and the Department of Education are committed to making sure there exists reliable information that helps students find the college that best fits their needs so that they can succeed. The College Scorecard can be found at the following link: https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/ Program and Student Spotlight In October 2015, for the second year in a row, Chicago area TRIO programs and the Council for Opportunity in Education (COE) held two exciting events to celebrate 50 years of success in creating paths to upward mobility for lowincome, first-generation students and their families. The first, an alumni reception hosted by Northeastern Illinois University's Center for College Access and Success, drew over 100 TRIO alums and featured Cornelius Griggs, President of GMA Construction Group, a Talent Search alumnus from Introspect Youth Services, Inc. and the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement program at Chicago State University, and Dominique Jordan Turner, President and CEO of Chicago Scholars Foundation, an Upward Bound Alumna from Notre Dame University, as speakers. The reception paid tribute to legendary TRIO director, Silas Purnell of Ada S. McKinley Community Services, who assisted tens of thousands of low-income and first-generation students in accessing college. The second event, a STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) Celebration was also hosted by Northeastern at its main campus. It engaged over 400 Chicago public and charter secondary students in hands-on activities. COE and Chicago TRIO directors are committed to making sure that both celebrations take place annually. These college access and success programs serve over 14,000 Chicago area residents annually. For a listing of all Chicago Area TRIO programs, please click here (.pdf). SS is honored to share the following story of an alumna of the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaurate Achievement (McNair) Program, who is also our colleague in the U.S. Department of Education. Ms. Erica Cuevas, a Confidential Assistant in the Office of the Deputy Secretary, participated in the McNair Program at Sonoma State University. Please see below for more information on her academic and professional journey. Name of the institution where I participated as a McNair Scholar: Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA Impact of the program on my educational experience: The McNair Scholar program at Sonoma State University (SSU) exposed me to a variety of educational experiences and resources that improved my overall undergraduate education and made me a strong candidate for graduate school. For example, as a McNair Scholar I became engaged in an advanced level research project that analyzed the voting behavior of the Latino electorate in the 2004 and 2008 Presidential elections. The McNair program connected me with a Political Science professor who served as my guide and mentor throughout my research project. Once my research was complete, I received essential tools and training on presenting my research findings at the SSU McNair Scholar Research Symposium and on publishing my research in the SSU McNair Scholar Research Journal. Additionally, the program’s Director served as one of my best mentors during my undergraduate education. He guided me through the graduate school application process and gave me advice on graduate programs and funding opportunities. Had it not been for the McNair Scholar program, I may not have applied or been accepted into graduate school right after completing my Bachelor’s degree. The McNair program served as one of my best resources in college, and there is no doubt that the program has had the same effect on a number of other low-income, first generation college students. When I graduated from Sonoma State University: May 2013 When I received my Master’s in Public Affairs from the University of Texas at Austin: May 2015 My current position here as at the Department of Education: I am currently the Confidential Assistant in the Office of the Deputy Secretary. I work very closely with the Deputy Secretary and Chief of Staff and am responsible for, but not limited to, scheduling, coordinating logistics for the Deputy Secretary’s meetings, handling all incoming/outgoing communication, and prioritizing invitations. I also assist with briefing materials for the Deputy Secretary, as well as attend meetings with senior officials. Page 6 of 9 STEM student participants [Photo courtesy of COE.] Technical Assistance Corner Upward Bound (UB) and U.S. Citizenship Many areas of the country have large immigrant communities, and many projects have reached out for technical assistance on how to best serve undocumented students in their target schools and target areas. The regulations are clear about participant eligibility, as it relates to citizenship. If a potential participant is not a citizen or permanent resident, then they must be able to document the steps they have taken with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in order to receive services. The best service that UB projects can provide to undocumented families is to connect them to INS or another reputable community organization that can help them navigate the INS process. Student Service understands that many projects hate to turn away any potential participants, especially those with serious needs; we recommend staying connected with those prospective participants, if you have the resources, so that you can serve those participants once they have initiated the citizenship process. If you have any specific questions, you should contact your assigned Program Specialist for technical assistance. Don’t Forget! Previous editions of the Student Service Updates are available on our Web site, including the most recent edition, a commemorative issue highlighting the history and success of the Veterans Upward Bound (VUB) Program. Visit the following link to check it out! http://www2.ed.gov/about/ offices/list/ope/ssnewsletters.html On December 10, 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and replaces the previous version of the law, No Child Left Behind. To learn more, visit the following link: http://www.ed.gov/ESSA America’s students are graduating from high school at a higher rate than ever before, reaching 82 percent in 2013-14! What’s more, the gap between white students and black and Hispanic students receiving high school diplomas continues to narrow, and traditionally underserved populations like English language learners and students with disabilities continue to make gains, the data show. Click HERE to check out the data on the NCES website. “The hard work of teachers, administrators, students and their families has made these gains possible and as a result many more students will have a better chance of going to college, getting a good job, owning their own home, and supporting a family. We can take pride as a nation in knowing that we’re seeing promising gains, including for students of color.” - Secretary Arne Duncan Has your project implemented any exciting or innovative activities? Any outreach or service strategies that have seen great results? Please let us know! Send a brief description, along with any pictures, to Catherine St. Clair at Catherine.StClair@ed.gov Page 8 of 9 Student Service Uses the Latest Technology Since 2014, Student Service (SS) has enjoyed consistently positive outcomes through its successful implementation of available technologies in grantee community outreach efforts. Increasing fiscal constraints have prompted SS, among others within the U.S. Department of Education, to better identify current technological resources that deliver cost-effective, targeted and customized monitoring while providing critical technical assistance to grantees. On February 13, 2015, Student Service leadership executed a virtual presentation, via WebEx videoconference technology, to approximately 350 TRIO project directors and staff attending the Southeastern Association of Educational Opportunity Program Personnel (SAEOPP) conference. Recently, one staff member also utilized the WebEx software to deliver a technical assistance webinar to their grantees. In addition, in fiscal year 2015 alone, Student Service conducted seven (7) virtual site visits across programs ranging from the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs to Student Support Services, which more than doubled the three (3) virtual site visits conducted in 2014. SS’s strategic use of technologies has led to an increase in grantee achievement of approved objectives, a greater number of professional development opportunities for program staff in both technology usage and monitoring activity planning and execution, an increase in the number of site visits conducted by the Office of Postsecondary Education, and generated positive feedback from both program staff and the grantee community. Moving forward, SS will continue to encourage the use of technology to support grantees, program staff and agency objectives aimed at ongoing development and adoption of effective technology. “Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves. Let us help others to grow, as we would like to be helped ourselves. In a word, if we want security, let us give security; if we want life, let us give life; if we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities. The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us.” -Pope Francis, from his Address to Congress [September 24, 2015] GEAR UP staff is preparing for the CapacityBuilding Workshop (CBW) that will take place January 31-February 3, 2016 in New Orleans, Louisiana. At the CBW, GEAR UP grantees will have extended conversations with experts in the field and their peers about how to advance the cause of college access and success. GEAR UP Capacity Building Workshop February 2016 is African American History Month. This year’s theme is: Hallowed Grounds: Sites of African American Memories The mere imparting of information is not education. -Carter G. Woodson Questions, comments, or ideas for future SS Updates? Please send an email to ReShone.Moore@ed.gov Student Aid Bulletin Board StudentAid.Gov Web site (Topics related to Federal Student Aid, including applying for loans, paying loans back, and publications about student aid.) http://studentaid.ed.gov/ National Student Loan Database System (Allows a student to access all of their student loan history.) https://www.nslds.ed.gov/nslds/nslds_SA/ Public Service Loan Forgiveness Q & A https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/public-service-loanforgiveness-common-questions.pdf Twitter Account for FAFSA (@FAFSA) https://mobile.twitter.com/fafsa?lang=en Financial Aid Toolkit (Provides federal student aid information and outreach tools for counselors, college access professionals, nonprofit mentors, and others.) http://www.financialaidtoolkit.ed.gov/tk/ FAFSA Demonstration Site (Increase your own understanding of the FAFSA and show it to students before they apply.) At the demo site, you can complete a sample FAFSA, make corrections, or check the status of the application. However, when you choose "submit," the information is not actually submitted. The site is purely a learning tool. To access the FAFSA demo site, enter the user name eddemo and the password fafsatest, and you're all set. http://fafsademo.test.ed.gov/ Please see the following link to access Grantmaking at ED, a non-technical summary of ED's discretionary grant process and the laws and regulations that govern it: http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/ grantmaking/index.html
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.595532/gov.uscourts.flsd.595532.3.0.pdf.json	AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action # UNITED # S TATES # D ISTRICT # C OURT for the __________ District of __________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff(s) v. Civil Action No. Defendant(s) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or moti on must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk ### Case 1:21-cv-22393-KMW Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/01/2021 Page 1 of 2AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action # UNITED # S TATES # D ISTRICT # C OURT for the __________ District of __________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff(s) v. Civil Action No. Defendant(s) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or moti on must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk ### Case 1:21-cv-22393-KMW Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/01/2021 Page 2 of 2
text/plain	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca8.99725/gov.uscourts.ca8.99725.814694155.0.pdf.json	No. 21-1890 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT THE RELIGIOUS SISTERS OF MERCY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. XAVIER BECERRA, et al., Defendants-Appellants. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF CATHOLIC BENEFITS ASSOCIATION’S PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General CHARLES W. SCARBOROUGH ASHLEY C. HONOLD Attorneys, Appellate Staff Civil Division, Room 7261 U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 (202) 353-9018 Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................................ 5 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 13 CERTIFICATIONS OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Page(s) ACLU Neb. Found. v. City of Plattsmouth, 358 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2004), reh’g granted and opinion vacated (Apr. 6, 2004), on reh’g en banc, 419 F.3d 772 (8th Cir. 2005) .................................................................. 9 City of Clarkson Valley v. Mineta, 495 F.3d 567 (8th Cir. 2007) ............................................................................................... 7 Conners v. Gusano’s Chi. Style Pizzeria, 779 F.3d 835 (8th Cir. 2015) ........................................................................................... 10 Fort Bend County v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 1843–47 (2019) ................................................................................................ 10 Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006) ..................................................................................................... 1, 12 Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advert. Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) ............................................................................................................ 2 Iowa League of Cities v. EPA, 711 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2013) ........................................................................................ 7, 9 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) ....................................................................................................... 5, 7 Newsome v. EEOC, 301 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2002) ........................................................................................... 11 Occidental Life Ins. Co. of Cal. v. EEOC, 432 U.S. 355 (1977) .......................................................................................................... 10 Ouachita Watch League v. U.S. Forest Serv., 858 F.3d 539 (8th Cir. 2017) ............................................................................................. 5 Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) ...................................................................................... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) ............................................................................................................ 6 Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 iii Statutes: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 42 U.S.C. § 18116(a) ........................................................................................................... 3 Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq. ................................................................................................... 1 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a) .................................................................................................................. 3 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(b) .......................................................................................................... 10 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) ...................................................................................................... 10 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-8(e) .......................................................................................................... 11 Regulation: 29 C.F.R. § 1601.22 ............................................................................................................... 11 Rule: Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) ................................................................................................................ 5 Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 4 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 INTRODUCTION As the government explained in its petition for rehearing en banc, plaintiffs lack standing to challenge hypothetical future enforcement actions by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) because the prospect of enforcement is entirely speculative. Neither HHS nor EEOC has ever threatened or initiated any enforcement action in court against any religious entities with objections to providing or covering gender-transition services, much less brought an enforcement action in court against plaintiffs or any member of plaintiff the Catholic Benefits Association (CBA). By affirming a broad, pre-enforcement injunction based on the mere possibility of future government actions that might (or might not) infringe on religious liberties protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq., the panel violated fundamental Article III standing and ripeness requirements and RFRA’s requirement of an individualized “to-theperson” analysis. See Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418, 430-431 (2006). The panel’s erroneous conclusion that at least some plaintiffs have standing to preemptively challenge government enforcement actions that may never actually occur is inextricably intertwined with the panel’s assessment of associational standing. Although the panel correctly concluded that the CBA lacks standing to represent “unnamed members,” that conclusion was also correct because the three named Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 5 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 2 plaintiffs who are CBA members—the Diocese of Fargo (the Diocese), Catholic Charities North Dakota (Catholic Charites), and the Catholic Medical Association— likewise failed to demonstrate a credible threat of enforcement sufficient to support standing. Because the CBA’s challenge to the panel’s holding that the CBA lacks associational standing rests exclusively on the standing of these three named plaintiffs, this Court should not grant the CBA’s rehearing petition without reconsidering the more fundamental standing defects applicable to all plaintiffs, which are presented in the government’s petition for rehearing en banc. In the alternative, this Court should deny the CBA’s rehearing petition because the organization still has not demonstrated that any CBA member has suffered an injury in fact sufficient to confer “standing to sue in their own right.” Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advert. Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333, 343 (1977). As the panel recognized, the CBA failed to identify any of its individual members aside from the named plaintiffs who are also CBA members. The CBA argues on rehearing that the panel ignored these three member entities in concluding that the CBA lacked associational standing. But that argument, in turn, ignores the district court’s independent holding that the Diocese, Catholic Charities, and the Catholic Medical Association do not have standing to sue HHS in their own right because they do not receive federal funding and accordingly are not covered entities under Section 1557 of Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 6 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 3 the Affordable Care Act. A780-781.1 Thus, even apart from the basic lack of any concrete or imminent enforcement activity that fatally undermines the standing of all plaintiffs, the CBA’s reliance on its three members that are also named plaintiffs cannot be reconciled with the district court’s prior holding that those entities lack standing on other grounds. Because the CBA thus still has not identified any member who has suffered an Article III injury, the panel should deny the CBA’s petition for panel rehearing. STATEMENT 1. Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act prohibits, as relevant here, “any health program or activity” “receiving Federal financial assistance” from discriminating against an individual based on “ground[s] prohibited under” several other statutes. 42 U.S.C. § 18116(a). One of the specified statutes is Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination “on the basis of sex.” 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a). An entity that does not receive federal funding is not a covered entity under Section 1557. See 42 U.S.C. § 18116(a). 2. The district court concluded that the CBA plaintiffs did not have standing to sue HHS in their own right because none of the CBA plaintiffs received federal funding, and thus they are not regulated entities under Section 1557. A780-781 1 Citations to the government’s Appendix are abbreviated A__. Citations to the Addendum filed with the government’s petition for rehearing en banc are abbreviated Add.__ Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 7 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 4 (“Section 1557 does not apply directly to the named [CBA] Plaintiffs. . . . None of the [CBA] Plaintiffs aver that their own health plans receive federal funding. . . . Those Plaintiffs thus lack standing to challenge Section 1557 in their own capacities.”). However, the district court concluded that the CBA had associational standing to sue on behalf of its unnamed members who receive federal funding. A781-782, A788. The district court reasoned that the CBA’s “second amended complaint confirms that its membership includes Catholic hospitals and other healthcare entities” that receive federal funding. A782. In the district court’s view, “[m]embers on whose behalf suit is brought may remain unnamed.” A781. 3. The panel reversed the district court’s conclusion that the CBA has associational standing to sue on behalf of its unnamed members. Add.26-28. The panel explained that the Supreme Court has instructed that “[a] court cannot ‘accept[] the organizations’ self-descriptions of their membership’ because ‘the court has an independent obligation to assure that standing exists, regardless of whether it is challenged by any of the parties.’” Add.27 (second alteration in original) (quoting Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488, 499 (2009)). Thus, “the [Supreme] Court ‘require[s] plaintiffs claiming an organizational standing to identify members who have suffered the requisite harm.’” Add.27-28 (second alteration in original) (quoting Summers, 555 U.S. at 499). The panel concluded that the CBA “failed to identify members who have suffered the requisite harm.” Add.28. The panel thus held that Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 8 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 5 “the CBA lacks associational standing to sue on behalf of unnamed members.” Add.28. ARGUMENT The panel correctly concluded that the CBA lacks associational standing. As the panel recognized, the normal rule is that “plaintiffs claiming an organizational standing” are required “to identify members who have suffered the requisite harm.” Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488, 499 (2009). The Supreme Court explained that courts cannot simply “accept[] the organizations’ self-descriptions of their membership” and that “individual affidavits” are necessary to permit the court to satisfy its “independent obligation to assure that standing exists.” Id. Applying these principles, this Court has held that a plaintiff organization did not have associational standing where it relied on “a series of general and conclusory legal allegations” that did not identify any specific member who would be harmed by the defendants’ actions. Ouachita Watch League v. U.S. Forest Serv., 858 F.3d 539, 543 (8th Cir. 2017). The CBA has not identified any specific members who have adequately demonstrated an injury such that they would have standing to sue in their own right. As in the district court, and before the panel on appeal, the CBA does not identify any individual members who receive federal funding at all, much less provide “specific facts” through affidavits or other evidence sufficient to demonstrate standing in their own right. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561 (1992) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)). The panel properly found this deficiency fatal to CBA’s associational Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 9 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 6 standing given the well-established rule that organizations must identify more than “a statistical probability that some of [its] members are threatened with concrete injury.” Add.27 (quoting Summers, 555 U.S. at 497). In their rehearing petition, the CBA acknowledges that it must identify at least one member “suffering immediate or threatened injury,” Pl.’s Pet. 8 (quoting Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511 (1975)), but the CBA nowhere identifies any individual member by name, much less specifically describes injuries to such a member with the specificity necessary to demonstrate standing, compare with id. at 11 (making general statements about members without providing details). Instead, the CBA relies exclusively on asserted injuries to three entities that are both named plaintiffs and CBA members—the Diocese, Catholic Charities, and the Catholic Medical Association—asserting that “[t]he panel, following the district court, found that these named member-plaintiffs have standing to sue in their own right.” Pl.’s Pet. 10-11. As explained above, however, the district court specifically held that the named CBA plaintiffs do not have standing to sue in their own right because they do not receive federal funding and thus are not covered entities under Section 1557. A780-781 (“Section 1557 does not apply directly to the named [CBA] Plaintiffs. . . . None of the [CBA] Plaintiffs aver that their own health plans receive federal funding. . . . Those Plaintiffs thus lack standing to challenge Section 1557 in their own capacities.”). The CBA cannot properly claim associational standing based on its members that the district court expressly found lacked standing. Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 10 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 7 The panel nowhere discussed, much less overturned, the district court’s independent holding that the Diocese, Catholic Charities, and the Catholic Medical Association do not have standing because they do not receive federal funding under Section 1557. A780-781. Nor does the CBA ever acknowledge this critical holding in its rehearing petition. The CBA’s exclusive reliance on the standing of these three CBA members as a predicate for associational standing is thus both misleading and flawed given the district court’s conclusion that the “named [CBA] Plaintiffs” “lack standing to challenge Section 1557 in their own capacities.” A780-781. For these reasons, the panel correctly carved out the CBA and its members, affirming the injunction “except to the extent it recognizes the associational standing of the CBA.” Add.40. In any event, the panel could not properly have concluded that the Diocese, Catholic Charities, and the Catholic Medical Association have standing to sue in their own right. These CBA members have not submitted “individual affidavits” or any other evidence demonstrating that they receive federal funding such that Section 1557 applies to them or demonstrating that they have suffered any injury from HHS or EEOC. Summers, 555 U.S. at 499; see also Iowa League of Cities v. EPA, 711 F.3d 844, 869 (8th Cir. 2013) (explaining that “to survive a summary judgment motion,” a plaintiff “must set forth by affidavit or other evidence specific facts” to demonstrate standing (quoting City of Clarkson Valley v. Mineta, 495 F.3d 567, 569 (8th Cir. 2007))); Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561 (explaining that elements of standing “are not mere pleading Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 11 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 8 requirements but rather an indispensable part of the plaintiff’s case”). Indeed, the government made clear that the named CBA plaintiffs “did not have standing to sue HHS in their own right because none of the CBA plaintiffs alleged that they received federal funding, and thus they are not regulated entities under Section 1557.” Gov’t Br. 13, 29. The panel nowhere addressed this issue, much less overruled the district court’s specific holding on this point. Moreover, the Catholic Medical Association’s broad allegation that it has “standing to represent all of its present and future members,” A142, ¶ 39, is itself insufficient to demonstrate associational standing to bring suit on behalf of its members because it has not named any members who could sue in their own right, nor has it provided any “individual affidavits” demonstrating that any of its members receive federal funding or that they have suffered any injury from HHS or EEOC. Summers, 555 U.S. at 499. Because the Catholic Medical Association does not have associational standing to sue on behalf of its unnamed members, it cannot serve as the named plaintiff who supports CBA’s associational standing. Neither the district court nor the panel addressed this independent standing defect. See Gov’t Br. 40; id. at 35 n.4. The CBA contends that it has associational standing because it alleged that “CBA members include hospitals and other healthcare entities that receive Medicaid and Medicare payments and thus are covered entities under the 2016 Rule.” Pl.’s Pet. 11 (quoting A145, ¶ 55). But the Supreme Court has made clear that courts cannot Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 12 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 9 accept the organizations’ “self-descriptions of their membership” and that plaintiffs are required “to identify members who have suffered the requisite harm” and provide “individual affidavits” to satisfy their burden to demonstrate standing. Summers, 555 U.S. at 499. The CBA has not identified any specific members who receive federal funding or provided any individual affidavits to support their allegations. The cases cited by the CBA are inapposite. Pl.’s Pet. 9-10. For example, in Iowa League of Cities, 711 F.3d 844, the plaintiff association supported its standing with affidavits from specific members. Id. at 870 (“[T]he League members’ affidavits evince the type of ‘concrete’ and ‘actual or imminent’ harm necessary to establish an injury in fact.”). And even where this Court has allowed individual plaintiffs to proceed under pseudonyms, it has required an association basing its standing on such a person to provide specific evidence of how that person was injured. See ACLU Neb. Found. v. City of Plattsmouth, 358 F.3d 1020, 1026 (8th Cir. 2004) (explaining that “[b]ecause of the [challenged] monument, Doe avoids using the park for recreational activities” and that he “would use the park more often were it not for the monument”), reh’g granted and opinion vacated (Apr. 6, 2004), on reh’g en banc, 419 F.3d 772 (8th Cir. 2005). In contrast, the CBA has not offered affidavits or any other evidence demonstrating that specific named members have been injured in any concrete way. The CBA’s attempt to establish associational standing based on a new allegation that “EEOC had begun an enforcement action” against one of its members “for its refusal to provide gender-transition coverage,” Pl.’s Pet. 16, is likewise Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 13 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 10 unavailing. As an initial matter, this Court “must assess standing in view only of the facts that existed at the time” of the operative complaint, so this Court should not consider the CBA’s new allegations at all. Conners v. Gusano’s Chi. Style Pizzeria, 779 F.3d 835, 840 (8th Cir. 2015). But even if this Court were to consider the CBA’s new allegations that a private party filed a charge of discrimination against a CBA member and that EEOC requested documents as part of its investigation of that charge, these allegations do not demonstrate that EEOC has initiated any enforcement action in court against a CBA member. When an individual files a charge of discrimination against an employer, Title VII requires EEOC to notify the employer of the charge and to initiate an investigation. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(b) (“Whenever a charge is filed . . . [EEOC] shall serve a notice of the charge . . . on such employer[] . . . within ten days, and shall make an investigation thereof.” (emphases added)). Accordingly, the CBA’s new allegations only show that EEOC complied with its statutory obligations concerning the administrative process. EEOC engaging in its statutorily required administration process is very different from EEOC deciding to exercise its enforcement discretion to pursue an enforcement action in court against an employer. EEOC’s administrative process is not an enforcement action at all, as EEOC does not “adjudicate the claim” and has no authority to impose penalties on employers itself. Fort Bend County v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 1843, 1846–47 (2019) (alterations omitted); see also Occidental Life Ins. Co. of Cal. v. EEOC, 432 U.S. 355, 363 (1977); 42 U.S.C. § 2000eAppellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 14 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 11 5(f)(1). CBA is thus incorrect in suggesting that its new allegations show that the government was disingenuous in arguing that EEOC has never brought an enforcement action in court against any objecting religious employer. Moreover, the CBA itself states that once EEOC was informed that the employer was a CBA member, EEOC did not take any further action, and EEOC did not file an enforcement action in court. See Pl.’s Pet. 17 (“EEOC has taken no action since then.”).2 Even if there were no injunction in place, an employer could always respond to a charge of discrimination by invoking a RFRA defense. If EEOC were to conclude that the employer raised a valid RFRA defense, EEOC would not take any further action against the employer and would not file an enforcement action. See Newsome v. EEOC, 301 F.3d 227, 229-230 (5th Cir. 2002) (explaining that after an employer responded to a charge of discrimination with a religious defense, EEOC dismissed the charge of discrimination and did not bring an enforcement action). Indeed, it remains true that HHS and EEOC have not threatened or initiated any enforcement actions in court against any objecting religious entities. 2 EEOC cannot respond to the CBA’s allegations in any further detail, as Title VII’s confidentiality provision precludes EEOC from providing any details regarding any charge. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-8(e) (“It shall be unlawful for [EEOC] to make public in any manner whatever any information obtained by [EEOC] pursuant to its authority under this section prior to the institution of any proceeding”); 29 C.F.R. § 1601.22 (“Neither a charge, nor information obtained during the investigation of a charge of employment discrimination under title VII . . . shall be made matters of public information by [EEOC] prior to the institution of any proceeding under title VII[.]”). Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 15 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 12 Finally, the CBA errs in contending that the panel’s case-specific finding that the CBA lacks associational standing to sue on behalf of its unnamed members presents a question of exceptional importance. Pl.’s Pet. 16-20. In future cases, the CBA should be able to avoid this problem by identifying at least one CBA member suffering concrete harm sufficient to confer standing, but the CBA’s inability to do so here underscores a more fundamental standing problem applicable to all the plaintiffs in this case: the absence of a credible threat of enforcement action by either EEOC or HHS. In short, the deficiencies in the CBA’s attempt to establish associational standing reflect even more basic problems resulting from the absence of any specific enforcement activity that could provide standing, create a ripe claim, or provide an adequate basis for the individualized, “to-the-person” analysis required under RFRA. See Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418, 430-431 (2006). As explained in the government’s pending petition for rehearing en banc, the broad pre-enforcement injunction the panel has affirmed violates bedrock Article III limitations on judicial power and effectively transforms RFRA from a shield against government action that actually infringes on religious exercise into a sword used to preemptively attack hypothetical, future government actions that may never come to pass. Because these are questions of exceptional importance, the full Court should grant rehearing en banc, but the CBA’s independent challenge to the panel’s associational standing holding does not independently warrant further review. Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 16 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 13 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny the CBA’s rehearing petition and grant the government’s petition for rehearing en banc. Respectfully submitted, BRIAN M. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General CHARLES W. SCARBOROUGH s/ Ashley C. Honold ASHLEY C. HONOLD Attorneys, Appellate Staff Civil Division, Room 7261 U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20530 (202) 353-9018 ashley.c.honold@usdoj.gov FEBRUARY 2023 Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 17 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 CERTIFICATIONS OF COMPLIANCE This brief complies with the type-volume limit of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(b)(2)(A) because it contains 3,082 words. This brief also complies with the typeface and type-style requirements of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32(a)(5)-(6) because it was prepared using Microsoft Word 2016 in Garamond 14- point font, a proportionally spaced typeface. Pursuant to Circuit Rule 28A(h)(2), I further certify that the brief has been scanned for viruses, and the brief is virus free. s/ Ashley C. Honold Ashley C. Honold Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 18 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on February 17, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing brief with the Clerk of this Court by using the appellate CM/ECF system. The participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and service will be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system. s/ Ashley C. Honold Ashley C. Honold Appellate Case: 21-1890 Page: 19 Date Filed: 02/17/2023 Entry ID: 5247112
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/railroads.dot.gov/elibrary-search?f[0]=document_series:14756&f[1]=document_series:14971&f[2]=subject:14266&f[3]=subject:14546.json	- Home ## Document Type - Accidents & Fatalities(33) - Compliance(22) - Conference & Presentations(86) - Emergency & Safety(24) - Other(5) - Public Affairs & Policy(12) - (-)Reference(3) - Reference Materials(3) - Reports(203) - Other Reports(33) - Reports to Congress(5) - Research Results(14) - (-)Technical Reports(151) - Rules & Regulations(1) ## Subjects - Show all(2373) - Evaluation(296) - (-)Hazardous Materials(153) - Track(147) - Signal and Train Control(101) - Facilities & Test Equipment(98) - Highway-Rail Grade Crossings(98) - Track/Train Interactions(98) - Human Factors(97) - Positive Train Control(97) - Tracks & Structures(90) - Grants & Financial Assistance(81) - Rolling Stock(75) - High-Speed Passenger Rail(61) - Maglev(56) - Grade Crossing Technology(53) - Freight Operations(52) - Passenger Rail(51) - Rail and Infrastructure Integrity(48) - Safety Performance Measures(41) - Environmental Protection(39) - Crashworthiness - Passenger Equipment(37) - Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Warning Systems(35) - Best Practices(35) - Braking Systems(27) - Grade Crossing and Trespass Outreach/Education(24) - Safety Regulatory Analysis(23) - Locomotive Standards (Safety & Noise)(23) - Grade Crossing Modeling and Simulation(22) - Amtrak(21) - Safety Advisories(21) - Accident Reduction(19) - Train Control(18) - Technology Transfer(17) - Trespasser Programs(13) - Communications(12) - Testing(10) - Emergency Preparedness(9) - Work Schedule & Sleep Patterns(9) - Program Evaluation(9) - Fatigue Management(8) - Occupant Protection(8) - Trespass Countermeasures(8) - Crashworthiness - Tank Car(7) - Collision(7) - Grade Crossings(7) - Accident Investigations(6) - Bridge and Structures Safety(6) - USDOT National Highway-Rail Crossing Inventory(6) - Railroad Employees(6) - Motive Power and Equipment(5) - Operating Practices(5) - Fiber Optic(5) - Cellular Telephones/Other Electronic Devices(4) - Emergency Notification Systems(4) - Intelligent Railroad Systems(4) - Social & Economic Impacts(4) - Railroad System Oversight(3) - Worker Protection(3) - Train Horn Noise(3) - Analysis(3) - Shared Corridor(3) - Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety(3) - Continuous Welded Rail(2) - Drug and Alcohol Program(2) - Engineer Certification(2) - Industrial Hygiene(2) - Intercity Passenger Rail Investment (2) - Occupational Noise Exposure(2) - Railroad Safety Technical Training Standards(2) - Railroad System Issues(2) - Sleep Disorders(2) - Switching Operations(2) - Budget(2) - Autonomous(2) - Security(2) - Automated Track Inspection Program (ATIP)(1) - Enforcement(1) - Hours of Service(1) - Railroad Safety Information Management(1) - Right-of-Way(1) - Remote Control Locomotive Operations(1) - Roadway Maintenance Machine Safety(1) - Risk Assessment(1) - (-)Crew Resource Management (CRM)(1) - Heavy Axle Load (HAL)(1) - Capital Planning(1) - Automation(1) - Laboratory(1) # eLibrary Search Your Selections: - Reset - (-)Reference(3) - (-)Technical Reports(151) - (-)Hazardous Materials(153) - (-)Crew Resource Management (CRM)(1) The FRA eLibrary contains all the documents that are found throughout the FRA Public Website. Multiple pages on the website may link to the same eLibrary item based on its set of metatdata. Can I find All FRA Documents in the Library? Some "documents" may not appear here for the following reasons: - Document resides on an external site for the record of source, links to the document are provided in context but not in the library as FRA does not maintain this record. This document lives on another website. - Document has not yet been assigned keywords. - Document is historical and has been removed from library to avoid confusion with current publications. - Document is public affairs & policy related, such as press releases, speeches, testimony, or fact sheet. These press-related documents can now be found in the FRA Newsroom. - Document is related to rules and notices. This information can now be found on the Rulemakings search and the Notices search , respectively. To search an exact document title or key phrase, place quotations around the text. Example: "U.S. Government Grade Crossing Research & Stakeholder Engagement" Entering keywords without quotations will search the eLibrary for all occurrences of the keywords. 22Mar2024 Technical Reports Detailed Puncture Analyses of Tank Cars: Analysis of Different Impactor Threats and Impact Conditions AuthorSteven W. Kirkpatrick Subject Hazardous Materials Keywords: Tank car, Impactor, derailment, hazardous materials, hazmat Abstract: There has been significant research in recent years to analyze and improve the impact behavior and puncture resistance of railroad tank cars. Much of this research has been... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-13/17 Revision 1OfficeRRD 29Feb2024 Technical Reports Fire Performance of a Cryogenic ISO UN-T75 Storage Tank Using Analytical Methods and Fire Testing – Phase 2: Testing with LNG in an ISO Tank AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Hazardous Materials Keywords: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), ISO UN-T75 Tank, Flatcar, Pressure Relief Valve/Device (PRV/PRD), Directional Flame Thermometer (DFT), Incident Heat Flux, Surface Temperature Abstract: FRA sponsored a study by Southwest Research Institute to... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-24/11OfficeRDI-22 29Feb2024 Technical Reports Modeling and Analysis of Phase Change in a DOT-113 Tank Car Surrogate Filled with Liquid Nitrogen AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Hazardous Materials Keywords: Impact test, DOT-113 tank car, tank car performance, transportation safety, liquefied natural gas, LNG, liquid nitrogen, LN2, finite element analysis, FEA, hazardous materials, rolling stock, cryogenic, phase change, thermodynamics Abstract: As part of a series of impact tests, the Federal Railroad... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-24/12OfficeRDI-22 1Feb2024 Technical Reports Improving Tank Car Crash Energy Management (CEM) AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Hazardous Materials Keywords: Rolling stock research, FEA, mitigation, hazmat, tank car, puncture resistance, TC128-B Abstract: The Federal Railroad Administration sponsored a 2-year research effort between August 2020 and August 2022 to investigate multiple mitigation concepts for hazmat tank cars,... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-24-05OfficeRDI-22 25Jan2024 Technical Reports Improving Thermal Protection of Cryogenic Tank Cars Through Testing, Analysis, and Evaluation of Pressure Relief Valve System Performance AuthorFederal Railroad Administration Subject Hazardous Materials Keywords: Cryogenic fluid, dual phase flow, simulation, fire, LNG Abstract: The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) sponsored a research team to conduct high fidelity finite element (FE) modeling to evaluate the effects of post-derailment motion on... Report NumberDOT/FRA/ORD-24/01OfficeRDI-22 # Pagination - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - … - ››› - »Last »
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.201710/gov.uscourts.ca5.201710.53.1.pdf.json	# United States Court of Appeals f or the Fifth Circuit No. 21 - 10448 Larry L. Sears, Plaintiff — Appellant , versus Zions Bancorporation NA, formerly known as ZB NA, doing business as Amegy Bank of Texas, Defendant — Appellee . Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:19 - CV - 2810 - C Before Richman , Chief Judge , and Clement and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges . Kurt D. Engelhardt, Circuit Judge : * In this case, we must determine whether a 6 4 - year - old banker provided sufficient evidence of age discrimination to survive summary judgment. We hold that he did. Accordingl y, we reverse and remand. * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ### FILED June 2, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 2 I. Larry Sears was hired by Zions Bancorporation (d/b/a/ Amegy Bank of Texas, or “Amegy”) on October 1, 2012 , as a Senior Vice President (“SVP”) in the Dallas bank energy lending department. Sears was hired by the group’s manager, Terry McCarter, and Amegy’s Head of Energy, Steve Kennedy. Sears initially reported to McCarter, who in turn reported to Kennedy. M cCarter left the bank in late 2016, after which Sears reported directly to Kennedy. Sears’s primary role was business development ; his role as an SVP was described as the “hunter” of the group. In early 2018, Amegy had four SVPs in its Dallas energy lending group: Sears (aged 6 4 ) , John Murray (aged 63), Jill McSorley (aged 54 - 55), and J.B. Askew (aged 31). Askew had been promoted to the role only in February 2018. The Dallas energy lending grou p also included Vice President Matt Lang, an employee in his thirties who had been promoted by Kennedy in February 2018, and Assistant Vice President Jack Bush, an employee in his thirties that had been promoted by Kennedy in October 2017. Amegy concedes that Kennedy was “broadly satisfied” with Sears’s performance , though his performance review scores began to falter after McCarter left . For example, while Sears’s 2015 and 2016 review s placed him at a 4.5/5 and 4.8/5 rating, respectively, h is 2018 score fell to 3.5/5, a “meets expectations” review. Amegy states that “Kennedy’s opinion of Sears’ management and marketing skills had become less favorable in 2017” once Kennedy began working directly with Sears. According to Amegy, in late 2017 it began to consider hiring a new manager for the Dallas energy lending group. A January 2018 email between bank executives states that the bank was putting “feelers” out for a new manager and “once found , [Amegy] would consider transitioning Larry out.” According to the bank, it determined that it needed to eliminate one of Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 3 the four SVP positions to make room in the budget for such a manager . To determine which SVP to eliminate, Kennedy performed an informal ranking. Kennedy ranked Sears last and decided to elimi nate his position. Amegy finalized this decision by April 2, 2018. On April 30, 2018, Kennedy traveled to Dallas to tell Sears that he was terminated. In August 2018, Amegy suspended its search for an outside candidate and assigned Scott Collins, the ma nager of Amegy’s Houston energy lending department, the role of managing the Dallas department. Sears sued Amegy alleging that he was terminated because of his age. Amegy removed the suit to federal court and later moved for summary judgment . The distr ict court granted Amegy’s motion, finding that Sears failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination and failed to demonstrate that Amegy’s proffered reason for Sears ’ s termination was pretextual. Sears timely appealed. II. This court reviews a grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo, and applies the same standard as the district court, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. First Am. Title Ins. Co. v. Cont’ l Cas. Co. , 709 F.3d 1170, 1173 ( 5th Cir. 2013). Summary judgment is appropriate where “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). “Courts do not disfavor summary judgment, but, rather, look upo n it as an important process through which parties can obtain a ‘just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.’” Goldring v. United States , 15 F.4th 639, 644 (5th Cir. 2021) (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317, 327 (1986)). “ A p arty asserting that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact must support its assertion by citing to particular parts of materials in the record. ” Id. at 644 – 45. Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 4 III. Sears claims he was discharged because of his age in violation of the Texas Labor Code . T exas law provides that, “An employer commits an unlawful employment practice if because of . . . age the employer . . . discharges an individual.” Tex. Lab. Code § 21.051. Although Sears brings only a state law claim, the Texas Labor Code i s designed “to correlate state law with federal law in employment discrimination cases,” including the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Ysleta Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Monarrez , 177 S.W.3d 915, 917 (Tex. 2005) (citation omitted) ; see also Lindsley v. TRT Holdings, Inc. , 984 F.3d 460, 466 – 67 (5th Cir. 2021) . Accordingly, we may turn to federal case law for guidance in assessing Sears’s claim . As the parties acknowledge, Sears’s employment discrimination claim is governed by the burden shi fting framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973). Under McDonnell Douglas , the plaintiff has the initial burden to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination. Id. at 802. If he does so, the burden shifts to hi s employer to put forth a legitimate, non - discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. Id. at 802 – 03. If the employer provides such a reason, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to demonstrate that the stated reason is pretextual. Id. at 804 – 05. A. Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination under Texas law, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he “(1) was a member of the protected class (that is, 40 years of age or older), (2) was qualified for the position at issue, (3) suffered a final, adverse employment action, and (4) was either (a) replaced by someone significantly younger, or (b) otherwise treated less favorably than others who were similarly situated but outside the protected Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 5 class.” Tex. Tech Univ. Hea lth Scis. Ctr. - El Paso v. Flores , 612 S.W.3d 299, 305 (Tex. 2020). Only the fourth prong is disputed here. We have previously held that “[o]nly a minimal showing is necessary to meet this burden ” of establish ing a prima facie case. Bauer v. Albemarle Co rp. , 169 F.3d 962, 967 (5th Cir. 1999); see also Prestige Ford Co. v. Gilmore , 56 S.W.3d 73, 82 (Tex. App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 2001 , pet. denied. ). “Employees are similarly situated if their circumstances are comparable in all material respects, including similar standards, supervisors, and conduct.” Flores , 612 S.W.3d at 312 (citation omitted) . “Though their circumstances need not be ‘identical,’ t hey must be ‘nearly identical.’” Id. (citation s omitted). “Employees with different responsibilities, supervisors, capabilities, work rule violations, or disciplinary records are not considered to be ‘nearly identical.’” Id. (citation omitted). Here, S ears has produced sufficient evidence to create a dispute of material fact regarding whether he was treated less favorably than younger and similarly situated SVPs. First, a jury could find that Sears and Askew were similarly situated. 1 See County of El Paso v. Aguilar , 600 SW.3d 62, 77 (Tex. App. — El Paso 2020, no pet. ) (noting that whether two employees are similar situated is a question of fact for the jury). Both were SVPs, both reported and Kennedy, and Sears attested to the fact that Askew performed nearly identical job duties based on his resume, which described Askew’s job 1 We acknowledge that two of the other SVPs were over the age of forty. Murray , who was near Sears’s age, was involuntarily terminated shortly after Sears. Further, although McSorley is over the age of forty, her age difference with Sears can still give rise to an inference of age discrimination. This is because the “outside the protect ed class” element does not always have a logical connection to age discrimination when a younger (but still protected) employee is favored over an older employee. See O’Connor v. Consol. Coin Caters Corp. , 517 U.S. 308 , 312 – 13 (1996); see also Mission Con sol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Garcia , 372 S.W.3d 629, 641 (Tex. 2012) . Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 5 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 6 as early as February 2018 . Although their reviews were not identical, Amegy concedes that it was “broadly satisfied” with Sears’s performance. Moreover, As kew’s performance records are incomplete, making it difficult to compare the SVP’s review . And Sears’s worst review came only after certain Amegy executives had discussed “transitioning Larry out.” A jury could also find that Sears was treated less favo rably. Sears, the oldest SVP, was the only SVP selected for termination. Askew not only kept his job but was promoted. Indeed, the same day that Sears was fired, Askew was promoted to team lead. Kennedy’s talking points for his April 30 , 2018 trip to D allas include scripts for both firing Sears and promoting Askew with a $9 , 000 raise. Based on this evidence, a jury could reasonably find that Sears was treated less favorably than a younger, similarly situated employee. Because we find that Sears has p roduced sufficient evidence that he was treated less favorably than others who were similarly situated but outside the protected class to avoid summary judgment , we do not reach Sears’s argument that he was replaced by Askew. B. Non - Discriminatory Reason Because Sears has produced sufficient evidence of a prima facie case to survive summary judgment , the burden shifts to Amegy to put forth a legitimate, non - discriminatory reason for Sears’s termination. McDonnell Douglas , 411 U. S. at 802 – 03. This is a burden of production, not persuasion. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc. , 530 U.S. 133, 142 (2000). The non discriminatory reason that Amegy put forth here is that it chose to eliminate Sears because it needed to eliminate an SVP to make room in its budget for a new manager to oversee the Dallas energy banking department. Specifically, Amegy contends that Kennedy ranked the four SVP s and picked Sears last based on his high compensation, his failure to integrate with other departments, his past performance reviews, and an internal email that Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 6 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 7 Kennedy viewed as insubordinate. In the abstract, these are all legitimate reasons for Sears’s termination. C. Pretext Because Amegy has put forth legitimate reason s for Sears’s termination, the burden shifts back to Sears to demonstrate that “(1) the reason stated by the employer was a pretext for discrimination, or (2) the defendant’s reason, while true, was only one reason for its conduct and discrimination is anot her motivating factor.” See Reed v. Neopost USA, Inc. , 701 F.3d 434, 439 – 40 (5th Cir. 2012) (quoting Michael v. City of Dallas , 314 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2010 , no pet. ) ) . Under Texas law, a plaintiff need only show that age was a “motivating factor” in the employer’s decision , not a “but - for” cause of that decision . See id. at 440 (citing Quantum Chem. Corp. v. Toennies , 47 S.W.3d 473, 480 (Tex. 2001)). A plaintiff must “produce substantial evidence indicating that the proffered legitimate nondiscriminatory reason is a pretext for discrimination.” Burton v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. , 798 F.3d 222, 233 (5th Cir. 2015) (quoting Laxton v. Gap Inc. , 333 F.3d 572, 578 (5th Cir. 2003)). “Evidence is substantial if it is of such qu ality and weight that reasonable and fair - minded men in the exercise of impartial judgment might reach different conclusions.” Id. (quoting Laxton , 333 F.3d at 579). “A plaintiff may establish pretext either through evidence of disparate treatment or by showing that the employer’s proffered explanation is false or ‘unworthy of credence.’” Laxton , 333 F.3d at 578 (quoting Wallace v. Methodist Hosp. Sys. , 271 F.3d 212, 220 (5th Cir. 2001) ). “At the end of the day, the pretext inquiry asks whether there is sufficient evidence ‘demonstrating the falsity of the employer’s explanation, taken together with the prima facie case,’ to allow the jury to find that discrimination was the . . . cause of the termination.’” Goudeau v. Nat’l Oilwell Varco, L.P. , 793 F.3d 470, 4 78 (5th Cir. 2015) Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 7 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 8 (quoting Sandstad v. CB Richard Ellis, Inc. , 309 F.3d 893, 897 (5th Cir. 2002)). Sears calls Amegy’s explanation into doubt with a variety of well taken arguments. First and foremost, Amegy’s actions contradict its proffered explanation. Amegy claims to have terminated Sears in order to open up room in its budget to hire a manager to oversee the Dallas energy banking department. But it never hired that manager. Instead , in August 2018, just three months after terminating Sears, it “decided for independent business reasons to suspend its search for an outside candidate to replace the long - since departed McCarter.” That Amegy abandoned its search for a new manager — the pu rported impetus for firing Sears — only three months after Sears’s termination undermines the bank’s explanation. Additional evidence contradicts Amegy’s proffered explanation that the termination decision was made by Kennedy after he conducted an informal ranking of the SVPs. Kennedy claimed to have performed his informal ranking in “the spring of 2018 . ” Similarly, Amegy represents in its brief that Kennedy considered Sears’s 2018 performance review, which was issued on March 1, 2018. But a January 10, 2 018 email between Amegy executives references “transitioning Larry out.” This suggests that the choice to remove Sears was preordained and calls into question the veracity of Kennedy’s Spring 2018 ranking of the SVPs. Finally, Sears presents evidence that Amegy deviated from its own established policies for reviewing and providing feedback to Sears. A 2016 email from Kennedy describing a “change to [Amegy’s] performance review process” states that “[m]anagers are being asked to take time to meet individua lly with employees on their teams to see how they are doing, both relative to their goals and with their plans for the rest of the year. This will also be a time to reinforce any goals that may need extra attention.” At Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 8 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 9 Kennedy’s deposition he acknowledg ed that he was required to comply with the performance review policy but testified that he was “not sure” if he issued Sears a performance appraisal that complied with Amegy’s policies. Sears testified that the only feedback that Kennedy ever gave him was in April 2018, after the decision to fire him had already been made. We have repeatedly held that an employer’s failure to follow its internal protocols in terminating an employee or in reviewing the employee before termination can be evidence of pretext. See Goudeau , 793 F.3d at 477; Machinchick v. PB Power , Inc. , 398 F.3d 345, 354 – 55 (5th Cir. 2005) , overruled on other grounds by Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc. , 577 U.S. 167 (2009) ; Russell v. McKinney Hosp. Venture , 235 F.3d 219, 224 (5th Cir. 2000). The failure to follow even non - mandatory policies can give rise to an inferenc e of pretext. See Machinchick , 398 F.3d at 354 n.29. Amegy concedes that Sears’s relatively poor ratings (relative to other SVPs) factored into the decision to rank him last. The evidence suggests that the ratings were unaccompanied by a performance rev iew indicating any improvement may be needed , notwithstanding company policy to the contrary . Indeed , evidence suggests that only after deciding to terminate Sears did Kennedy comply with this policy by g iving Sears an oral review telling him that improve ment was needed . Viewed in the light most favorable to Sears, th is evidence shows that Kennedy failed to follow the performance review policy that he acknowledged he was required to follow. Considering all this evidence cumulatively, we are convinced that a jury could conclude that age was the reason for Sears’s termination based on the evidence Sears has produced to undermine the genuineness of Amegy’s explanations. “[A] plaintiff’s prima facie case, comb ined with sufficient evidence to find that the employer’s asserted justification is false, may permit the trier of fact to conclude that the employer unlawfully discriminated.” Reeves , 530 U.S. at 148. This is particularly true under Texas law, where a Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 9 Date Filed: 06/02/2022No. 21 - 10448 10 p laintiff need only establish that age was a “motivating factor” in the Amegy’s decision to terminate Sears. Go u deau , 793 F.3d at 47 5 . Accordingly, the district court erred in granting summary judgment in Amegy’s favor. IV. Sears has provided sufficient e vidence to survive summary judgment on his age discrimination claim . Accordingly, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion. Case: 21-10448 Document: 53-1 Page: 10 Date Filed: 06/02/2022
text/markdown	null	s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/dotgov/home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/AFM-Notification-Letter.pdf.json	DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY WASHINGTON, D.C. August 11 , 2020 Christopher J.G. Brockmeyer Raymond M. Hair, Jr. Board of Trustees American Federation of Musicians & Employers Pension Fund Fourteen Penn Plaza – 12 th Floor New York, NY 10122 Re: American Federation of Musicians and Employers Pension Fund A pplication for Benefit S uspension Dear Mr. Brockmeyer, Mr. Hair, and the Board of Trustees: On December 30, 2019 , you submitted an application to the Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary or Treasury) on behalf of the Board of Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians & Employers Pension Fund (Fund). The application you submitted (Application) requests approval to reduce benefits under the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 ( MPRA ). Treasury has reviewed the Application under the terms of MPRA and MPRA’s implementing regulations . Treasury also has reviewed the comments received on the Application from organizations and individuals. I am writing to notify you of Treasury's decision to deny the Application because the proposed suspension fails to satisfy the statutory criteria for approval. Under MPRA , Treasury, in consultation with the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) and the Secretary of Labor (DOL), must approve an application upon finding that the plan is eligible for the benefit suspensions and has satisfied the applicable statutory requirements. 1 A fter reviewing the Application and consulting with PBGC and DOL, Treasury has determined that the suspension described in the Application fails to satisfy the requirement s et forth in MPRA “ that the proposed benefit suspensions, in the aggregate, be reasonably estimated to achieve , but not materially exceed , the level that is necessary to avoid insolvency . ” 2 Specifically, Treasury has determined that the mortality rate assum ption and the new entrant assumption are not reasonable under the standards in the regulations . Treasury’s key findings are described below. FINDINGS MPRA requires the Secretary of the Treasury to approve an application for a suspension of benefits, in consultation with PBGC and DOL, “upon finding that the plan is eligible for the suspensions and has satisfied the criteria of subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), and (F)” of section 432(e)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code), as amended by MPRA. 3 1 Code§ 432(e)(9)(G)(i). 2 Code§ 432(e)(9)(D)(iv) . 3 Code § 432(e)(9)(G)(i).2 As furth er described below, the Application fails to satisfy the criteria of subparagraph (D) of Code § 432(e)(9) because it does not comply with the limitation of clause (iv) of subparagraph (D), which requires that “[a]ny suspensions of benefits, in the aggregat e . . . shall be reasonably estimated to achieve, but not materially exceed, the level that is necessary to avoid insolvency.” 4 T his letter does not address whether the Application satisfies any of the other criteria of Code § 432(e)(9). Requirement that Suspension Be Reasonably Estimated to Avoid Insolvency The r egulations implementing Code § 432(e)(9) require that an applicant use actuarial projections to demonstrate that a suspension , in the aggregate, is reasonably estimated to achieve , but not materially exceed, the level that is necessary to avoid insolvency. 5 One of the projection s required is a deterministic projection 6 of cash flow throughout an extended period under which the plan’s available resources are pro jected forward using assumptions regarding the cash flows into the plan ( e.g., contributions, withdrawal liability payments, and investment returns) and out of the plan ( e.g., benefit payments and administrative expenses). The extended period over which an applicant must demonstrate that it satisfies the requirement to avoid insolvency is at least 30 years , starting with the first day of the plan year that includes the effective date of the suspension. 7 Standards for Selecting Actuarial Assumptions Use d i n Projections Treasury evaluated the assumptions and methods used in the Application based on the regulations. The regulations require that each of the actuarial assumptions and methods used for the required projections , as well as the combination of actuarial assumptions and methods, are reasonable, taking into account the experience of the plan and reasonable expectations. 8 In applying the regulations, Treasury refer red to guidance provided by the professional standards that apply to the actuarial profession, which include the Actuarial Standards of Practice (ASOPs ), as referenced in the regulations. 9 The regulations require that , to be reasonable, each of the assumptions or methods must be appro priate for the purpose of the measurement, meaning, in this instance, that factors specific to a benefit suspension must be taken into account. The ASOPs also require that reasonable assumptions take into account historic and current demographic and econ o mic data that are relevant as of the measurement date and that the assumptions have no significant optimistic or pessimistic bias. Further, t he ASOPs provide that the plan’s actuary must consider the materiality of the assumptions and the balance between the benefits of using more refined 4 Code § 432(e)(9)(D)(iv). 5 26 C.F.R. § 1.432(e)(9) - 1(d)(5). 6 A d eterministic actuarial projection is a projection based on inputs that are assumed to occur . These projections are in contrast to stochastic a ctuarial projections , which estimate the probability of a range of outcomes as a result of random variation in one or more inputs ( e.g., the investment return) over time. 7 26 C.F.R. § 1.432(e)(9) - 1(d)(5)(ii)(C). The Application provides for a 32 - year extended period, from April 1, 2020 through March 31, 2052. 8 26 C.F.R. § 1.432(e)(9) - 1(d)(5)(iv)(B). 9 TD 9765, 81 FR 25540, 25549. In this case, the relevant ASOPs are numb ers 4, 27, 35 , and 41.3 actuarial assumptions (that is, assumptions that are based upon more extensive and specific study and research) and the cost of using those refinements. Selection of Actuarial Assumptions for this Application Treasury has concluded that two of the key actuarial assumptions used for the cash flow projections in the Application are not reasonable . Specifically, the mortality rate assumption and the assumption regarding the demographic characteristics of new entrants to the plan are not reasonable under the standards in the regulations . Because projections that rely on assumptions that are not reasonable were used in the Applicatio n, the Application fails to demonstrate that the proposed suspension is reasonably estimated to achieve, but not materially exceed , the level that is necessary to avoid insolvency. Accordingly, the proposed suspension does not meet the statutory requireme nts for approval because it does not satisfy the limitations set forth in Code § 43 2 (e)(9)(D). 10 The Mortality Assumption Is Not Reasonable The mortality assumption used in the Application is not reasonable because it is based on a standard table that was used without adequate justification or a demonstration of the manner in which the table properly reflects the mortality experience of the Fu nd. Furthermore, when additional information was requested to support the use of the table, that information revealed that the Fund’s actuary did not take into account relevant historic and current demographic data when selecting the standard table and th at the standard table significantly overestimates the rate at which Fund participants and beneficiaries will die. M ortality assumptions typically include both an assumption regarding the current mortality rate , which is reflected in a “base” mortality tab le , and an assumption about expected improvements in longevity, which are reflected in a mortality improvement scale. S tandard mortality tables are developed using relevant historic experience and demographic data for standard populations , such as white collar workers in private pension plans. 11 Generally, the selection of a mortality table , including a standard mortality table, must be supported by appropriate experience from the plan, including actuarially credible evidence 12 demonstrating how the mortal ity experience used to develop the selected table is reflective of the mortality experience of the plan . For the Application, an unadjusted standard base mortality table is used for current mortality rates, i.e., the RP - 2014 Employee and Annuitant Morta lity Tables (RP - 2014 table), and that table 10 MPRA Applications must be subject to public notice and comment pursuant to section Code § 432(e)(9)(G)(ii). If the Fund were to revise the cash flow projections in the Application (i.e., so that they are based on different , actu arial assumptions and methods ), the Treasury Department could not rely upon those revised projections in the evaluation of the current Application because the revised projections would not have been subject to public notice and comment. See Air Transport Ass’n of America v. FAA , 169 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1999). 11 The Society of Actuaries (SOA) published a series of mortality tables in 2014 reflecting the mortality experience for the population of participants covered under private retirement plans in the Uni ted States. The SOA is a professional organization in the United States engaged in actuarial research and education that publishes mortality tables and mortality improvement scales that may be used for private pension plans. 12 This requirement, however, would not apply to very small plans, which would have no actuarially credible experience on their own.4 reflects longevity using the Mortality Improvement Scale MP - 2019 from the 2006 base year, projected forward generationally using Scale MP - 2019. 13 However, the Application did not provide sufficient data and a nalysis to demonstrate how the mortality experience in the standard table was reflective of the Fund’s mortality experience. Rather, for its rationale for the selection of the unadjusted RP - 2014 table, the Application merely refers to a 2016 experience st udy prepared by the plan actuary that examines actual plan experience for plan years 2011 through 2015. 14 The Application states that in selecting the mortality assumption, “[n]o adjustments to the base mortality rates in RP - 2014 were made because the [Act ual to Expected] ratio in the 2016 experience study was 103%.” 15 When Treasury questioned why the RP - 2014 table was selected without documenting a detailed justification, the Fund stated that it was not required to demonstrate the appropriateness of the use of the RP - 2014 table since the use of that table is a safe harbor under Reve nue Procedure 2017 - 43. 16 Treasury disagrees that Rev. Proc. 2017 - 43 provides a safe harbor for the use of the RP - 2014 table. Rev. Proc. 2017 - 43 provides guidance on how to apply for a suspension and includes descriptions of the information required for a complete application. Section 6. 03 of Rev. Proc. 2017 - 43 states that an application must include: (1) a description of each of the assumptions used in the projections, and (2) supporting evidence for the selection of those assumptions. Appendix B to Rev. Proc. 2017 - 43, which “may be use d as a template” for providing the information required by Section 6.03, indicates that the mortality experience used in developing the total data set mortality rates in the RP - 2014 Mortality Tables Report “may be treated as representative” of the expected mortality experience for the participants in the plan. However, this language merely describes the information that must be included in an application using the RP - 2014 table — after an applicant has reasonably concluded (and provided the basis for its con clusion) that use of the RP - 2014 mortality table is appropriate for the plan. That language is not intended to replace the regulatory requirement that the actuarial assumptions and a combination of those assumptions must be “reasonable, taking into accoun t the experience of the plan and reasonable expectations” (emphasis added). 17 It was not only the scant support for the mortality assumption included in the Application that caused Treasury to question the use of the RP - 2014 table. In evaluating the mi nimal evidence the Application did provide to support the selection of the assumption, Treasury noted that that 2016 experience study was weighted on a “headcount” basis, rather than on an “amount weighted” basis, as the RP - 2014 table is. The difference s in weighting between the two tables skew the mortality results. 18 In the Fund’s case in particular, the use of a headcount - weighted 13 Application at pg. 315. 14 Application pg. 322. The Application includes two 5 - year experience study reports in Exhibit 6.04 (2), beginning on pg. 340. 15 Application pg. 322. 16 2017 - 31 I.R.B. 152. 17 26 C.F.R. § 1.432(e)(9) - 1(d)(5)(iv)(B). 18 Headcount - weighted tables measure mortality based on the number of deaths that occur over a period of time . In contrast, an amount - weighted table considers the number of deaths and the amount of benefits associated with those deaths over that same time period, such as whether participants with larger benefits will have greater longevity than retirees with sma ller benefits; the mortality rates resulting from these amounts weighting are different than the rates based on the number of deaths alone. The use of amount - weighted rates is considered appropriate for the measurement of pension plan obligations in most cases; headcount - weighted rates are typically used in more limited5 study is inappropriate because of the Fund’s non - homogenous population and benefit structures, which result in a wide range of benefit amounts for participants. 19 The Fund’s cash flows are heavily weighted toward participants with larger benefits; thus, amount - weighting exposures are essential for determining the Fund’s mortality experience in relation to the RP - 2014 table. Given that the Application did not provide a detailed rationale for use of the RP - 2014 table and that the 2016 experience study was problematic because it was headcount - weighted, Treasury requested additional amount - weighted information to support the reas onableness of the Fund’s mortality assumption. Specifically, the Fund was asked to provide information and analysis to support the conclusion that the Fund’s amount - weighted experience analysis (based on the most recent 3 - 5 years of experience) is f ully or partially credible and provides support for use of the RP - 2014 mortality table. 20 The Fund subsequently submitted an amount - weighted experience analysis (for ages 50 and older) by year and in aggregate, for the 2014 - 2018 plan years, as well as t he calculation of the plan’s credibility factor (separate for males and females). 21 However, this information exposed another issue with the mortality assumption used in the Application by showing that it assumes higher mortality rates than are supported b y the amount - weighted experience during recent years. Specifically, if future experience is similar to the recent experience (determined by the plan actuary on an amount - weighted basis), but considering the partial credibility of the Fund ’s experience , the Fund is expected to have 15% fewer deaths for the male population over the extended period, which is a significant deviation given that the Fund’s population is predominantly male. 22 In addition, the year - by - year amount - weighted experience analysis i ndicates that the difference between the Fund ’s assumption and the Fund ’s actual experience has been cum u latively widening. In sum, the Fund’s use of the unadjusted RP - 2014 standard table is not reasonable. The Application itself provided only limited support for the choice of this mortality assumption. In addition, the Fund’s use of headcount - weighted experience is not reasonable to support the use of that assumption. Further, because the mortality rate assumption used in the A pplication was circumstances in which benefits are similar in amount for all plan participants, such as for retiree health benefits. See, Society of Actuaries, “RP - 2014 Mortality Tables Report,” revised November 2014, section 13.5, pg. 52. Available at https://www.soa.org/globalassets/assets/Files/Research/Exp - Study/research - 2014 - rp - comment.pdf (l ast visited August 2, 2020). See also , Selecting and Documenting Mortality Assumptions for Pensions, Q&A 27. Available at https://www.actuary.org/sites/default/fi les/files/Mortality_PN_060515_0.pdf . 19 Based on the census data provided by the Fund as of April 1, 2019, post suspension, 50% of participants in pay status would receive less than $313 per month; 40% would have a monthly benefit between $313 and $2,217; 5% would have a monthly benefit between $2,218 and $3,588; and the remaining 5% would have monthly benefits ranging from $3,589 to over $25,000. 20 T he Fund initially indicated that an amount - weighted experience study was not appropriate because the Fund’s mortality experience is not credible. In response , Treasury suggested that , because the Fund’s mortality experience appeared to be partially credibl e, the Fund could utilize the methodology prescribed by Rev. Proc. 2017 - 55 to develop a partial credibility weighting factor for the Fund’s mortality experience. Rev. Proc. 2017 - 55 sets out generic procedures for single - employer plans with partial credibi lity to apply to the Internal Revenue Service for approval to use plan - specific substitute mortality tables for funding purposes. See 2017 - 43 I.R.B. 373. 21 This analysis was developed by the plan actuary based on standards set forth in Rev. Proc. 2017 - 55. 22 About 70% of plan participants are male, based on census data provided by the Fund. The projections show a 5% negative differential for the Fund’s female population.6 not consistent with historic and demographic experience relevant as of the measurement ; Treasury has conclude d that it is not reasonable. Therefore, the proposed suspension does not satisfy the statutory requirement that it be reasonably estimated to avoi d insolvency. The New Entrant Assumption Is Not Reasonable To project cash flows , an applicant must make an assumption regarding the demographic characteristics of plan participants, including the characteristics of employees who replace terminating and retiring workers or otherwise become active participants (i.e ., future new entrants to the plan). In particular, a new entrant assumption must project the “entry age” — the assumed age at which new participants enter (or return to active status in) the plan. 23 Further, as for any actuarial assumption, t o be appropriate for the purpose of the measurement , the new entrant assu mption must be selected in a manner that takes into account factors specific to the measurement. The anticipated pattern and magnitude of change in the level of Fund assets is sensitive to assumptions (like the age at which new active participants are h ired or rehired) that affect the amount and timing of anticipated benefit payments. Accordingly, the new entrant assumption for purposes of these cash flow projections must be developed in a refined manner that reflects expected cash flows. The new entra nt assumption used in the Application fails to take into account the prevalence of rehires, even though it is clear from recent actuarial valuations that a significant portion of the new entrants each year are terminated vested participants who are rehire d. For example, in each of the last three valuation reports, about 30% of the new entrants were formerly terminated vested participants. 24 The Application’s new entrant assumption is not reasonable because it does not take into account relevant historic and current demographic data (that is , data available regarding demographic characteristics of recent rehires) and it has a significant bias in that it underestimates the average entry age of new active participants, resulting in a significant understatem ent of benefit payments from the Fund. Specifically, it is not appropriate for the Fund to utilize a new entrant assumption that excludes recently rehired participants if doing so produces materially different results than use of a refined assumption . Th e new entrant demographic profile used in the Application was developed based only on the demographic characteristics of the new hires who had not previously participated in the Fund and did not consider the characteristics of rehires from terminated veste d status. Based on the experience analysis provided by the Fund, the demographic characteristics of new entrants are quite different if the rehired participants are included in the analysis. Treasury has estimated that the average entry age of new entran ts when considering the demographic characteristics of rehires is 5 years older than the average entry age if rehires are excluded from the analysis. 23 The new entrant assumption also includes assumptions about the new participants’ gen der, pay, and contributions. 24 The 2017 Actuarial Valuation Report (AVR) shows 32% (1,155 of 3,605) of new entrants are rehires (Application, p. 1450). The 2018 AVR shows 29% (1,023 of 3,580) of new entrants are rehires (Application, p. 1492). The 2019 AVR shows 30% (1,068 of 3,615) of new entrants are rehires (p. 28 of the April 1, 2019 actuarial valuation report published in February 2020).7 The inclusion of the demographic characteristics of the rehired participants would have a significant i mpact on the Fund’s projections. The cumulative benefit payments through the extended period for new entrants would be almost 70% higher ($63M) than shown in the Application, and the projected market value of assets at the end of the extended period would be more than 10% lower ($135M) than the projected market value shown in the Application. Relevant historic and current demographic data, such as data on the actual entry ages of all new entrants to the Fund over any relevant period, should have been revie wed and taken into account in the selection of the new entrant demographic profile. It is the view of Treasury that the new entrant assumption used in the application is not supported by the Fund’s experience for new entrants including rehired participant s and that the assumption is not reasonable. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Treasury has concluded that the Application fails to demonstrate that the proposed suspension satisfies the requirement that it be reasonably estimated to achieve, but not materially exceed, the level that is necessary for the Fund to avoid insolvency. As a result, the Application fails to demonstrate that the proposed suspension satisfies the limitations set forth in Code § 432(e )(9)(D), which is required for approval of a proposed suspension. Accordingly, the Application is denied. This notification letter will be made public in order to inform plan participants and beneficiaries of the outcome of Treasury's review. Respectfully, Danielle Norris MPRA Director